25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The prevalence of mental illness in refugees and asylum seekers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Globally, the number of refugees and asylum seekers has reached record highs. Past research in refugee mental health has reported wide variation in mental illness prevalence data, partially attributable to methodological limitations. This systematic review aims to summarise the current body of evidence for the prevalence of mental illness in global refugee populations and overcome methodological limitations of individual studies.

          Methods and findings

          A comprehensive search of electronic databases was undertaken from 1 January 2003 to 4 February 2020 (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EBM Reviews, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PILOTS, Web of Science). Quantitative studies were included if diagnosis of mental illness involved a clinical interview and use of a validated assessment measure and reported at least 50 participants. Study quality was assessed using a descriptive approach based on a template according to study design (modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). Random-effects models, based on inverse variance weights, were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for sex, sample size, displacement duration, visa status, country of origin, current residence, type of interview (interpreter-assisted or native language), and diagnostic measure. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD) 42016046349. The search yielded a result of 21,842 records. Twenty-six studies, which included one randomised controlled trial and 25 observational studies, provided results for 5,143 adult refugees and asylum seekers. Studies were undertaken across 15 countries: Australia (652 refugees), Austria (150), China (65), Germany (1,104), Italy (297), Lebanon (646), Nepal (574), Norway (64), South Korea (200), Sweden (86), Switzerland (164), Turkey (238), Uganda (77), United Kingdom (420), and the United States of America (406). The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was 31.46% (95% CI 24.43–38.5), the prevalence of depression was 31.5% (95% CI 22.64–40.38), the prevalence of anxiety disorders was 11% (95% CI 6.75–15.43), and the prevalence of psychosis was 1.51% (95% CI 0.63–2.40). A limitation of the study is that substantial heterogeneity was present in the prevalence estimates of PTSD, depression, and anxiety, and limited covariates were reported in the included studies.

          Conclusions

          This comprehensive review generates current prevalence estimates for not only PTSD but also depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Refugees and asylum seekers have high and persistent rates of PTSD and depression, and the results of this review highlight the need for ongoing, long-term mental health care beyond the initial period of resettlement.

          Abstract

          In a systematic review and meta analysis, Rebecca Blackmore and colleagues investigate the prevalence of mental illness among adult refugees and asylum seekers in studies undertaken across 15 countries.

          Author summary

          Why was this study done?
          • Globally, the numbers of refugees and asylum seekers have reached record highs.

          • This systematic review aims to estimate how common mental illnesses are in current adult refugee and asylum-seeker populations.

          What did the researchers do and find?
          • We performed a comprehensive literature search looking for studies that diagnosed mental illness in refugee and asylum-seeker populations.

          • For studies to be included, the diagnosis must have resulted from a clinical interview using a validated diagnostic assessment measure.

          • We found adult refugee and asylum seekers have high and persistent rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. The prevalence of anxiety disorders and psychosis are more comparable to findings from general populations.

          What do these findings mean?
          • The increased prevalence of PTSD and depression appears to persist for many years after displacement.

          • These results highlight the importance of early and ongoing mental health care, extending beyond the period of initial resettlement, to promote the health of refugees and asylum seekers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sex differences in trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder: a quantitative review of 25 years of research.

          Meta-analyses of studies yielding sex-specific risk of potentially traumatic events (PTEs) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) indicated that female participants were more likely than male participants to meet criteria for PTSD, although they were less likely to experience PTEs. Female participants were more likely than male participants to experience sexual assault and child sexual abuse, but less likely to experience accidents, nonsexual assaults, witnessing death or injury, disaster or fire, and combat or war. Among victims of specific PTEs (excluding sexual assault or abuse), female participants exhibited greater PTSD. Thus, sex differences in risk of exposure to particular types of PTE can only partially account for the differential PTSD risk in male and female participants. (c) 2006 APA, All Rights Reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome

