Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31646006›Full record

SynthesisBMJ global health2019

Mental health and psychosocial support programmes for adults in humanitarian emergencies: a systematic review and meta-analysis in low and middle-income countries.

Mukdarut Bangpan, Lambert Felix, Kelly Dickson

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mukdarut BangpanThe Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinatng Centre (EPPI-Centre), Department of Social Science, University College London Institute of Education, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8887-659X
Lambert FelixSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK.
Kelly DicksonThe Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinatng Centre (EPPI-Centre), Department of Social Science, University College London Institute of Education, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHumanitarian emergencies are a major global health challenge with the potential to have a profound impact on people's mental and psychological health. Effective interventions in humanitarian settings are needed to support the mental health and psychosocial needs of affected populations. To fill this gap, this systematic review synthesises evidence on the effectiveness of a wide range of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) programmes delivered to adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsA comprehensive search of 12 electronic databases, key websites and citation checking was undertaken in 2015 and updated in May 2018. We included controlled trials published in English from 1980. We extracted data and assessed risk of bias prior to performing a meta-analysis using random effects models. When meta-analysis was not used, we narratively described individual trial effect sizes using forest plots.

resultsThirty-five studies were included. Overall, MHPSS programmes show benefits in improved functioning and reducing post-traumatic stress disorder. There are also indications from a limited pool of evidence that cognitive-behavioural therapy and narrative exposure therapy may improve mental health conditions. Other psychotherapy modalities also showed a positive trend in favour of MHPSS programmes for improving several mental health outcomes.

conclusionIn addition to MHPSS programme for improving mental health outcomes in adults affected by humanitarian emergencies in LMICs, there is also a need to generate robust evidence to identify potential impact on broader social dimensions. Doing so could aid the future development of MHPSS programmes and ensure their effective implementation across different humanitarian contexts in LMICs. Future research on MHPSS programmes which focus on basic services and security, community and family programmes, their cost-effectiveness and mechanisms of impact could also strengthen the MHPSS evidence base to better inform policy and practice decision-making in humanitarian settings. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016033578.

Indexed as

evaluationhumanitarian crisismental healthpsychosocial interventionsystematic review: global health

Identifiers

PMID31646006
PMCPMC6782047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.