Mental health screening and assessment tools for forcibly displaced children: a systematic review

Ilse L Verhagen1, Marc J Noom2, Ramón J L Lindauer1

  • 1Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Insights

Mental health assessment tools for displaced youth are evaluated for reliability and validity. While some instruments show promise, more research is needed for cross-cultural validation and optimal use in this vulnerable population.

Area of Science:

  • Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
  • Global Mental Health
  • Psychometrics

Background:

  • A significant global population of forcibly displaced individuals are children and youth.
  • These young populations face heightened risks for mental health issues due to exposure to trauma.
  • There is a critical need for reliable and valid mental health assessment tools for this demographic.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
  • To assess the validity and reliability of mental health assessment tools for asylum-seeking, refugee, and internally displaced children and youth.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted systematic literature searches across four major databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science).
  • Evaluated study quality using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist.
  • Assessed PROMs based on COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.

Main Results:

  • Screened 4842 articles, with 27 studies meeting eligibility criteria.
  • Evaluated 28 PROMs for reliability, internal consistency, structural validity, hypotheses testing, and criterion validity.
  • Identified several instruments suitable for measuring emotional/behavioral problems, PTSD, anxiety, and depression.

Conclusions:

  • Several PROMs demonstrate adequate validity and reliability for assessing mental health in forcibly displaced children and youth.
  • Further high-quality research is essential to establish cross-cultural validity and optimal cut-off scores.
  • A core set of instruments cannot yet be recommended, emphasizing the need for continued research and best practice guidance.