The pitfalls of psychosocial evaluations: a critical perspective from a field worker

Kos, Anica

doi:10.1097/wtf.0b013e3282f823d1

Cited by 5 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst what constitutes “fair” benefits was contested, there was broad agreement that benefits be defined in direct relation to burdens: as risks increase, so should the benefits [ 36 ]. Certain risk / benefit considerations were identified as requiring special attention in emergencies: awareness of socio-political context [ 1 , 15 ] including safety considerations such as when gathering groups [ 21 ]; strength of confidentiality and anonymity procedures, avoiding (inadvertent) disclosure, recognising the harm this may cause to individuals and communities [ 21 , 35 , 40 ]; understanding the impact dissemination may have upon communities receiving aid and services [ 41 , 42 ]; adequate responses to research participants’ discomfort or adverse reactions, including functional referral pathways for MHPSS care [ 14 , 18 , 26 , 29 , 31 , 32 , 35 , 43 , 44 ] determined by the level of risk that the research [ 45 ] or the participant’s situation presents [ 46 ]; communication of risks and benefits in informed consent, identifying risks that matter to participants in/following a particular emergency [ 39 ]. ensuring researcher self-care [ 14 , 31 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ethical standards for mental health and psychosocial support research in emergencies: review of literature and current debates

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundResearch in emergencies is needed to understand the prevalence of mental health and psychosocial problems and strengthen the evidence base for interventions. All research - including operational needs assessments, programme monitoring and evaluation, and formal academic research - must be conducted ethically. While there is broad consensus on fundamental principles codified in research ethics guidelines, these do not address the ethical specificities of conducting mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) research with adults in emergencies. To address this gap, this paper presents a review of multidisciplinary literature to identify specific ethical principles applicable to MHPSS research in emergencies.DiscussionFifty-nine sources meeting the literature review inclusion criteria were analysed following a thematic synthesis approach. There was consensus on the relevance of universal ethical research principles to MHPSS research in emergencies, including norms of participant informed consent and protection; ensuring benefit arises from research participation; researcher neutrality, accountability, and safety; and the duty to ensure research is well designed and accounts for contextual factors in emergency settings.We go onto discuss unresolved issues by highlighting six current debates relating to the application of ethics in emergency settings: (1) what constitutes fair benefits?; (2) how should informed consent be operationalised?; (3) is there a role for decision making capacity assessments?; (4) how do risk management approaches impact upon the construction of ethical research?; (5) how can ethical reflection best be achieved?, and (6) are ethical review boards sufficiently representative and equipped to judge the ethical and scientific merit of emergency MHPSS research? Underlying these debates is a systemic tension between procedural ethics and ethics in practice.Summary and recommendationsIn summary, underpinning the literature is a desire to ensure the protection of participants exposed to emergencies and in need of evidence-based MHPSS. However, there is a lack of agreement on how to contextualise guidelines and procedures to effectively maximise the perspectives of researchers, participants and ethical review boards. This is a tension that the field must address to strengthen ethical MHPSS research in emergencies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…understanding the impact dissemination may have upon communities receiving aid and services [ 41 , 42 ];…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical standards for mental health and psychosocial support research in emergencies: review of literature and current debates

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increased focus on psychosocial interventions for children in (post) con£ict areas Claessens et al has led to a growing interest from practitioners, donors and other stakeholders in the ¢eld to show evidence about 'what works' (Kos, 2008;Tol & Jordans, 2008). This has increased the emphasis on evidence-based practice.…”

Section: Evidence-based Practicementioning

confidence: 96%

Participatory evaluation of psychosocial interventions for children

Claessens¹,

Graaff²,

Jordans³

et al. 2012

Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past decade, evidence-based practice has led to a more critical approach towards professional practice in the humanitarian working ¢eld. Many agencies have increased their capacity and resources to research intervention e¡ectiveness and programme impact.When evaluating psychosocial interventions, practitioners and researchers are often not only interested in intervention outcomes, but also in the external factors that in£uence e¡ectiveness, the intervention process and the views of its bene¢ciaries. This requires a practice-driven approach that takes into account the (cultural) reality in the ¢eld, collects relevant process information and provides a framework to re£ect the views of the participants. This paper explains howWar Child Holland developed a participatory Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) tool to evaluate I DEAL, its psychosocial life-skills intervention. The aim of the tool was to research intervention e¡ectiveness by collecting process information with children as the key informants. The participatory M&E tool comprises a range of qualitative and quantitative measures, such as setting personal goals, themed quizzes, module evaluations and impact mapping. The tool was piloted with 510 children and 120 parents in Northern Uganda. It was found that the M&E tool has potential to strengthen ' evidence-based' evaluative practice and to involve children in meaningful evaluation, but it was found to be di⁄cult to gather more data for impact evaluation without further quantifying and expanding the tool.

show abstract

“…The papers in this issue make it clear how important it is to use multiple methods for data gathering, involving all stakeholder groups, in order to include various perspectives (see also Mikus Kos, 2008). The nature, timing and function of the evaluation process have implications for the capacity of programme managers to best use the information.…”

Section: Multi-dimensional Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%