This umbrella review analyzes existing literature on sexual harassment (SH) prevention in universities, including approaches that address SH within broader gender-based violence (GBV) forms. Conducted as part of the Uni4Equity project (CERV-2022-DAPHNE Programme), it aims to identify key trends, limitations and gaps in current prevention strategies. A systematic search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) was conducted to identify relevant systematic reviews evaluating interventions aimed at preventing SH (and related GBV forms) in university settings. Reviews were selected if they (1) demonstrated methodological requirements (e.g., detailed search strategies, pre-registered protocol), (2) were published in English between 2000 and 2024, (3) involved adult populations (students, staff). We identified 17 systematic reviews meeting these criteria, whose methodological quality was rated as “critically low” according to the AMSTAR-2. Notably, none of the included reviews focused specifically on SH, and the available evidence derived from interventions targeting broader forms of GBV. The most consistent results came from bystander intervention programs, which effectively improved knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy, though they had limited impact on actual behavior change. Primary prevention programs addressing sexual and relationship violence had mixed results, while self-defense and risk reduction programs showed limited evidence of effectiveness. Social minorities, including LGBTQ + populations, were notably underrepresented in the studies reviewed. Findings highlight the need for comprehensive, campus-wide strategies that go beyond individual-focused interventions. These strategies should integrate education, policy reforms, awareness campaigns, and staff training. Moreover, they must be inclusive and intersectional, addressing the different layers of gender relations—social, institutional, and interpersonal. Methodological rigor is also essential to develop sustainable and culturally relevant solutions.

QUESTION:Psychological distress is increasingly prevalent among university students, raising concerns about their mental health. This review aimed to assess the strength and credibility of evidence on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for improving mental health in this population. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS:We conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials assessing psychosocial interventions among university students. Searches were performed in Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Epistemonikos and Campbell Collaboration from 1 January 2014 to 1 February 2026. Data on intervention type, comparator, outcome and study-level effect sizes were analysed using inverse-variance random-effects models with restricted maximum likelihood estimation of between-study heterogeneity (τ²). Strength of associations was evaluated according to umbrella review criteria, reporting quality using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) and certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). FINDINGS:A total of 34 SRs were identified. After excluding overlapping syntheses, 28 unique meta-analyses from 12 SRs were included. Mindfulness-based interventions versus inactive controls for distress (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.40; 95% CI -0.53 to -0.28) showed highly suggestive evidence (class II; GRADE: low; AMSTAR: high). Seven associations provided suggestive evidence (Class III): mindfulness-based interventions versus inactive controls for anxiety (SMD -0.54; 95% CI -0.81 to -0.27) and depression (SMD -0.52; 95% CI -0.65 to -0.39); cognitive-based interventions versus inactive controls for anxiety (SMD -0.48; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.34) and depression (SMD -0.60; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.45); cognitive-based interventions versus active controls for well-being (SMD -0.30; 95% CI -0.42 to -0.18); positive psychology interventions versus inactive controls for distress (SMD -0.22; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.10); and multimodal interventions versus inactive controls for distress (SMD -0.85; 95% CI -1.32 to -0.87). The remaining associations were weak or non-significant, generally supported by low or very low certainty and mostly low or very low reporting quality. CONCLUSIONS:The most robust evidence emerged for mindfulness and cognitive-based interventions, with some support also for positive psychology approaches. These interventions appear to improve depression, anxiety, distress and well-being among university students, though further rigorous research is needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42023493618.

