Abstract
Ethical, logistical, and funding approaches preclude conducting randomized control trials (RCTs) in some humanitarian crises. A lack of RCTs and other intervention research has contributed to a limited evidence-base for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPS) programs after disasters, war, and disease outbreaks. Propensity score methods (PSMs) are an alternative analysis technique with potential application for evaluating MHPS programs in humanitarian emergencies. PSMs were used to evaluate impacts of education reintegration packages (ERPs) and other (vocational or economic) reintegration packages (ORPs) v. no reintegration programs on mental health of child soldiers. Propensity scores were used to determine weighting of child soldiers in each of the three treatment arms. Multiple linear regression was used to estimate adjusted changes in symptom score severity on culturally validated measures of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and functional impairment from baseline to 1-year follow-up. Among 258 Nepali child soldiers participating in reintegration programs, 54.7% completed ERP and 22.9% completed ORP. There was a non-significant reduction in depression by 0.59 (95% CI -1.97 to 0.70) for ERP and by 0.60 (95% CI -2.16 to 0.96) for ORP compared with no treatment. There were non-significant increases in PTSD (1.15, 95% CI -1.55 to 3.86) and functional impairment (0.91, 95% CI -0.31 to 2.14) associated with ERP and similar findings for ORP (PTSD: 0.66, 95% CI -2.24 to 3.57; functional impairment (1.05, 95% CI -0.71 to 2.80). In a humanitarian crisis in which a non-randomized intervention assignment protocol was employed, the statistical technique of PSMs addressed differences in covariate distribution between child soldiers who received different integration packages. Our analysis did not demonstrate significant changes in psychosocial outcomes for ERPs and ORPs. We suggest the use of PSMs in evaluating non-randomized interventions in humanitarian crises when non-randomized conditions are not utilized.
Highlights
Ethical, logistical, and funding approaches preclude conducting randomized control trials (RCTs) in some humanitarian crises
A challenge in global mental health research is identifying research methods and statistical techniques to evaluate interventions in settings that may not be amenable to randomized control trials (RCTs)
A few RCTs have been conducted in humanitarian crises, and they have tended to focus on adults or have examined interventions that are not widely used in humanitarian crises (Tol et al 2011); Tol and colleagues observed that the most frequently used interventions in humanitarian crises are the least studied approaches
Summary
Logistical, and funding approaches preclude conducting randomized control trials (RCTs) in some humanitarian crises. Propensity score methods (PSMs) are an alternative analysis technique with potential application for evaluating MHPS programs in humanitarian emergencies. In a humanitarian crisis in which a non-randomized intervention assignment protocol was employed, the statistical technique of PSMs addressed differences in covariate distribution between child soldiers who received different integration packages. Our analysis did not demonstrate significant changes in psychosocial outcomes for ERPs and ORPs. We suggest the use of PSMs in evaluating non-randomized interventions in humanitarian crises when nonrandomized conditions are not utilized. A challenge in global mental health research is identifying research methods and statistical techniques to evaluate interventions in settings that may not be amenable to randomized control trials (RCTs). There are limited funding mechanisms that can rapidly make research grants available to study mental health and psychosocial in these settings
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
