Measuring refugees' capabilities: translation, adaptation, and valuation of the OxCAP-MH into Juba Arabic for use among South Sudanese male refugees in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Forcibly displaced populations are highly vulnerable to psychosocial distress and mental disorders, including alcohol misuse. In an ongoing trial that seeks to develop a transdiagnostic intervention addressing psychological distress and alcohol use disorders among conflict-affected populations, we will carry out a cost-effectiveness evaluation using a capability-based Oxford Capabilities Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) measure. The OxCAP-MH is a 16-item questionnaire developed from the Capability Approach, that covers multiple domains of functioning and welfare. The aim of the current paper is to present the results of the translation, cultural adaptation and valuation of the OxCAP-MH into Juba Arabic for South Sudanese refugees living in Uganda. We adhered to the official Translation and Linguistic Validation process of the OxCAP-MH. To carry out the translation, the Concept Elaboration document, official English version of the OxCAP-MH, and the Back-Translation Review Template were used. Four independent translators were used for forward and back translations. The reconciled translated version was then piloted in two focus group discussions (N = 16) in Rhino refugee settlement. A most important to least important valuation of the sixteen capability domains covered in the OxCAP-MH was also done. RESULTS: The Juba Arabic version of the OxCAP-MH was finalized following a systematic iterative process. The content of the Juba Arabic version remained unchanged, but key concepts were adapted to ensure cultural acceptability, feasibility, and comprehension of the measure in the local context of Rhino refugee settlement. Most participants had low levels of literacy and required support with filling in the tool. Participants suggested an additional capability that is currently not reflected in the OxCAP-MH, namely access to food. Furthermore, discussions around the valuation exercise of the sixteen domains led to two separate importance scales, which showed relevant differences. CONCLUSIONS: In this context, the OxCAP-MH was considered culturally acceptable. The valuation exercise proved cognitively demanding. Participants voiced confusion over how to answer the questions on the OxCAP-MH instrument due to low levels of literacy. These concerns invite consideration for future research to consider how measures such as the OxCAP-MH can be made more accessible to individuals with low literacy rates in resource poor settings.

The development and validation of the 'Good Life in the Community Scale' (GLiCS): a validation study with women migrants living in high income countries.

BACKGROUND: To date, few assessment instruments have been developed to quantitatively measure the mental health status of migrant populations specifically. This paper describes the development and preliminary assessment of the 'Good Life in the Community Scale' (GLiCS). GLiCS is a wellbeing measure for migrant women in high-income settings that was coproduced with experts by experience across two phases. METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods approach and was composed of two phases. PHASE I: 88 initial items generated using qualitative data collected in a previous study were reduced to 42 through consultation with expert advisory panels, based on whether each item was considered understandable and relevant Phase II: these 42 items were piloted with a sample of migrant women (N = 109). A preliminary exploratory factor analysis was conducted using Oblique rotation. Internal consistency was measured using McDonald's ω. Convergent validity was tested by correlating the GLiCS with the Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire Mental Health (OxCAP-MH), WHO-5 wellbeing index and Objective Social Outcomes Index (SIX). Incremental validity was tested using hierarchical regression analysis to ascertain the effect on the WHO-5 wellbeing index of: age, migration status, SIX, OxCAP-MH and GLiCS. Known groups validity, the ability a measure has to discriminate between groups likely to differ on the variables of interest, was tested between the different migrant categories using a simple between subjects ANOVA. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis confirmed a 17-item (three-factor: (i) access to resources, (ii) belonging and contributing, (iii) independence) scale with high internal consistency (McDonald's ω = 0.91). Convergent and incremental validity were also evidenced. CONCLUSION: The GLiCS has demonstrable good internal consistency and construct validity, and it presents a promising wellbeing measure for better understanding the experience of migrant women.