title: Embedding mental health interventions in early childhood education systems for at-risk preschoolers: an evidence to policy realist review.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Current early childhood systems of care are not geared to respond to the complex needs of preschoolers at risk for mental health problems in a timely, coordinated, multidisciplinary, and comprehensive fashion. Evidence-informed policy represents an opportunity for implementing prevention, promotion, and early intervention at the population or at-risk level. Exposure to risk factors as well as the presence of clinical disorders can derail the developmental trajectories of preschoolers, and problems may persist if left untreated. One way to address these multiple research-to-policy gaps are systematic reviews sensitive to context and knowledge user needs, such as the realist review. The realist review is an iterative process between research teams and knowledge users to build mid-level program theories in order to understand which interventions work best for whom and under what context.
  
  
  METHODS
  The realist review employs five 'iterative' steps: (1) clarify scope, (2) search for evidence, (3) appraise primary studies and extract data, (4) synthesize the evidence, and (5) disseminate, implement, and evaluate evidence, to answer two research questions: What interventions improve mental health outcomes for preschoolers at risk for socio-emotional difficulties and under what circumstances do they work? and what are the best models of care for integrating mental health interventions within pre-existing early childhood education (ECE) services for at-risk children? Knowledge users and researchers will work together through each stage of the review starting with refining the questions through to decisions regarding program theory building, data extraction, analysis, and design of a policy dissemination plan. The initial questions will guide preliminary literature reviews, but subsequent more focused searches will be informed by knowledge users familiar with local needs and further building of explanatory program theories.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Policy makers want to know what works best for whom, but are faced with a wide and disparate intervention literature for at-risk children. Applying evidence-based standards is a good start, but the chain of implementation between research results and how to match interventions sensitive to local context are ongoing challenges.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Prospero registration number: CRD42014007301.
authors: IWK Health Centre, 5890 University Ave, Box 9700, Halifax, NS B3K 6R8, Canada. Normand.Carrey@iwk.nshealth.ca.
authors: Normand J
authors: NJ
authors: Carrey
authors: Janet A
authors: JA
authors: Curran
authors: Robin
authors: R
authors: Greene
authors: Alicia
authors: A
authors: Nolan
authors: Alan
authors: A
authors: McLuckie
mesh_terms: D002662:Child Health Services; D002675:Child, Preschool; D018479:Early Intervention, Educational / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D008605:Mental Health Services; D012307:Risk Factors