            Study Question: What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? Summary Answer: International evidence-based guidelines including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS. What Is Known Already: Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. Study Design, Size, Duration: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods: Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, five guideline development groups, and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, and translation experts. Thirty-seven societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, with final recommendations approved across all panels. Main Results and the Role of Chance: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: i) considerable refinement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; ii) reducing unnecessary testing; iii) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modification, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and iv) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around refining specific diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided. Wider Implications of the Findings: The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program. Study Funding/Competing Interest(S): The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guideline development group members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of conflicts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Full details of conflicts declared across the guideline development groups are available at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/sphpm/mchri/pcos/guideline in the Register of disclosures of interest. Of named authors, Dr Costello has declared shares in Virtus Health and past sponsorship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Laven declared grants from Ferring, Euroscreen and personal fees from Ferring, Euroscreen, Danone and Titus Healthcare. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in an IVF unit. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating societies and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREEII criteria and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and was submitted for final approval by the NHMRC
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5): Development and Initial Psychometric Evaluation in Military Veterans.

              The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) is an extensively validated and widely used structured diagnostic interview for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The CAPS was recently revised to correspond with PTSD criteria in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). This article describes the development of the CAPS for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) and presents the results of an initial psychometric evaluation of CAPS-5 scores in 2 samples of military veterans (Ns = 165 and 207). CAPS-5 diagnosis demonstrated strong interrater reliability (к = .78 to 1.00, depending on the scoring rule) and test-retest reliability (к = .83), as well as strong correspondence with a diagnosis based on the CAPS for DSM-IV (CAPS-IV; к = .84 when optimally calibrated). CAPS-5 total severity score demonstrated high internal consistency (α = .88) and interrater reliability (ICC = .91) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = .78). It also demonstrated good convergent validity with total severity score on the CAPS-IV (r = .83) and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (r = .66) and good discriminant validity with measures of anxiety, depression, somatization, functional impairment, psychopathy, and alcohol abuse (rs = .02 to .54). Overall, these results indicate that the CAPS-5 is a psychometrically sound measure of DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity. Importantly, the CAPS-5 strongly corresponds with the CAPS-IV, which suggests that backward compatibility with the CAPS-IV was maintained and that the CAPS-5 provides continuity in evidence-based assessment of PTSD in the transition from DSM-IV to DSM-5 criteria. (PsycINFO Database Record
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Med
                PLoS Med
                plos
                plosmed
                PLoS Medicine
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1549-1277
                1549-1676
                21 September 2020
                September 2020
                : 17
                : 9
                : e1003337
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
                [2 ] Department of Psychiatry, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom
                [3 ] Centre for Developmental Psychiatry & Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
                [4 ] Centre for Educational Development, Appraisal and Research (CEDAR), University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
                Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4617-0609
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3616-1637
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9342-2365
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6131-5741
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5043-8786
                Article
                PMEDICINE-D-19-02869
                10.1371/journal.pmed.1003337
                7505461
                32956381
                1ed4e8dd-ebe9-44f4-843c-0f603d2efb9e
                © 2020 Blackmore et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 6 August 2019
                : 14 August 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 8, Tables: 1, Pages: 24
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000925, National Health and Medical Research Council;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000925, National Health and Medical Research Council;
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001036, Australian Rotary Health;
                Award ID: Ian Scott PhD Scholarship
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Windermere Foundation
                Award ID: Doctoral Scholar
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation (MCHRI)
                Award Recipient :
                The authors received no specific funding for this work. MG-H and JAB are supported by fellowships from the National Health and Medical Research Council. RB is supported by scholarships from Australian Rotary Health, Windermere Foundation, and Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation (MCHRI).
                Categories
                Research Article
                People and Places
                Demography
                Refugees
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Neuropsychiatric Disorders
                Anxiety Disorders
                Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Neuroses
                Anxiety Disorders
                Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Mood Disorders
                Depression
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Neuropsychiatric Disorders
                Anxiety Disorders
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Neuroses
                Anxiety Disorders
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Assessment
                Systematic Reviews
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Medical Risk Factors
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article