ArticleJMIR human factors2026
Online Tiered Screening for Mental Health Problems Among Refugees in Sweden: Validation Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefugees and asylum-seekers commonly experience numerous adverse and traumatic events and are therefore at increased risk of mental health problems. Despite the high need for mental health interventions, services tend to be underused by refugees and asylum-seekers, and various barriers compromise access. Digital, efficient screening, adapted for these groups, could facilitate initial assessment and increase accessibility to mental health services. We developed an internet-based tiered screening procedure (i-TAP) aiming to identify clinically relevant symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD), anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and insomnia disorder among individuals with a refugee background. The i-TAP is an adaptive procedure with 3 tiers aiming to identify general mental distress in Tier 1, differentiate between symptoms in Tier 2, and assess the severity of symptoms in Tier 3. Each tier additionally functions as a gateway to further assessment, as a negative outcome terminates the procedure.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of the i-TAP, using structured clinical assessments as the reference standard.
methodsIn this prospective study, 70 adult participants with a refugee background, literate in Arabic, Dari, Farsi, or Swedish, and residing in Sweden, completed the i-TAP on tablets and participated in a subsequent structured diagnostic interview.
resultsIt has been shown that the i-TAP could identify 91.7% (33/36) of individuals assessed with any psychiatric disorder, and correctly identified 82.1% of all positive cases of MDD, anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and insomnia disorder, with few false negative assessments. Overall test accuracy of the i-TAP ranged between 77.1% and 84.3%, depending on disorder. The tiered design could reduce item burden while maintaining accuracy. A vast majority of participants rated the user experience as positive. In this sample, 36/70 (51.4%) individuals were assessed with one or more psychiatric disorders and comorbidity was high.
conclusionsThe i-TAP may be a valid, efficient, and feasible screening tool for the identification of common psychiatric disorders among individuals with a refugee background in Sweden. The i-TAP could be implemented as a first screener in various settings, including online and in-person clinical practices. The digital, adaptive, multilingual format could facilitate early assessment and increase the availability of mental health services for refugees and asylum-seekers.
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.