Background: Up to half of Western children and adolescents experience at least one type of childhood adversity. Individuals with a history of childhood adversity have an increased risk of psychopathology. Resilience enhancing factors reduce the risk of psychopathology following childhood adversity. A comprehensive overview of empirically supported resilience factors is critically important for interventions aimed to increase resilience in young people. Moreover, such an overview may aid the development of novel resilience theories. Therefore, we conducted the first systematic review of social, emotional, cognitive and/or behavioral resilience factors after childhood adversity.Methods: We systematically searched Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Scopus (e.g., including MEDLINE) for English, Dutch, and German literature. We included cohort studies that examined whether a resilience factor was a moderator and/or a mediator for the relationship between childhood adversity and psychopathology in young people (mean age 13–24). Therefore, studies were included if the resilience factor was assessed prior to psychopathology, and childhood adversity was assessed no later than the resilience factor. Study data extraction was based on the STROBE report and study quality was assessed with an adapted version of Downs and Black's scale. The preregistered protocol can be found at: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016051978.Results: The search identified 1969 studies, of which 22 were included (eight nationalities, study sample n range: 59–6780). We found empirical support for 13 of 25 individual-level (e.g., high self-esteem, low rumination), six of 12 family-level (e.g., high family cohesion, high parental involvement), and one of five community-level resilience factors (i.e., high social support), to benefit mental health in young people exposed to childhood adversity. Single vs. multiple resilience factor models supported the notion that resilience factors should not be studied in isolation, and that interrelations between resilience factors should be taken into account when predicting psychopathology after childhood adversity.Conclusions: Interventions that improve individual, family, and/or social support resilience factors may reduce the risk of psychopathology following childhood adversity. Future research should scrutinize whether resilience factors function as a complex interrelated system that benefits mental health resilience after childhood adversity.

Background: Due to their experiences of major stressful life events, including postdisplacement stressors, refugees and asylum seekers are vulnerable to developing mental health problems. Yet, despite the availability of specialized mental health services in Western European host countries, refugees and asylum seekers display low mental healthcare utilization. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore structural and socio-cultural barriers to accessing mental healthcare among Syrian refugees and asylum seekers in Switzerland. Method: In this qualitative study, key-informant (KI) interviews with Syrian refugees and asylum seekers, Swiss healthcare providers and other stakeholders (e.g. refugee coordinators or leaders) were conducted in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. Participants were recruited using snowball sampling. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed, and then analysed using thematic analysis, combining deductive and inductive coding. Results: Findings show that Syrian refugees and asylum seekers face multiple structural and socio-cultural barriers, with socio-cultural barriers being perceived as more pronounced.Syrian key informants, healthcare providers, and other stakeholders identified language, gatekeeper-associated problems, lack of resources, lack of awareness, fear of stigma and a mismatch between the local health system and perceived needs of Syrian refugees and asylum seekers as key barriers to accessing care. Conclusions: The results show that for Syrian refugees and asylum seekers in Switzerland several barriers exist. This is in line with previous findings. A possible solution for the current situation might be to increase the agility of the service system in general and to improve the willingness to embrace innovative paths, rather than adapting mental healthcare services regarding single barriers and needs of a new target population.

Aims Common mental disorders are highly prevalent among Syrian refugees. Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief, transdiagnostic, non-specialist helper delivered, psychological intervention targeting psychological distress. This single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) on PM+ delivered by peer-refugees examined trial procedures in advance of a definitive RCT, evaluated PM+ 's acceptability and feasibility, and investigated its likely effectiveness and cost-effectiveness among Syrian refugees in the Netherlands. Methods Adult Syrian refugees (N = 60) with elevated psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) score >15) and reduced pychosocial functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) score >16) were randomised into PM+ in addition to care as usual (CAU) (PM+/CAU; n = 30) or CAU alone (n = 30). Primary outcomes were symptoms of depression and anxiety (Hopkins Symptom Checklist; HSCL-25) at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were pychosocial functioning (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule; WHODAS 2.0), symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (PTSD Checklist for DSM 5; PCL-5) and self-identified problems (Psychological Outcomes Profiles; PSYCHLOPS). Changes in service utilisation and time out of employment and/or adult education were estimated (adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory; CSRI). Semi-structured interviews on the implementation of PM+ were conducted with stakeholders (i.e. six PM+ participants, five non-specialist helpers and five key informants). Results Recruitment, randomization and blinding procedures were successful. PM+ was generally perceived positively by stakeholders, especially regarding the intervention strategies, accommodation of the intervention and the helpers. Two serious adverse events not attributable to the trial were reported. At 3-month follow-up, the HSCL-25 total score was significantly lower for the PM+/CAU group (n = 30) than CAU group (n = 30) (p = 0.004; d = 0.58). Significant differences in favour of PM+/CAU were also found for WHODAS psychosocial functioning (p = 0.009, d = 0.73), PCL-5 symptoms of PTSD (p = 0.006, d = 0.66) and PSYCHLOPS self-identified problems (p = 0.005, d = 0.81). There were no significant differences in mean health service costs (p = 0.191) and the mean costs of lost productive time (p = 0.141). This suggests PM+ may potentially be cost-effective with an incremental cost from a health system perspective of €5047 (95% CI €0–€19 773) per additional recovery achieved. Conclusions Trial procedures and PM+ delivered by non-specialist peer-refugee helpers seemed acceptable, feasible and safe. Analyses indicate that PM+ may be effective in improving mental health outcomes and psychosocial functioning, and potentially cost-effective. These results support the development of a definitive RCT with a larger sample of refugees and a longer follow-up period.

MEDLINE) for English, Dutch and German literature. We included cohort studies that examined 36 whether a resilience factor was a moderator and/ or a mediator for the relationship between childhood 37 adversity and psychopathology in young people (mean age 13-24). Therefore, studies were included if 38 the resilience factor was assessed prior to psychopathology, and childhood adversity was assessed no 39 later than the resilience factor. Study data extraction was based on the STROBE report and study 40 quality was assessed with an adapted version of Downs and Black's scale. The preregistered protocol 41 can be found at: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016051978. 43Results: The search identified 1969 studies, of which 22 were included (eight nationalities, study 44 sample n range: 59-6780). We found empirical support for 13 of 25 individual-level (e.g. high self-45 esteem, low rumination), six of 12 family-level (e.g. high family cohesion, high parental involvement), 46 and one of five community-level resilience factors (i.e. high social support), to benefit mental health in 47 young people exposed to childhood adversity. Single versus multiple resilience factor models 48 supported the notion that resilience factors should not be studied in isolation, and that interrelations 49 between resilience factors should be taken into account when predicting psychopathology after 50 childhood adversity. 51 52 Conclusions:Interventions that improve individual, family, and/ or social support resilience factors 53 may reduce the risk of psychopathology following childhood adversity. Future research should 54 scrutinize whether resilience factors function as a complex interrelated system that benefits mental 55 health resilience after childhood adversity. 56 57

Identification of the common practice elements of effective interventions for conflict-affected children and youth can inform essential future treatment development, implementation, and evaluation for this vulnerable population. To further advance the field, research should focus on identifying which of these elements are the active ingredients for clinical change, along with attention to costs of delivery, training, supervision and how to sustain quality implementation over time.