Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35152939›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2022

A Refugee Rose of competencies and capabilities for mental healthcare of refugees.

Kamaldeep Bhui

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Kamaldeep BhuiDepartment of Psychiatry and Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, UK; East London NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and World Psychiatric Association Collaborating Centre in Research, Training, Policy and Practice, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9205-2144

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, I set out the challenges of care for refugees and suggest approaches to assessment and intervention. I discuss clinical interventions that can address the immediate concern of the clinician in a bio-psycho-social framework, and the value of considering eco-social and structural influences that can hinder recovery and perpetuate inequalities. Refugees face multiple adversities before, during and after escaping from life-threatening situations, political violence, torture and persecution. They present with complex health needs and encounter hostility from host countries and public services, which see their needs as an additional demand on the public purse. Regrettably, existing care practice and training of professionals do not often include skills for working across cultures, including cultural formulations and fair assessment, cultural adaptation of interventions, cultural competence and cultural consultation methods, including clinical ethnography and exploration of cultural identity and explanatory models. There are little data on effective and kind models of interpretation and translation. Care systems are rarely designed to fully address the needs of refugees. Health practitioners are not trained to address structural and institutional racism and discrimination, which leads to exclusion of the most marginalised, with little attention to social justice and fair processes as part of appropriate healthcare.

Indexed as

cultureeco-socialethnographymental healthRefugee

Identifiers

PMID35152939
PMCPMC8867853

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.