Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35428341›Full record

ArticleConflict and health2022

Translating, contextually adapting, and pilot testing of psychosocial and mental health assessment instruments for Congolese refugees in Rwanda and Uganda.

Rosco Kasujja, Paul Bangirana, Anna Chiumento, Tasdik Hasan, Stefan Jansen, Daniel M Kagabo, Maria Popa, Peter Ventevogel, Ross G White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conflict and health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors.

Rosco KasujjaDepartment of Mental Health and Community Psychology, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Paul BangiranaDepartment of Psychiatry, Makerere University, College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda.
Anna ChiumentoDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Tasdik HasanDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Stefan JansenCenter for Mental Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
Daniel M KagaboMental Health & Community Psychology and Behaviour Research Group, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda.
Maria PopaDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Peter VentevogelDivision of Resilience and Solutions, Public Health Section, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, Switzerland.
Ross G WhiteSchool of Psychology, Queen's University Belfast, David Keir Building, 8-30 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5BN, UK. r.white@qub.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4026-6439

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/S000976/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundForcibly displaced people are at elevated risk of experiencing circumstances that can adversely impact on mental health. Culturally and contextually relevant tools to assess their mental health and psychosocial needs are essential to inform the development of appropriate interventions and investigate the effectiveness of such interventions.

methodsWe conducted two related studies: (1) to translate and contextually adapt the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), a measure of depressive symptomatology, along with assessment instruments measuring levels of daily stress (Checklist for Daily & Environmental Stressors; CDES), social capital (Shortened and Adapted Social Capital Assessment Tool; SASCAT) and perceived social support (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support; MSPSS) for use with Congolese refugees; (2) to conduct pilot testing of the assessment instruments (including cognitive interviewing about participants' views of completing them) and a validation of the adapted PHQ-9 using a 'known group' approach by recruiting Congolese refugees from refugee settings in Rwanda (n = 100) and Uganda (n = 100).

resultsStudy 1 resulted in the translation and adaptation of the assessment instruments. No substantive adaptations were made to the SASCAT or MSPSS, while notable linguistic and contextual adaptations were made in both sites to the CDES and the PHQ-9. The cognitive interviewing conducted in Study 2 indicated that the adapted assessment instruments were generally well received by members of the refugee communities. Participants recruited on the basis that local informants adjudged them to have high levels of depressive symptoms had significantly higher PHQ-9 scores (M = 11.02; SD = 5.84) compared to those in the group adjudged to have low levels of depressive symptoms (M = 5.66; SD = 5.04). In both sites, the adapted versions of the PHQ-9 demonstrated concurrent validity via significant positive correlations with levels of daily stressors. Each of the four adapted assessment instruments demonstrated at least adequate levels of internal consistency in both sites.

conclusionsThe adapted versions of the PHQ-9, CDES, SASCAT and MSPSS are appropriate for use amongst Congolese refugees in Rwanda and Uganda. We recommend further application of the approaches used in the current studies for contextually adapting other assessment instruments in humanitarian settings.

Indexed as

AdaptationAssessmentDepressionHumanitarian settingsMental health and psychosocial supportPost-conflictRefugees

Identifiers

PMID35428341
PMCPMC9013053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.