ArticleBMC public health2025
Changes in health after a work-related intervention among highly educated migrants in Norway: a pilot study.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Highly Educated Migrants in Norway: Identity and Well-Being During Delayed Workforce Entry-A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHighly educated individuals migrating to a new host country without work accreditation face various stressors that impact their health. Among them is the long waiting time for their integration as a resourceful workforce. In this study, we piloted a work-related intervention aimed at improving the health of highly educated migrants. We hypothesize that by including migrants in meaningful working-related activities, their self-rated health (SRH) and other health outcomes will improve.
methodsThis is a non-randomized intervention pilot study examining the changes in participants' health using an explanatory sequential design for evaluation. Baseline data was collected in Bergen for the intervention group and Kristiansand for the control group in 2023, with follow-up data collected after six months. The intervention consisted of working as assistant teachers at various health education programs at university level in Bergen for six months. Both groups answered a questionnaire that included SRH measured by a single validated item and other health measures. We calculated prevalence proportions and ratios, and differences in means using generalized estimating equations with 95% confidence intervals (CI), to estimate the changes in health outcomes adjusting for baseline confounders. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the intervention group (N = 15) to gain deeper understanding of changes in health or other effects of the intervention.
resultsFifteen participants in the intervention and 62 in the control group completed both questionnaires. We found no changes between the groups in SRH, but significant improvements in general mental health measured with the crude General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) -0.07 (-0.11;-0.03) and improved well-being measured with the adjusted World Health Organization-5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5) 0.09 (0.01;0.17) in the intervention group. Qualitative data indicated a positive intervention experience, explained by renewed self-confidence, family pride, improved stress management, empowerment and increased physical activity.
conclusionOur pilot study suggested positive health changes from a work-related intervention in terms of improved general mental health and well-being. Quantitative and qualitative data were complementary. For confirmation of effects, this pilot study should be upscaled with a randomized trial design.
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.