Mapping the evidence on psychosocial interventions for migrant populations: Descriptive analysis of a living database of randomized studies

Migrant mental health is a pressing public health issue with wide-ranging implications. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted in this population to assess the effects of psychosocial interventions. However, the available evidence is characterized by controversy and fragmentation, with studies focusing on different migrant populations, interventions, outcomes, delivery modalities and settings. Aiming to promote systematic reviews of the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions in different migrant groups, we have developed a living database of existing RCTs. The development of the database provides an opportunity to map the existing RCT evidence in this population. A total of 135 studies involving 24,859 participants were included in the living database. The distribution of studies by year of publication aligns with the increasing global migrant population in recent years. Most studies focus primarily on adult participants, with a limited representation of children and adolescents, and a prevalence of female participants, which is consistent with epidemiological data, except for older adults, who are underrepresented in research. Studies predominantly focus on refugees and asylum seekers, likely due to their elevated risk of mental health issues, despite the substantial presence of economic migrants worldwide. While studies mainly involve migrants from the Middle East and East Asia, epidemiological data suggest a broader geographic representation, with migrants coming from Eastern Europe, Latin America and South Asia. The present descriptive analysis of RCTs on mental health and psychosocial interventions for migrant populations provides valuable insights into the existing research landscape. It should be used to inform future research efforts, ensuring that studies are more representative of the global migrant population and more responsive to the mental health needs of migrants in different contexts.

The Protective Effect of Culture on Depression During Covid-19 Pandemic: A Romanian National Study

Previous studies indicated that collectivism represents a protective factor against depressive disorders, even among vulnerable populations. The protective effect of collectivism in relation to depressive disorders is often attributed to the social support networks available to individuals in collectivistic societies. The current study aims to investigate the protective effect of collectivism in the relationship between psychological vulnerabilities and depression. Moreover, we examined whether the protective effect of collectivism in relation to depression can be explained through the mechanism of social support. We measured individualism-collectivism for 42 Romanian counties ( n = 2,882) before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data for irrational cognitions, depression, and social support were collected online during the lockdown in Romania ( n = 5,310). All instruments showed acceptable measurement and scalar invariance across regions. In a multi-level regression model, county-level collectivism was associated with lower levels of depressive symptoms b = −.032, 95% CI [−0.045; −0.019], while irrational cognitions were positively associated with depression b = .474, 95% CI [0.438; 0.510]. The interaction between irrational beliefs and collectivism had a significant and negative effect on depression, b = −.004, 95% CI [−0.008; −0.000]. The indirect effect of collectivism on depression via social support was tested in a two-level SEM model. Explicit and implicit social support were not significant mediators. Collectivism was negatively associated with the perceived availability of explicit social support, b = −.043, 95% CI [−0.074; −0.012]. The results support a general protective effect of collectivism on mental health but cast doubt that the mechanism for this effect is related to social support.