Social and mental health risks faced by undocumented migrants during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from three surveys in France

  1. Anne Gosselin
  2. Cecile Longchamps
  3. Rachid Oulahal
  4. Ilse Derluyn
  5. Simon Ducarroz
  6. Morten Skovdal
  7. An Verelst
  8. Gesine Sturm
  9. Annabel Desgrees du Lou
  10. Maria Melchior

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background The often-precarious life circumstances of undocumented migrants are likely to heighten the detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their lives. Given the paucity of research exploring how undocumented migrants are affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, we set out to explore the association between being an undocumented migrant and a range of social and mental health measures. Methods Our study draws on three complementary surveys conducted among migrants in France between April 1st and June 7th 2020 (APART TOGETHER, MAKASI, ECHO; n = 716). We tested associations between eight outcome measures, covering health literacy, prevention behaviours, perceptions of government responses, livelihoods and mental health (PHQ-9 score), and the participants' legal status as either undocumented or documented. We modelled the probability of food insecurity increase, job loss, depression, and responses to SARS-COV-2 symptoms with logistic regression models, adjusted for age, gender and legal status. Results Undocumented migrants had a higher probability of experiencing food insecurity increase (aORs=10.40 [3.59, 30.16], and 2.19 [1.39, 3.50] in APART TOGETHER and ECHO), a higher probability of depression (aOR=2.65 [1.01, 6.97] in MAKASI). In all three surveys, undocumented migrants were more likely to lose their job (aORs=6.51 [1.18, 36.00], 8.36 [1.08, 64.70] and 3.96 [1.79, 9.16] in APART TOGETHER, MAKASI and ECHO respectively). Conclusion Our results suggest that the lives of undocumented migrants have been dramatically worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic, exposing and amplifying the inequalities facing this group. There is an urgent need for action to address these inequalities.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264999: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has several limitations. First, the very attempt to compare different surveys is challenging, as all the questions were not necessarily asked in the same way and with the same answer modalities, which can lead to information bias. As an example, legal residence status was not asked the same way in all three surveys, and although all of them included the “undocumented” modality, all three did not collect information on participants’ resident permit in the same way, which prevented us from more precise analyses on the different administrative situations The MAKASI survey collected the information on the length of the legal permit (less than one year, 1y and more, 10years or more, Citizenship) whereas in ECHO, participants were asked whether they had a legal resident permit/an asylum claim. Second, although the total number of participants is 716, in each survey the number of individuals is relatively limited, precluding more in-depth analyses that would take more cofounders into account in multivariate analyses. However, our study provides empirical data on a hard-to-reach population, namely undocumented migrants in France, and reports on their experiences of the first French lockdown and their knowledge of COVID-19. These results lead to several considerations in terms of public health campaigns and the fight against COVID-19. First, preventive messages should include not only specific instructions for prevention, but also key messages about the COVID-19 illness. Pre...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:

    IdentifierStatusTitle
    NCT04468724RecruitingMAKASI Intervention for African and Caribbean Migrants' Empo…

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.10.14.21264999v1 on medRxiv