The European Union member states received about 385,000 asylum applications from children and adolescents below 18 years in 2015, and 398,000 in 2016. The latest political crises and war have led to an upsurge in refugee movements into European countries, giving rise to a re-evaluation of the epidemiology of psychiatric disorders and mental health problems among young refugees and asylum seekers. We systematically searched five electronic databases and reference lists of pertinent review articles. We then screened the results of forward citation tracking of key articles for relevant studies in the field for the period from January 1990 to October 2017. We dually reviewed citations and assessed risk of bias. We reported the results narratively, as meta-analyses were impeded due to high heterogeneity. We included 47 studies covered in 53 articles. Overall, the point prevalence of the investigated psychiatric disorders and mental health problems varied widely among studies (presenting interquartile ranges): for posttraumatic stress disorder between 19.0 and 52.7%, for depression between 10.3 and 32.8%, for anxiety disorders between 8.7 and 31.6%, and for emotional and behavioural problems between 19.8 and 35.0%. The highly heterogeneous evidence base could be improved by international, methodologically comparable studies with sufficiently large sample sizes drawn randomly among specific refugee populations. The prevalence estimates suggest, nevertheless, that specialized mental health care services for the most vulnerable refugee and asylum-seeking populations are needed. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO on October 19th, 2017 with the number: CRD42017080039 and is available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=80039

/pdf/prevalence-of-mental-disorders-in-young-refugees-and-asylum-13da8tr9kh.pdf

Prevalence of mental disorders in young refugees and asylum seekers in European Countries: a systematic review.

Most vaccines protect both the vaccinated individual and the society by reducing the transmission of infectious diseases. In order to eliminate infectious diseases, individuals need to consider social welfare beyond mere self-interest-regardless of ethnic, religious, or national group borders. It has therefore been proposed that vaccination poses a social contract in which individuals are morally obliged to get vaccinated. However, little is known about whether individuals indeed act upon this social contract. If so, vaccinated individuals should reciprocate by being more generous to a vaccinated other. On the contrary, if the other doesn't vaccinate and violates the social contract, generosity should decline. Three preregistered experiments investigated how a person's own vaccination behavior, others' vaccination behavior, and others' group membership influenced a person's generosity toward respective others. The experiments consistently showed that especially compliant (i.e., vaccinated) individuals showed less generosity toward nonvaccinated individuals. This effect was independent of the others' group membership, suggesting an unconditional moral principle. An internal metaanalysis (n = 1,032) confirmed the overall social contract effect. In a fourth experiment (n = 1,212), this pattern was especially pronounced among vaccinated individuals who perceived vaccination as a moral obligation. It is concluded that vaccination is a social contract in which cooperation is the morally right choice. Individuals act upon the social contract, and more so the stronger they perceive it as a moral obligation. Emphasizing the social contract could be a promising intervention to increase vaccine uptake, prevent free riding, and, eventually, support the elimination of infectious diseases.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/117/26/14890.full.pdf

Vaccination as a social contract

Background Migrants who have been forced to leave their home, such as refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced persons (IDP), are likely to experience stressors which may lead to mental health problems. The efficacy of interventions for mental health promotion, prevention, and treatment may differ in this population. Objectives With this overview of systematic reviews, we will map the characteristics and methodological quality of existing systematic reviews and registered systematic review protocols on the promotion of mental health and prevention and treatment of common mental disorders among refugees, asylum seekers, and IDPs. The findings from this overview will be used to prioritise and inform future Cochrane reviews on the mental health of involuntary migrants. Methods We searched Ovid MEDLINE (1945 onwards), Ovid Embase (1974 onwards), Ovid PsycINFO, ProQuest PTSDpubs, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, NIHR Journals Library, CRD databases (archived), DoPHER, Epistemonikos, Health Evidence, 3ie International Initiative for Impact Evaluation, and PROSPERO, to identify systematic reviews of mental health interventions for involuntary migrants. We did not apply any restrictions on date, language, or publication status to the searches. We included systematic reviews or protocols for systematic reviews of interventions aimed at refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced persons. Interventions must have been aimed at mental health promotion (for example, classroom-based well-being interventions for children), prevention of mental health problems (for example, trauma-focussed Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to prevent post-traumatic stress disorder), or treatment of common mental disorders and symptoms (for example, narrative exposure therapy to treat symptoms of trauma). After screening abstracts and full-text manuscripts in duplicate, we extracted data on the characteristics of the reviews, the interventions examined in reviews, and the number of primary studies included in each review. Methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR 2. Main results The overview includes 23 systematic reviews and 15 registered systematic review protocols. Of the 23 published systematic reviews, meta-analyses were conducted in eight reviews. It was more common for the search strategy or inclusion criteria of the reviews to state that studies involving refugees were eligible for inclusion (23/23), than for asylum seekers (14/23) or IDPs (7/23) to be explicitly mentioned. In most reviews, study eligiblity was either not restricted by participant age (9/23), or restricted to adults (10/23). Reviews commonly reported on studies of diagnosis or symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder or trauma (11/23) and were less likely to report on depression or anxiety (6/23). In 15 reviews the intervention of interest was focused on/ specific to psychological therapy. Across all 23 reviews, the interventions most commonly identified from primary studies were general Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Narrative Exposure Therapy, and a range of different integrative and interpersonal therapies. Even though many reviews included studies of participants without a diagnosis of a mental health problem, they often assessed mental health treatments and did not usually distinguish between promotion, prevention, and treatment in the review aims. Together the 23 systematic reviews included 336 references, of which 175 were unique primary studies. Limitations to the methodological quality of reviews most commonly related to reporting of selection criteria (21/23), absence of a protocol (19/23), reporting of study design (20/23), search strategy (22/23), and funding sources of primary studies (19/23). Authors' conclusions Gaps exist in the evidence on mental health interventions for refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced persons. Most reviews do not specify that internally displaced persons are included in the selection criteria, even though they make up the majority of involuntary migrants worldwide. Reviews specific to mental health promotion and prevention of common mental disorders are missing, and there is more evidence available for adults or mixed populations than for children. The literature is focused on post-traumatic stress disorder and trauma-related symptoms, with less attention for depression and anxiety disorders. Better quality systematic reviews and better report of review design and methods would help those who may use these reviews to inform implementation of mental health interventions.

