MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011587151 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2019-002014

Delivering mental health and psychosocial support interventions to women and children in conflict settings: a systematic review

2020· review· en· W3011587151 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidInternational Development Research CentreUNICEFBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsPsychological interventionMedicinePsychosocialCINAHLMental healthReferralPsycINFOGrey literatureMEDLINEFamily medicineNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over 240 million children live in countries affected by conflict or fragility, and such settings are known to be linked to increased psychological distress and risk of mental disorders. While guidelines are in place, high-quality evidence to inform mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions in conflict settings is lacking. This systematic review aimed to synthesise existing information on the delivery, coverage and effectiveness of MHPSS for conflict-affected women and children in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Psychological Information Database (PsycINFO)databases for indexed literature published from January 1990 to March 2018. Grey literature was searched on the websites of 10 major humanitarian organisations. Eligible publications reported on an MHPSS intervention delivered to conflict-affected women or children in LMICs. We extracted and synthesised information on intervention delivery characteristics, including delivery site and personnel involved, as well as delivery barriers and facilitators, and we tabulated reported intervention coverage and effectiveness data. Results: The search yielded 37 854 unique records, of which 157 were included in the review. Most publications were situated in Sub-Saharan Africa (n=65) and Middle East and North Africa (n=36), and many reported on observational research studies (n=57) or were non-research reports (n=53). Almost half described MHPSS interventions targeted at children and adolescents (n=68). Psychosocial support was the most frequently reported intervention delivered, followed by training interventions and screening for referral or treatment. Only 19 publications reported on MHPSS intervention coverage or effectiveness. Discussion: Despite the growing literature, more efforts are needed to further establish and better document MHPSS intervention research and practice in conflict settings. Multisectoral collaboration and better use of existing social support networks are encouraged to increase reach and sustainability of MHPSS interventions. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019125221.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.426 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it