Despite important research efforts devoted to testing the effectiveness of psychological interventions for the treatment of common mental disorders in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs), a gap remains in the field of prevention. We searched multiple databases up to May 7, 2026 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing task-sharing psychological interventions for preventing common mental disorders in adults living in LMICs. Prevention interventions were classified into indicated, selective and universal. Primary outcomes were the diagnosis and symptom decrease of depression, PTSD, and anxiety at post-intervention. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) using random effects pairways and network meta-analyses (NMA). Protocol registration: CRD42023402399. We included 81 RCTs with 10,747 participants. 41 RCTs tested indicated, 34 selective and 7 universal prevention interventions. For preventing depression, wellbeing promotion, parental psychoeducation, yoga/mindfulness, and multi-component interventions were more effective than enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU/TAU) (RR 0.25 to 0.66). In head-to-head comparisons, wellbeing promotion and psychoeducation ranked highest (Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking, SUCRA>90%). In reducing depressive symptoms, parental psychoeducation, social support, wellbeing promotion, yoga-mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, multicomponent interventions were more effective than ETAU/TAU (SMDs -0.94 to -0.36). For PTSD prevention, yoga-mindfulness, parental psychoeducation, CBT, and multicomponent interventions reduced symptoms. For anxiety diagnosis and symptoms, wellbeing promotion, social support, yoga-mindfulness, multicomponent interventions, and active waiting list were the most effective interventions. Extensive evidence supports the effectiveness of task-sharing psychosocial interventions in preventing mental disorders in LMICs, with stronger evidence for indicated and selective prevention.

Background:Self Help Plus (SH+) is a WHO intervention that provides strategies for managing distress arising from adversity. In the Palestinian context, SH+ holds promise in supporting psychological well-being and mitigating the impact of trauma, with the critical challenge in adapting and scaling the intervention for feasible and sustainable delivery. Methods:This is the piloting phase of a prospective hybrid type-1 non-randomised follow-up study investigating the implementability and effectiveness of SH+ in early 2023 in the Gaza Strip. Participants were recruited by the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme, which also facilitated the intervention. Assessments were conducted immediately before and one week after the intervention. Exposure to traumatic events was measured by the Gaza Trauma Checklist (GTC). Implementability was evaluated using the Feasibility of Intervention Measure, the Acceptability of Intervention Measure, and the Intervention Appropriateness Measure. Effectiveness was assessed using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 items (DASS-21), the WHO-5 Well-being Index, and the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2·0)-12 items. After each session, the facilitators completed an online fidelity test for the intervention. Findings:Of 177 eligible participants, 162 completed the pre-assessment, and 157 the post-assessment. Results indicated that 151 participants (96·16%) found SH+ acceptable, 131 (83·44%) appropriate, and 139 (88·45%) feasible. In terms of effectiveness measures, the estimated average psychological well-being score increased from 10·78 (SE = 0·42) to 17·69 (SE = 0·41), indicating a substantial enhancement in well-being. The disability scores were estimated to decrease, on average, from 22·70 (SE = 0·63) to 18·35 (SE = 0·53), and significant improvements were also observed across all DASS subscales, and in the global DASS score, with fitted model values declining from 58·97 (SE = 1·85) to 33·02 (SE = 1·71). Interpretation:The pilot phase of the study shows that SH+ is a scalable psychological intervention for individuals exposed to trauma in the Gaza Strip. Conducting the implementation phase is needed to confirm the findings. Funding:None.

IntroductionEngagement with arts and cultural activities has been increasingly recognized for its role in promoting mental health and well-being. This study evaluates the impact of a structured museum-based intervention on psychological well-being.MethodsA prospective hybrid type-1 non-randomized follow-up study with a pre-post design was conducted. Psychological distress, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and psychological well-being were assessed before and after a structured museum itinerary.ResultsA total of 103 participants (82.5% female) completed pre- and post-intervention assessments. The intervention led to significant improvements across all psychological measures (p < 0.001), with the most notable effects observed in individuals aged 41–60. Additionally, between 89 and 98% of participants reported high acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the itinerary.DiscussionThe observed clinical improvements and high acceptability highlight the potential of museum-based interventions as an innovative and effective approach to mental health promotion. Future research should focus on scaling and replicating such interventions in diverse cultural and community settings, further integrating the arts into public health strategies.

