IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v303y2022ics0277953622003008.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Process evaluations of mental health and psychosocial support interventions for populations affected by humanitarian crises

Author

Listed:
  • Massazza, Alessandro
  • May, Carl R.
  • Roberts, Bayard
  • Tol, Wietse A.
  • Bogdanov, Sergiy
  • Nadkarni, Abhijit
  • Fuhr, Daniela C.

Abstract

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been increasingly used to test the effectiveness of mental health and psychosocial support(MHPSS) interventions for populations affected by humanitarian crises. Process evaluations are often integrated within RCTs of psychological interventions to investigate the implementation of the intervention, the impact of context, and possible mechanisms of action. We aimed to explore limitations and strengths of how process evaluations are currently conceptualised and implemented within MHPSS RCTs specifically.

Suggested Citation

  • Massazza, Alessandro & May, Carl R. & Roberts, Bayard & Tol, Wietse A. & Bogdanov, Sergiy & Nadkarni, Abhijit & Fuhr, Daniela C., 2022. "Process evaluations of mental health and psychosocial support interventions for populations affected by humanitarian crises," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:303:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622003008
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622003008
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114994?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. May, Carl & Ellis, Nicola T., 2001. "When protocols fail: technical evaluation, biomedical knowledge, and the social production of 'facts' about a telemedicine clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 989-1002, October.
    2. May, Carl & Mort, Maggie & Williams, Tracy & Mair, Frances & Gask, Linda, 2003. "Health technology assessment in its local contexts: studies of telehealthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 697-710, August.
    3. Glasgow, R.E. & Vogt, T.M. & Boles, S.M., 1999. "Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(9), pages 1322-1327.
    4. Rhodes, Tim & Lancaster, Kari, 2019. "Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Bonell, Chris & Fletcher, Adam & Morton, Matthew & Lorenc, Theo & Moore, Laurence, 2012. "Realist randomised controlled trials: A new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2299-2306.
    6. Deaton, Angus & Cartwright, Nancy, 2018. "Understanding and misunderstanding randomized controlled trials," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 2-21.
    7. Hennink, Monique & Kaiser, Bonnie N., 2022. "Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. May, Carl & Finch, Tracy & Mair, Frances & Mort, Maggie, 2005. "Towards a wireless patient: Chronic illness, scarce care and technological innovation in the United Kingdom," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(7), pages 1485-1494, October.
    2. Busse, Heide & Campbell, Rona & Kipping, Ruth, 2018. "Examining the wider context of formal youth mentoring programme development, delivery and maintenance: A qualitative study with mentoring managers and experts in the United Kingdom," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 95-108.
    3. Margaret Dalziel, 2018. "Why are there (almost) no randomised controlled trial-based evaluations of business support programmes?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Gülüm Özer & İdil Işık & Jordi Escartín, 2024. "Is There Somebody Looking out for Me? A Qualitative Analysis of Bullying Experiences of Individuals Diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(2), pages 1-22, January.
    5. Jungyoon Kim & Valerie Pacino & Hongmei Wang & April Recher & Isha Jain & Vaibhavi Mone & Jihyun Ma & Mary Jo Spurgin & Daniel Jeffrey & Stephen Mohring & Jane Potter, 2021. "System Redesign: The Value of a Primary Care Liaison Model to Address Unmet Social Needs among Older Primary Care Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    6. Perrotta, Manuela & Geampana, Alina, 2020. "The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    7. Gonot-Schoupinsky, Freda N. & Garip, Gulcan, 2019. "A flexible framework for planning and evaluating early-stage health interventions: FRAME-IT," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    8. Chelsea M. Cooper & Mary Drake & Justine A. Kavle & Joyce Nyoni & Ruth Lemwayi & Lemmy Mabuga & Anne Pfitzer & Mary Makungu & Elizabeth Massawe & John George, 2021. "Implementing a Novel Facility-Community Intervention for Strengthening Integration of Infant Nutrition and Family Planning in Mara and Kagera, Tanzania," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-21, April.
    9. Christopher J. Ruhm, 2019. "Shackling the Identification Police?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(4), pages 1016-1026, April.
    10. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. Francisco Javier de la Garza Iga & Marinés Mejía Alvarez & Joshua D Cockroft & Julia Rabin & Ana Cordón & Dina Maria Elias Rodas & Maria del Pilar Grazioso & Maria Espinola & Christine O’Dea & Ch, 2023. "Using the project ECHO™ model to teach mental health topics in rural Guatemala: An implementation science-guided evaluation," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 69(8), pages 2031-2041, December.
    12. Martin, Will, 2021. "Tools for measuring the full impacts of agricultural interventions," IFPRI-MCC technical papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Eugenio Zucchelli & Andrew M Jones & Nigel Rice, 2012. "The evaluation of health policies through dynamic microsimulation methods," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 5(1), pages 2-20.
    14. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg & Schmidt, Christoph M., 2020. "Social Norms and Energy Conservation Beyond the US," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    15. Júlio Belo Fernandes & Diana Vareta & Sónia Fernandes & Ana Silva Almeida & Dina Peças & Noélia Ferreira & Liliana Roldão, 2022. "Rehabilitation Workforce Challenges to Implement Person-Centered Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-9, March.
    16. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "‘Misbehaving’ RCTs: The confounding problem of human agency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    17. Gabrielle Scronce & Wanqing Zhang & Matthew Lee Smith & Vicki Stemmons Mercer, 2020. "Characteristics Associated with Improved Physical Performance among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in a Community-Based Falls Prevention Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, April.
    18. Saria Hassan & Alexis Cooke & Haneefa Saleem & Dorothy Mushi & Jessie Mbwambo & Barrot H. Lambdin, 2019. "Evaluating the Integrated Methadone and Anti-Retroviral Therapy Strategy in Tanzania Using the RE-AIM Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Cristina Bellés-Obrero & María Lombardi, 2022. "Teacher Performance Pay and Student Learning: Evidence from a Nationwide Program in Peru," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(4), pages 1631-1669.
    20. Julie Cowie & Eileen Calveley & Gillian Bowers & John Bowers, 2018. "Evaluation of a Digital Consultation and Self-Care Advice Tool in Primary Care: A Multi-Methods Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:303:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622003008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.