Table 2 CASP appraisal for the studies included in the review
Crowe et al. (2016) | Pertz et al. (2018) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
CASP Q1. | Did the study address a clearly focused research question? | Y | Y |
CASP Q2. | Was the assignment of participants to interventions randomised? | CT | N |
CASP Q3. | Were all participants who entered the study accounted for at its conclusion? | N | CT |
CASP Q4a. | Were the participants ‘blind’ to intervention they were given? | N | N |
CASP Q4b. | Were the investigators ‘blind’ to the intervention they were giving to participants? | N | N |
CASP Q4c. | Were the people assessing/analysing outcome/s ‘blinded’? | CT | CT |
CASP Q5. | Were the study groups similar at the start of the randomised controlled trial? | N | CT |
CASP Q6. | Apart from the experimental intervention, did each study group receive the same level of care (that is, were they treated equally)? | CT | CT |
CASP Q7. | Were the effects of intervention reported comprehensively? | CT | N |
CASP Q8. | Was the precision of the estimate of the intervention or treatment effect reported? | N | N |
CASP Q9. | Do the benefits of the experimental intervention outweigh the harms and costs? | CT | CT |
CASP Q10. | Can the results be applied to your local population/in your context? | CT | |
CASP Q11. | Would the experimental intervention provide greater value to the people in your care than any of the existing interventions? | CT | CT |
CASP Q12. | Appraisal summary | The sample size is too small. It was not clear how participants were allocated to either the face-to-face or telepsychiatry group. | Did not compare the outcomes between telemental health services and in-person services. |