Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39816782›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Europe2025

Digital solutions for migrant and refugee health: a framework for analysis and action.

Stephen A Matlin, Johanna Hanefeld, Ana Corte-Real, Paulo Rupino da Cunha, Thea de Gruchy, Karima Noorali Manji, Gina Netto, Tiago Nunes, İlke Şanlıer, Amirhossein Takian and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Electronic Personal Health Records for Mobile Populations: A Rapid Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Feasibility and Acceptability of mPallCareJMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  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

12 authors.

Stephen A MatlinInstitute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Johanna HanefeldCentre for International Health Protection (ZIG), Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, Berlin, 13353, Germany.
Ana Corte-RealUniversity of Coimbra, Clinical and Academic Centre of Coimbra, Faculty of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Paulo Rupino da CunhaDepartment of Informatics Engineering, University of Coimbra, CISUC, Coimbra, Portugal.
Thea de GruchyAfrican Centre for Migration & Society, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Karima Noorali ManjiCharité Center for Global Health (CCGH), Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.
Gina NettoThe Institute of Place, Environment and Society, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK.
Tiago NunesUniversity of Coimbra, Clinical and Academic Centre of Coimbra, Faculty of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
İlke ŞanlıerMigration and Development Research Center (MIGCU), Çukurova University, Sarıçam/Adana, Turkey.
Amirhossein TakianDepartment of Global Health & Public Policy, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Iran.
Muhammad Hamid ZamanDepartments of Biomedical Engineering and International Health, Center on Forced Displacement, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Luciano SasoFaculty of Pharmacy and Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital technologies can help support the health of migrants and refugees and facilitate research on their health issues. However, ethical concerns include security and confidentiality of information; informed consent; how to engage migrants in designing, implementing and researching digital tools; inequitable access to mobile devices and the internet; and access to health services for early intervention and follow-up. Digital technical solutions do not necessarily overcome problems that are political, social, or economic. There are major deficits with regard to (1) reliable data on the health needs of migrants and mobile populations and on how they can use digital tools to support their health; (2) evidence on effectiveness of solutions; and (3) a broad framework to guide future work. This article provides a wide socio-technical perspective, as a framework for analysis and developing coherent agendas across global-to-local spaces, with particular attention to the European region.

Indexed as

Digital healthEquityEthicsmHealthMigrant and refugee healthPrivacySecurityTelehealthTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39816782
PMCPMC11732709

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.