Scoping review maps psychosocial services for children in transnational families, highlighting gaps and needs.
This scoping review maps the evidence on psychosocial care and services for children in transnational families (TNFs), including both children who migrate and those who remain in the countries of origin while one or both parents migrate for work. Guided by PRISMA and Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage frameworks, the review searched three electronic databases for English-language journal articles and book chapters published between 2014 and 2024. Using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 137 publications were selected and analysed by a team of 13 researchers across six countries. The findings show that most studies originated from North America, Western Europe, and Asia, and that the literature is dominated by qualitative journal articles, with a marked increase in publications after 2020. Evidence was organised into four categories of psychosocial care and services: emotional and relational support; educational and developmental support; psychological and mental health interventions; and legal, welfare, and protective services. Emotional and relational support was the most frequently documented form of care, typically provided by family members, schools, and community networks. In contrast, formal psychological, educational, and protective services were far less frequently documented. Overall, the review shows that children in TNFs rely heavily on informal and relationship-based care, particularly through extended family and transnational digital communication, while access to formal culturally responsive psychosocial care and services remains limited, fragmented, and uneven. By synthesising a decade of evidence and presenting a clear taxonomy, this review highlights the need for multidimensional, context-sensitive approaches to psychosocial care and services for children in TNFs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Božić et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: