ArticleBMJ open2022
Scalable psychological interventions for Syrian refugees in Europe and the Middle East: STRENGTHS study protocol for a prospective individual participant data meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transdiagnostic psychosocial interventions to promote mental health in forcibly displaced persons: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Effects of Rational Emotional Therapy on Anxiety and Delivery Outcome of Pregnant Women.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Digital interventions to promote psychological resilience: a systematic review and meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Mental healthcare access among resettled Syrian refugees in Leipzig, Germany.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Providing continuity of care for people living with noncommunicable diseases in humanitarian settings: A qualitative study of health actors' experiences in Lebanon.Journal of migration and health · 2024Article
- World Health Organization's low-intensity psychosocial interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of Problem Management Plus and Step-by-Step.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2023Article
- Considerations in designing trauma-focused interventions for displaced Afghan women.Frontiers in global women's health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
43 authors at 12 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe World Health Organization's (WHO) scalable psychological interventions, such as Problem Management Plus (PM+) and Step-by-Step (SbS) are designed to be cost-effective non-specialist delivered interventions to reduce symptoms of common mental disorders, such as anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The STRENGTHS consortium aims to evaluate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation of the individual format of PM+ and its group version (gPM+), as well as of the digital SbS intervention among Syrian refugees in seven countries in Europe and the Middle East. This is a study protocol for a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to evaluate (1) overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness and (2) treatment moderators of PM+, gPM+ and SbS with Syrian refugees. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Five pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and seven fully powered RCTs conducted within STRENGTHS will be combined into one IPD meta-analytic dataset. The RCTs include Syrian refugees of 18 years and above with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10>15)) and impaired daily functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0>16)). Participants are randomised into the intervention or care as usual control group, and complete follow-up assessments at 1-week, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Primary outcomes are symptoms of depression and anxiety (25-item Hopkins Symptom Checklist). Secondary outcomes include daily functioning (WHODAS 2.0), PTSD symptoms (PTSD Checklist for DSM-5) and self-identified problems (PSYCHLOPS). We will conduct a one-stage IPD meta-analysis using linear mixed models. Quality of evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach, and the economic evaluation approach will be assessed using the CHEC-list. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Local ethical approval has been obtained for each RCT. This IPD meta-analysis does not require ethical approval. The results of this study will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.