Migrant populations – including labour migrants, undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, internationally displaced persons, and other populations on the move – are exposed to a variety of stressors that affect their mental health. We designed and tested the effectiveness of a stepped‐care programme consisting of two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and locally adapted for migrant populations. A parallel‐group randomized controlled trial was conducted in Italy. We recruited migrant adults (≥18 years) with psychological distress (score of at least 16 on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, K10). The experimental arm received psychological first aid (PFA) and a stepped‐care programme consisting of two WHO interventions adapted for this population group: first, Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and, for participants who still reported significant levels of psychological distress after DWM, Problem Management Plus (PM+). Each intervention lasted 5‐6 weeks and was delivered remotely by lay facilitators. The control arm received PFA and care as usual (CAU). The primary outcome was the change in symptoms of depression and anxiety from baseline to week 21 after randomization, measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ‐ADS). Between December 14, 2021 and April 18, 2023, 108 migrants were randomized to the stepped‐care intervention and 109 to CAU. Analysis of the primary outcome revealed that participants receiving the stepped‐care programme showed a greater reduction in anxiety and depression symptoms compared to those receiving CAU (coefficient: –3.460, standard error, SE: 1.050, p=0.001) at week 21. The same difference was observed at week 7 (coefficient: –3.742, SE=1.008, p<0.001) and week 14 (coefficient: –6.381, SE=1.039, p<0.001). The stepped‐care programme was also associated with a greater improvement of depression and anxiety symptoms assessed separately at all timepoints, of post‐traumatic stress disorder symptoms at weeks 14 and 21, and of self‐assessed problems, function and well‐being at all timepoints. No serious adverse events occurred. This study provides evidence supporting the stepped‐care delivery of DWM and PM+ for migrant population groups with elevated distress. As these interventions are low‐intensity, transdiagnostic and task‐shifting, they are highly scalable. Existing evidence‐based guidelines and implementation packages should be updated accordingly.

Co-creation has emerged as a crucial strategy for addressing complex public health challenges, including promotion and prevention of mental health concerns. While the evidence base for effective interventions continues to grow, significant gaps remain in their implementation and integration into real-world settings. Co-creation offers a valuable tool for strengthening mental health promotion strategies, ensuring that interventions are evidence-based, contextually relevant, culturally sensitive, sustainable and acceptable to those directly affected. However, there is a paucity of studies examining the evaluation of co-creation research, particularly regarding how participatory methods foster adaptation and influence outcomes and long-term sustainability. This protocol outlines a study designed to implement, evaluate and strengthen co-creation methodologies through a participatory and formative evaluation approach. This study adopts a mixed-methods design within the ADVANCE project, a multi-country initiative focused on co-creating mental health promotion and prevention interventions with groups in vulnerable situations across seven European countries. End-users, healthcare professionals, and decision-makers will be engaged throughout the project in both intervention design and evaluation. Co-creation activities initiated with intervention scenario building and prioritization, drawing on desk reviews and online Delphi surveys co-developed with locally-set Society Advisory Groups (SAGs). The selection of intervention scenarios for implementation was performed using scenario-based workshops involving stakeholders in six partner countries. A second goal is to evaluate the co-creation process, which was co-designed in consultation with country teams and SAGs. A longitudinal qualitative study based on semistructured interviews with co-creators across two time points will be conducted, following the co-development of the interview guide through an online World Café. This study introduces an innovative approach by embedding participatory and formative evaluation into the co-creation process, enabling ongoing adaptation of co-creation activities. Through continuous stakeholder engagement, the project seeks to address barriers deriving from power imbalances, conflicting priorities, and resource limitations. Qualitative and participatory methods will be combined to elicit stakeholders’ views, identify drawbacks and promote adjustments to ensure meaningful collaboration and reduce participation fatigue. Expected outcomes include actionable recommendations to inform policy, reduce stigma and foster the co-creation of more inclusive, effective, sustainable and scalable mental health promotion and prevention strategies across Europe.

