The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Underrepresentation of men in gender based humanitarian and refugee trauma research: a scoping review
Abstract
Sex and gender are important considerations within refugee studies. Risks to health and wellbeing may manifest differently for refugee women and men, as may the use of health and social services and responses to interventions. Since the 1980s, increased attention has been paid to the experience of girls and women in refugee and humanitarian research, however, much less attention has been paid to boys and men. The purpose of this systematic scoping review was to investigate whether there is a gender bias in refugee and humanitarian research on refugee trauma. Findings demonstrate that since 1988, fully 95% of gender focused refugee research addressed women’s issues, while only 5% addressed the experience of refugee men. This article offers possible explanations for this gap and discusses its ramifications for both research and clinical practice.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Males face unique stressors during displacement, and risk experiencing traumas related to combat situations (Affleck et al., 2018).”
From Feasibility trial of a scalable transdiagnostic group psychological intervention for Syrians residing in a refugee camp (2021) · cites this paper as Affleck et al., 2018
In the citing paper
“The recruitment of male participants into humanitarian research has often been neglected, with the majority of published papers focusing on the experiences of females (Affleck, Selvadurai, & Sikora, 2018).”
From Feasibility trial of a scalable transdiagnostic group psychological intervention for Syrians residing in a refugee camp (2021) · cites this paper as Affleck, Selvadurai, & Sikora, 2018
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Morina, N., Akhtar, A., Barth, J., & Schnyder, U. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00433 · Cited by 339
Affleck, W., Thamotharampillai, U., Jeyakumar, J., & Whitley, R. (2018) · Culture Medicine and Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s11013-018-9592-9 · Cited by 67
Self-citationAkhtar, A., Giardinelli, L., Bawaneh, A., Awwad, M., Al-Hayek, H., Whitney, C., Jordans, M. J. D., Sijbrandij, M., Cuijpers, P., Dawson, K., et al. (2021) · European Journal of Psychotraumatology · doi:10.1080/20008198.2021.1932295 · Cited by 31
Reinforcing data bias in crisis information management: The case of the Yemen humanitarian response
Paulus, D., de Vries, G., Janssen, M., & de Walle, B. V. (2023) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102663 · Cited by 28
Bond, S. (2019) · Journal of Family Social Work · doi:10.1080/10522158.2019.1546965 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Affleck, W., Selvadurai, A., & Sikora, L.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- Barnes-Jewish Hospital (US)
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Affleck, William
- Venue
- Intervention
- Publisher
- Medknow
- Published
- 2018
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 22
- ISSN
- 1571-8883 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2747456417
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 1.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Intervention (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Migration, Health and Trauma
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Security, and Conflict
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
- Keywords
- gender bias in research, refugee trauma, humanitarian research, refugee men, refugee women, clinical practice implications
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
