ArticleJournal of migration and health2024
"Sometimes it can be like an icebreaker": A mixed method evaluation of the implementation of the Refugee Health Screener-13 (RHS-13).
Article in Journal of migration and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between mental health screening and healthcare utilization among refugees and asylum seekers in Sweden: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of migration and health · 2026Article
- Using the Refugee Health Screener with Children and Young People Seeking Asylum and Refugees who are unaccompanied (CYPSAR-U): A mixed-methods evaluation.Journal of migration and health · 2026Article
- 'Respond'-A novel approach to healthcare delivery for people seeking asylum.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Forced migrants are at risk of developing mental illness, yet challenges remain with underutilization of mental healthcare among this population. This study examined the implementation of the Refugee Health Screener-13 (RHS-13) in the health assessment for forced migrants in eight primary health care centres in Stockholm Region, Sweden. Methods: A mixed-methods convergent parallel design was used, combining nurses self-reported quantitative data on the levels and reasons for RHS-13 use in the health assessment with qualitative interview data on the barriers and facilitators for RHS-13 use. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a coding framework for the qualitative analysis. Results: Levels of RHS-13 use varied between primary health care centres, resulting in two groups: three centres with high-level (65-92%) and five centres with low-level (0-36%) implementation. Factors related to the tool itself, as well as the inner and outer context, influenced the use of RHS-13. Language barriers, insufficient time, and lack of trust in the validity and utility of RHS-13 were the main barriers, while its availability in many languages and that it was perceived as an important complement to the health assessment were the main facilitators. Conclusion: RHS-13 contributes to the standardization of assessing mental health in the health assessment. Identifying context-based implementation strategies and addressing language and time issues as well as nurses trust in the tool's utility are recommended to enhance the use of RHS-13.
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.