Background:University students frequently face mental health challenges due to academic pressures, lifestyle changes, and developmental factors. Digital interventions, such as Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM), a psychosocial e-mental health intervention developed by the World Health Organization (WHO), offer scalable approaches to address these issues. These data emerging from the literature provide the framework for the CAMPUS (Characterize and Address Mental health Problems in University Students) study aimed at supporting the mental health of students attending the University of Verona. Objective:This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and implementability of DWM as a psychological strategy for effective mental health prevention and promotion, as well as for reducing psychological symptoms and distress and improving well-being in university students. Methods:During the study period (October 2023-June 2024), we conducted a prospective hybrid type-1 nonrandomized follow-up study, with a pretest-posttest design. The study population consisted of students attending the University of Verona, who were recruited through university communication channels and participated via web-based platforms. Data were collected at baseline (T1) and after the intervention (T2) using an ad hoc sociodemographic information page and self-reported tools assessing psychological distress with the Kessler-10 (K-10), depressive symptoms with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression scale, anxiety symptoms with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) scale, and psychological well-being with the WHO-5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5). In addition, at postintervention, the implementability was assessed. Statistical analyses included Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank tests and logistic regression models to identify associated factors. Results:Out of 2296 interested students, 1498 (65.24%) completed all DWM sessions and assessments. At T1, students exhibited mild psychological distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms with moderate well-being. Significant improvements were observed postintervention: the K-10 scores decreased from 22.41 (SD 6.54) to 19.86 (SD 5.96), the GAD-7 scale scores decreased from 8.27 (SD 4.31) to 6.57 (SD 3.76), and the PHQ-9 scores decreased from 8.28 (SD 7.73) to 6.75 (SD 4.37; all P<.001). The WHO-5 well-being scores increased from 11.73 (SD 4.65) to 13.26 (SD 4.68; P<.001). Satisfaction was high, with 90.72% (1359/1498) of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing on satisfaction, 77.37% (1159/1498) agreeing or strongly agreeing on appropriateness, and 94.99% (1423/1498) finding the program easy to use. No significant differences in clinical outcomes were associated with sociodemographic or baseline mental health variables. Conclusions:The DWM intervention demonstrated positive effects on students' mental health, showing reductions in distress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms, alongside improved well-being. The program's high levels of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility highlight its potential for broader application as a digital mental health strategy for university students.

OBJECTIVE:Adolescence is a transitional period marked by psychosocial changes that can impact well-being. Mental disorders before university are linked to dropout and lower employment rates, affecting long-term outcomes. This study examines the psychological well-being of Italian students aged 18-25, exploring factors related to distress. DESIGN:Cross-sectional survey. SETTING:High schools and university in Verona, northern Italy. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 1766 students (88.96% university students and 11.04% high school students in their final year) were recruited. Inclusion criteria were being enrolled in high school or university in Verona, aged 18-25, with adequate Italian language proficiency and informed consent. No exclusion criteria were applied. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcomes were levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale-10-item - Kessler-10), anxiety and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale - PHQ-ADS) and well-being (WHO-Five Well-Being Index - WHO-5). Secondary analyses examined the association of these outcomes with sociodemographic and educational variables. RESULTS:Most participants (88.6%) reported psychological distress (mean K-10=22.95, SD=6.64). Mild symptoms of anxiety and depression were reported by 47.1% and 43.3% of participants, respectively. Only 16.5% reported high psychological well-being. Female and non-binary students had worse mental health outcomes than males (p value <0.001). Students in their first 3 years of university exhibited better mental health compared with those in later years or high school (p value <0.001). Students living in owned properties had lower levels of anxiety and depression (p value=0.004). CONCLUSIONS:Psychological distress, anxiety and depression are widespread among Italian students. Gender, academic stage and living situation significantly impact mental health outcomes. The findings emphasise the need for targeted mental health interventions, particularly for non-binary and female students, as well as those in advanced academic years.

Migrants often experience psychological distress due to pre-, peri- and post-migration stressors. Scalable interventions like Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM) and Problem Management Plus (PM+) have been developed to address these challenges. This study evaluates a stepped-care program combining DWM and PM+ for migrants in Italy, examining its context, implementation, and mechanisms of impact. A mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial (RCT), following the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. Post-trial qualitative data were collected through individual interviews with intervention participants (n = 10) and stakeholders (n = 10), as well as a focus group with intervention providers (n = 8). Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo. Cultural stigma and practical barriers influenced engagement, while community leaders fostered trust and participation. Interventions were feasible and acceptable. Digital delivery improved accessibility for some but posed challenges for those with low technological literacy or private spaces. The stepped-care approach supported gradual engagement with mental health strategies, enhancing self-care and emotional awareness, while provider relationships were key to sustaining motivation. The stepped-care model alleviated psychological distress and was well-received. Findings underscore the need for cultural sensitivity, digital accessibility and community engagement to optimize migrant mental health support.

Providing Mental Health and Psychosocial Support interventions (MHPSS) for forcibly displaced Ukrainians in Central and Eastern Europe poses numerous challenges due to various socio-cultural and infrastructural factors. This qualitative study explored implementation barriers reported by service providers of in-person and digital MHPSS for Ukrainian refugees displaced to Poland, Romania and Slovakia due to the war. In addition, the study aimed to generate recommendations to overcome these barriers. Semi-structured Free List and Key Informant interviews were conducted using the Design, Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation protocol with 18 and 13 service providers, respectively. For in-person interventions, barriers included stigma, language, shortage of MHPSS providers, lack of financial aid and general lack of trust among refugees. For digital MHPSS, barriers included generational obstacles, lack of therapeutic relationships, trust issues, and lack of awareness. Recommendations included advancing public health strategies, organizational interventions, building technical literacy and support, enhancing the credibility of digital interventions and incorporating MHPSS into usual practice. By implementing the recommendations proposed in this study, policymakers, organizations and service providers can work towards enhancing the delivery of MHPSS and addressing the mental health needs of Ukrainian refugees in host countries, such as Poland, Romania and Slovakia.

Objectives This study presents the process evaluation of an effective stepped-care programme of eHealth interventions (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress [DWM] and Problem Management Plus [PM+]) for healthcare workers (HCWs) with psychological distress (RESPOND-HCWs trial) conducted in Spain. The aim is to analyse the context in which the programme was delivered, assess key implementation outcomes and explore mechanisms of action. Methods We used mixed methods. Quantitative data came from routine randomised control trial monitoring and structured observation, and qualitative data were collected using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with trial participants ( n = 12) and decision-makers ( n = 7) and a focus group discussion with intervention providers ( n = 7). We conducted a descriptive analysis of quantitative data using R software and a thematic analysis of qualitative data using NVivo. Results Context analysis revealed implementation barriers, including unrealistic expectations of participants about the programme and mental health-related stigma. The flexibility of interventions and the opportunity for mental health actions were enabling factors. Implementation outcomes showed that the trial was feasible, appropriate and timely, and that the intervention was delivered with minimal protocol deviations and good acceptance among participants. Mechanisms of action included confidence in the positive effect of the intervention, a good therapeutic relationship and specific intervention components. Conclusions These results supplement the outcome evaluation and can help inform large-scale implementation in similar settings. Specific recommendations include increasing mental health awareness and reducing stigma in the implementation setting, including a short orientation session and ensuring flexibility in schedules and peer support. Trial registration number NCT04980326.

Introduction The transition phase from late adolescence to early adulthood, which corresponds with the period of university life, is a time that offers important opportunities for personal growth. However, this developmental phase also concurs with the peak period of risk for the onset of mental health disorders. For this reason, the literature clearly identifies university students as a vulnerable population group for psychogical distress and mental problems. Digital psychological interventions and e-mental health solutions are emerging as a promising solution for university students, particularly appealing due to their anonymity, portability and ease of access. Hence, the World Health Organisation has developed several psychosocial e-mental health tools including Doing What Matters in Times of Stress (DWM), which has been consistently shown effective in various vulnerable populations. These data provide the framework for the CAMPUS study that is intended for students attending the University of Verona. Objectives The main objective of this project is to adapt the WHO psychological intervention called “Doing What Matters in Times of Stress” (DWM) to this target population and to evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of WHO’s DWM as a psychological strategy for effective mental health prevention and promotion, and for reducing psychological symptoms and distress in university students. Secondary objectives of the project include to evaluate the fidelity of DWM, to assess factors associated with its implementation and effectiveness and to co-create the necessary local conditions for implementation and up-scaling of DWM. Methods The CAMPUS study is a prospective non-randomized follow-up study. The target population is composed by university students of University of Verona, Italy. The online assessments, which are collected pre and post intervention, consist of an ad-hoc sociodemographic information page, and four self-administered questionnaires assessing psychological distress, depression and anxiety symptoms, and psychological well-being. In addition, implementation checklists will be administered to assess the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the intervention. Results Preliminary results on a sample of 300 students attending University of Verona show that the adapted DWM intervention promote students’ psychological well-being and reduce the level of psychological distress as well as the risk for the later development of a psychopathology. Moreover we expect that future results would include data on the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of the adapted DWM intervention among university students Conclusions These results provide valuable information for mental health promotion and support programs for university students, as well as insights into factors influencing its implementation and suggestions for future scaling of the intervention. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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.

