Interpersonal therapy is a widely used intervention for depression and other mental health conditions, yet its acceptability, cultural appropriateness, and mechanisms of change in different contexts remain insufficiently understood, particularly from the first-person perspective of participants. The study aimed to explore experiences with interpersonal group therapy (IPT-G) and perceived levels of improvement among participants with symptoms of depression in the city of Mosul, Iraq. The study conducted 32 semi-structured interviews (53.13% female; mean age = 28.44) with former IPT-G participants purposefully sampled from different cycles of therapy groups. Interviews explored general perspectives, experiences with techniques, group format, and perceived outcomes. Thematic content analysis revealed that IPT-G provided a space for sharing, receiving emotional support, learning valuable skills, and forming new social connections. These elements facilitate positive changes in participants’ overall well-being. At the same time, the therapy evoked feelings of discomfort for some participants by triggering difficult emotions. It was also described as demanding in practical and organisational terms and, at times, monotonous due to the repetitive structure of sessions. Despite these challenges, IPT-G appeared to fit well in the local context and was experienced as positive and useful. Nevertheless, contextual and cultural factors need to be carefully considered during implementation to enhance both effectiveness and acceptability.
A Community Advisory Board (CAB) engages a study’s target population in the research process. However, little scholarship exists to guide research to facilitate an online CAB during complex emergencies. This article describes how research exploring perspectives on good social work in complex emergencies, through a study of Northwest Syria, designed and facilitated an online CAB with international and Syrian practitioners. This study found engaging practitioners in a pilot study helped promote the relevance of the overall research to the Syrian culture and context and that carefully designed research could benefit practitioners. This process also demonstrated how ethical research in complex emergencies should be relevant and useful to participants. Ultimately, this article argues that engaging practitioners through a CAB helps improve research relevance and may benefit practitioners.
This review examines studies reporting the psychometric properties of the three most frequently used mental health screening tools for refugees: the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25), the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire (HTQ), and the Refugee Health Screener (RHS-15 and RHS-13). The review utilized the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology. We searched the PubMed and PsycInfo databases for relevant studies published between 2008 and 2024. From 2505 studies screened, 13 were ultimately included in the review. Five studies analysed the HSCL-25, showing good internal consistency but problems with cross-cultural and structural validity. Three studies on the HTQ focused on measurement invariance, showing mixed results in cross-cultural and structural validity. One study revised the HTQ to match updated diagnostic criteria, but this revision has not yet been validated. Five studies established the content validity, internal consistency, and criterion validity of the RHS. Additionally, they reported similar psychometric properties for the 13-item and 15-item versions of the RHS. However, only one of these studies examined structural validity, and none examined cross-cultural validity. In conclusion, although the HSCL-25 and HTQ were seminal contributions in refugee mental health screening, more recent evidence suggests that the RHS has since emerged as the preferred instrument.
