We read with interest the paper "Meta-analysis: The Effectiveness of Youth Psychotherapy Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries" by Venturo-Conerly et al. (2023).1 The paper presents results on the effectiveness of youth psychotherapies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) from a systematic review and meta-analysis using rigorous, highly regarded methods. The authors should be commended for taking on this important subject. However, we feel that the paper needs to be situated in the backdrop of a few concerns that we believe are important for LMIC geographies. In our reply, we mainly focus on the finding that interventions developed in high-income countries (HIC) were more effective if not adapted to local conditions, suggesting that non-culturally adapted interventions had better outcomes than culturally adapted ones. This, as the authors note, seems counterintuitive.

中文翻译：

---

对低收入和中等收入国家青年心理健康证据综合最佳实践的思考


我们饶有兴趣地阅读了 Venturo-Conerly 等人（2023 年）的论文“荟萃分析：中低收入国家青年心理治疗干预的有效性”。该论文介绍了中低收入国家 （LMIC） 青年心理治疗有效性的结果，这些结果来自系统评价和荟萃分析，使用严格、备受推崇的方法。作者对这一重要主题的处理应该受到赞扬。然而，我们认为本文需要置于我们认为对中低收入和中等收入国家地区很重要的一些问题的背景下。在我们的回复中，我们主要关注在高收入国家 （HIC） 开发的干预措施如果不适应当地条件会更有效，这表明非文化适应的干预措施比文化适应的干预措施有更好的结果。正如作者所指出的，这似乎有悖常理。