Background: Scalable psychological interventions such as the WHO's Self-Help Plus (SH+) have been developed for clinical and non-clinical populations in need of psychological support. SH+ has been successfully implemented to prevent common mental disorders among asylum seekers and refugees who are growing in number due to increasing levels of forced migration. These populations are often exposed to multiple, severe sources of traumatisation, and evidence of the effect of such events on treatment is insufficient, especially for non-clinical populations.Objective: We aim to study the effect of potentially traumatic experiences (PTEs) and the mediating role of symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on the improvement following SH+.Method: Participants allocated to SH+ who received at least three sessions (N = 345) were extracted from two large, randomised, European prevention trials involving asylum seekers and refugees. Measures of distress, depression, functional impairment, and post-traumatic stress symptoms were administered at baseline and 6 months post-intervention, together with measures of well-being and quality of life. Adjusted models were constructed to examine the effect of PTEs on post-intervention improvement. The possible mediating role of PTSD symptoms in this relationship was then tested.Results: Increasing numbers of PTEs decreased the beneficial effect of SH+ for all measures. This relationship was mediated by symptoms of PTSD when analysing measures of well-being and quality of life. However, this did not apply for measures of mental health problems.Conclusions: Exposure to PTEs may largely reduce benefits from SH+. PTSD symptomatology plays a specific, mediating role on psychological well-being and quality of life of participants who experienced PTE. Healthcare professionals and researchers should consider the role of PTEs and PTSD symptoms in the treatment of migrants and refugees and explore possible feasible add-on solutions for cases exposed to multiple PTEs. Increasing numbers of potentially traumatic experiences can decrease the beneficial effect of a manualized group psychotherapeutic intervention in migrants and refugees across multiple countries.In absence of a full threshold diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, post-traumatic stress symptoms still mediate the relation between potentially traumatic experiences and some outcome improvements at follow-up.While the moderating role of number of potentially traumatic experiences applies to all outcomes (depression symptoms, psychological distress, functional impairment, well-being, and quality of life), the mediating role of post-traumatic stress symptoms in this relation only applies to well-being and quality of life. Antecedentes: Se han desarrollado intervenciones psicol & oacute;gicas escalables, como Self-Help Plus (SH+) de la OMS, para poblaciones cl & iacute;nicas y no cl & iacute;nicas que necesitan apoyo psicol & oacute;gico. SH+ se ha implementado con & eacute;xito para prevenir trastornos mentales frecuentes entre los solicitantes de asilo y refugiados, cuyo n & uacute;mero est & aacute; aumentando debido a los crecientes niveles de migraci & oacute;n forzada. Estas poblaciones a menudo est & aacute;n expuestas a m & uacute;ltiples y graves fuentes de traumatizaci & oacute;n, y la evidencia del efecto de tales eventos en el tratamiento es insuficiente, especialmente para las poblaciones no cl & iacute;nicas.Objetivo: Nuestro objetivo es estudiar el efecto de las experiencias potencialmente traum & aacute;ticas (EPTs) y el papel mediador de los s & iacute;ntomas del trastorno de estr & eacute;s postraum & aacute;tico (TEPT) en la mejora despu & eacute;s de SH+.M & eacute;todo: Los participantes asignados al programa de intervenci & oacute;n SH+ que recibieron al menos tres sesiones (N = 345) fueron extra & iacute;dos de dos grandes ensayos de prevenci & oacute;n europeos, aleatorizados, que involucraron a personas que solicitaron asilo y refugiados. Se administraron medidas de angustia, depresi & oacute;n, deterioro funcional y s & iacute;ntomas de estr & eacute;s postraum & aacute;tico al inicio del estudio y 6 meses despu & eacute;s de la intervenci & oacute;n, junto con medidas de bienestar y calidad de vida. Se construyeron modelos ajustados para examinar el efecto de las EPTs en la mejora posterior a la intervenci & oacute;n. A continuaci & oacute;n se comprob & oacute; el posible papel mediador de los s & iacute;ntomas del trastorno de estr & eacute;s postraum & aacute;tico en esta relaci & oacute;n.Resultados: Un n & uacute;mero creciente de EPTs disminuy & oacute; el efecto beneficioso de SH+ para todas las medidas. Esta relaci & oacute;n estuvo mediada por los s & iacute;ntomas del TEPT al analizar medidas de bienestar y calidad de vida. Sin embargo, esto no se aplica a las medidas de problemas de salud mental.Conclusiones: La exposici & oacute;n a EPTs puede reducir en gran medida los beneficios de SH+. La sintomatolog & iacute;a TEPT desempe & ntilde;a un papel mediador espec & iacute;fico en el bienestar psicol & oacute;gico y la calidad de vida de los participantes que experimentaron EPTs. Los profesionales de la salud y los investigadores deben considerar el papel de las EPTs y los s & iacute;ntomas de TEPT en el tratamiento de migrantes y refugiados, y explorar posibles soluciones factibles complementarias para los casos expuestos a m & uacute;ltiples EPTs.

