Review: Mental Health and Social Isolation among Sub-Saharan African Migrants in Tunisia: A Cross-Sectional Quantitative Study {under peer review}

 

Reviewer: Kamala Poudel

 

Completed: 18-09-2025 07:35

 

Recommendation: Accept Submission

 

 

	Yes	No	N/A
Is the research question clearly defined?	+
Are the methods appropriate and sufficiently detailed?	+
Is the data analysis robust and replicable?	+
Are the conclusions supported by the results?	+
Is the manuscript well organised and clearly written?	+
Are tables, figures, and supplementary material informative and necessary?	+
Is the abstract an accurate summary of the study?	+
Does the manuscript contribute meaningfully to the field?	+
Is it relevant to the field of mental health or related disciplines that are connected to the scope of the Journal?	+
Are ethical approvals and participant consents adequately described?	+
Have competing interests, funding, and data availability been transparently declared?		+

 

Comments for the authors:

 

Lucid style of writing grips the focus of the reader -The author has successfully acknowledged the emerging new trends  in mental health issues such as depression etc. from the research under reporting, by way of this article.  For example "the reversal of an expected trend: male participants reported higher depression scores than their female counterparts, challenging prevailing epidemiological assumptions and pointing towards gendered pressures linked to migration, economic hardship and cultural expectations" has been duly explained.

In Table 3 which shows the main descriptive results Psychosocial scores overview,"...... participants reported high levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms alongside considerable social isolation. They also demonstrated substantial psychosocial resources......... "

I`m curious to know more about these psychosocial resources and whether these could be augmented and whether these resources were available to all the respondents and whether these resources were utilized by the respondents or they were merely available but not utilized.

Cluster analysis identified four distinct clinical profiles with specific combinations of symptoms and psychosocial resources (Table 8). Cluster analysis revealed four distinct clinical profiles within  sample of 98 respondents. It is wonderfully explained. However, psychosocial resources available to these respondents have not been described. Nature of resilience in these 4 groups could have been explained whether it is same for all the 4 groups or different in nature. Also the nature and source of resources.

How resilience gauged?