/pdf/an-overview-of-systematic-reviews-on-mental-health-promotion-4c3tyhvkgy.pdf

An overview of systematic reviews on mental health promotion, prevention, and treatment of common mental disorders for refugees, asylum seekers, and internally displaced persons

This review brought together research investigating barriers asylum seekers and refugees (AS&R) face in accessing and negotiating mental health (MH) services. The candidacy framework (CF) was used as synthesizing argument to conceptualize barriers to services (Dixon-Woods et al. in BMC Med Res Methodol 6:35, 2006). Five databases were systematically searched. Twenty-three studies were included and analyzed using the CF. The seven stages of the framework were differentiated into two broader processes-access and negotiation of services. Comparatively more data was available on barriers to access than negotiation of services. The Identification of Candidacy (access) and Appearances at Services (negotiation) were the most widely discussed stages in terms of barriers to MH care. The stage that was least discussed was Adjudications (negotiation). The CF is useful to understand inter-related barriers to MH care experienced by AS&R. A holistic approach is needed to overcome these barriers together with further research investigating understudied areas of candidacy.

/pdf/barriers-to-accessing-and-negotiating-mental-health-services-3994q56err.pdf

Barriers to Accessing and Negotiating Mental Health Services in Asylum Seeking and Refugee Populations: The Application of the Candidacy Framework.

The social determination of ethnic/racial inequalities in health

Increasing numbers of disasters require comprehensive preparedness. Border regions are vulnerable as disasters might not halt at administrative borders. Cross-border coordination is therefore required. As integral part of cross-border collaborations initiative in the Meuse–Rhine Euregio (EMR), we reviewed published evidence informing on existing initiatives dedicated to disaster education in the EMR. A search based on the PRISMA guidelines for scoping reviews was conducted to retrieve articles in the following databases: Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus. The searches were limited to English, French, Dutch and German language articles and the period between January 2010 and June 2019. No restrictions were set for the study design or the type of methodology used. A total of 18 articles met the inclusion criteria out of a total of 1771 publications. Training development was found in two studies while nine studies focused on the state of knowledge in disaster management. Seven articles referred only to technical skills, three only to non-technical skills and eight combined both types of skills. For the technical nature, Knowledge was found seven times, Skills five times and Attitudes twice. On the non-technical side, Knowledge was found three and both Skills twice and Attitudes three times. Five studies trained and assessed all the Knowledge, skills and attitudes. Most of the studies constitute inventories with descriptive reporting and very few experimental studies of quality have been carried. Non-technical skills for disaster preparedness have been well considered among the articles. Cross-border collaboration needs to be further investigated.

Disaster management training in the euregio-meuse-rhine: What can we learn from each other to improve cross-border practices?

http://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article-pdf/28/suppl_1/cky047.256/24639934/cky047.256.pdf

7.4-O3Evidence on interventions that improve mental health of child refugees and child asylum seekers in Europe: a rapid systematic review

The current migration flow into Europe is leading to a growing ethnically diverse population in many European countries. Now more than ever, those populations have different healthcare needs, languages, traditions, and previous level of care. This higher level of diversity is likely to increase health inequalities that might challenge healthcare systems if not addressed. In this context, this study aims at reviewing the policy framework for migrants’ access to healthcare in Spain, Portugal and Ireland, countries with a long history of immigration, to identify lessons to be learned for policies on migrants’ health. A content analysis of official policy documents was undertaken and the conceptual framework developed by Mladowsky was adapted to classify the actions indicated in the policies. The content analysis revealed that the policy aim for all three analysed countries is the improvement of the health status of the immigrant population based on equity and equality principles. The main strategies are the adaptation of services through actions targeting patients and providers, such as the implementation of cultural mediators and trainings for health professionals. The three countries propose a great range of policies aiming at improving access to healthcare services for immigrants that can inspire other European countries currently welcoming refugees. Developing inclusive policies, however does not necessarily mean they will be implemented or felt on the ground. Inclusive policies are indeed under threat due to the economic and social crises and due to the respective nationalistic attitudes towards integration. The European Union is challenged to take a more proactive leadership and ensure that countries effectively implement inclusive actions to improve migrant’s access to health services.

/pdf/migrants-access-to-healthcare-services-within-the-european-37xaodwl2c.pdf

Migrants’ access to healthcare services within the European Union: a content analysis of policy documents in Ireland, Portugal and Spain

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Céline Ledoux

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Disaster management training in the euregio-meuse-rhine: What can we learn from each other to improve cross-border practices?

7.4-O3Evidence on interventions that improve mental health of child refugees and child asylum seekers in Europe: a rapid systematic review

Migrants’ access to healthcare services within the European Union: a content analysis of policy documents in Ireland, Portugal and Spain