Background:Migrant populations are at increased risk of developing mental health problems. We aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions in this population. Methods:We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). Cochrane Central Register of randomised trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PTSDpubs, PsycINFO, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception to October 7, 2024, to identify randomized clinical trials assessing the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for migrant populations in reducing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression or anxiety. Studies with second-generation migrants were excluded if they comprised over 20% of participants. Two independent researchers screened, reviewed, and extracted data. The primary outcomes were the severity of PTSD, depression, and anxiety symptoms at post-intervention. Secondary outcomes included acceptability. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) were pooled using pairwise and NMA. PROSPERO: CRD42023418817. Findings:Of the 103 studies with 19,230 participants included, 96 contributed to the meta-analyses for at least one outcome, with women representing 64% of the participants. Narrative Exposure Therapy (NET), counselling, Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), and creative expressive interventions demonstrated greater efficacy than treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing PTSD symptoms, with SMDs [95% Confidence Intervals (CIs)] ranging from -0.69 [-1.14, -0.24] to -0.60 [-1.20, -0.01], albeit with low confidence in the evidence. For depressive symptoms, Integrative therapy emerged as the top intervention compared to TAU, with moderate confidence (SMD [95% CI] = -0.70 [-1.21, -0.20]). For anxiety symptoms, NET, Integrative therapy, and Problem Management Plus (PM+)/Step-by-Step (SbS) were more effective than TAU, with SMDs [95% CIs] ranging from -1.32 [-2.05, -0.59] to -0.35 [-0.65, -0.05]. Still, the confidence in the evidence was low. Overall, head-to-head comparisons yielded inconclusive results, and the acceptability analysis revealed variations across interventions. 16% of the studies (17 studies) were classified as "high risk" of bias, 68% (70) as having "some concerns", and 18% (19) as "low risk". We identified considerable heterogeneity (I2 of >70%). Interpretation:The analysis revealed no clear differences in the efficacy of psychosocial interventions compared to TAU for reducing symptoms of PTSD, depression, and anxiety. While certain interventions showed potential benefits, confidence in these findings was generally low, limiting the ability to draw definitive conclusions about their comparative effectiveness. Funding:This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, an ad hoc organisational framework was established between academic, local government and community partners to implement the “Sentinella – Identify, Trace and Prevent” screening programme in Verona, north-east Italy. Between September 2020 and May 2021, key populations not covered by any screening policies at the local and national level were screened for SARS-CoV-2. Target populations were: older adult residents (males >65 years and females >75 years), bus and taxi drivers, social workers, supermarket employees, hospital cleaning and catering staff, researchers working in the local hospitals, students, and people experiencing homelessness (PEH). Five dedicated swab clinics, home testing facilities, and one mobile clinic were activated to collect nasopharyngeal swabs. Molecular analysis was performed for all the subjects; an antigen-rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) was also implemented as a point-of-care test for PEH. Medical follow-up, psychological support, and quarantine facilities were organised for subjects who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Overall, 2075 subjects participated in the surveillance programme. Amongst these, 1,572 were residents/workers, whilst 503 were PEH. A total of 127 (6.2%) participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Sixty-nine were residents, 58 PEH. The incidence rate was 4 per 10.000 person/day (95% CI 3.1–5.0). The highest prevalence and incidence rates were found amongst supermarket employees (9.7% and 8.5 per 10.000 person/day, 95% CI 3.81–18.86, respectively), followed by hospital cleaning staff (8.1%, 7.6 per 10.000 person/day, CI 95% 4.9–11.7). Regarding PEH, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 11.5%. All PEH identified as positive were isolated in dedicated shelter facilities. Amongst the 69 residents/workers who were quarantined, 53 were reached for initial psychological support for assessing the presence of any psychological distress or psychiatric pathology. Amongst the subjects evaluated, 10 (18.9%) presented clinically significant psychological discomfort and accessed the stepped-care psychological intervention. The community partnerships played a pivotal role in optimising early case detection. Promotion of testing helped to prevent and contain more efficiently potential clusters through strategic planning, especially for PEH. Insights from the study highlight the importance of community partnerships in public health emergencies, particularly in the context of highly transmissible diseases pathways.

Background: In asylum seekers and refugees, the frequency of mental disorders, such as depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, is higher than the general population, but there is a lack of data on risk factors for the development of mental disorders in this population. Aim: This study investigated the risk factors for mental disorder development in a large group of asylum seekers and refugees resettled in high- and middle-income settings. Methods: Participant-level data from two randomized prevention studies involving asylum seekers and refugees resettled in Western European countries and in Turkey were pooled. The two studies randomized participants with psychological distress, but without a diagnosis of mental disorder, to the Self-Help Plus psychological intervention or enhanced care as usual. At baseline, exposure to potentially traumatic events was measured using the Harvard Trauma Questionnaire-part I, while psychological distress and depressive symptoms were assessed with the General Health Questionnaire and the Patient Health Questionnaire. After 3 and 6 months of follow-up, the proportion of participants who developed a mental disorder was calculated using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. Results: A total of 1,101 participants were included in the analysis. At 3- and 6-month follow-up the observed frequency of mental disorders was 13.51% (115/851) and 24.30% (207/852), respectively, while the frequency estimates after missing data imputation were 13.95% and 23.78%, respectively. After controlling for confounders, logistic regression analysis showed that participants with a lower education level ( p = .034), a shorter duration of journey ( p = .057) and arriving from countries with war-related contexts ( p = .017), were more at risk of developing mental disorders. Psychological distress ( p = .004), depression ( p = .001) and exposure to potentially traumatic events ( p = .020) were predictors of mental disorder development. Conclusions: This study identified several risk factors for the development of mental disorders in asylum seekers and refugees, some of which may be the target of risk reduction policies. The identification of asylum seekers and refugees at increased risk of mental disorders should guide the implementation of focused preventative psychological interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had major and potentially long-lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing across populations worldwide. However, these impacts were not felt equally, leading to an exacerbation of health inequalities, especially affecting vulnerable populations such as migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. Aiming to inform the adaptation and implementation of psychological intervention programmes, the present study investigated priority mental health needs in this population group. Participants were adult asylum seekers, refugees and migrants (ARMs) and stakeholders with experience in the field of migration living in Verona, Italy, and fluent in Italian and English. A two-stage process was carried out to examine their needs using qualitative methods including free listing interviews and focus group discussions, according to Module One of the DIME (Design, Implementation, Monitoring, and Evaluation) manual. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic analyses approach. A total of 19 participants (12 stakeholders, 7 ARMs) completed the free listing interviews and 20 participants (12 stakeholders and 8 ARMs) attended focus group discussions. Salient problems and functions that emerged during free listing interviews were discussed during the focus group discussions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, ARMs struggled with many everyday living difficulties in their resettlement country due to social and economic issues, revealing a strong influence of contextual factors in determining mental health. Both ARMs and stakeholders highlighted a mismatch between needs, expectations and interventions as factors that may hamper proper implementation of health and social programmes. The present findings could help in the adaptation and implementation of psychological interventions targeting the needs of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants aiming to find a match between needs, expectations, and the corresponding interventions. Registration number 2021-UNVRCLE-0106707, February 11 2021.