Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ktprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T04:24:23.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2025

Lisa Zook*
Affiliation:
Informed International, Seattle, WA, USA
Ali Bitenga Alexandre
Affiliation:
Informed International, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo
Michelle M. Hood
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Sioban D. Harlow
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
*
Corresponding author: Lisa Zook; Email: lisazook@informedinternational.org
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study assessed whether a music therapy program improved mental health and school attendance among girls in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) following economic and conflict-related insecurity. It included 483 girls aged 10–14 who participated in the Healing in Harmony (HiH) program, implemented by World Vision and Make Music Matter in Kasai-Central province. Participants completed surveys before and after the program, and up to two follow-up interviews assessing depression, anxiety, self-esteem, and school attendance. Before the program, 36.0% (95% CI 31.7%–40.3%) and 60.5% (95% CI 56.1%–64.8%) screened positive for depression and anxiety, respectively. After participation, the risk of screening positive declined by 75% for depression (RR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.22–0.32) and by about half for anxiety (RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.41–0.53), with improvements sustained up to 17 months. Self-esteem scores increased by 3.93 points (95% CI 3.22–4.64, p<0.001). School absenteeism decreased from 10% (95% CI 7.2%–12.6%) to 5.4% (RR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.40–0.73). Participation in HiH was associated with sustained improvements in mental health and school attendance. These findings support integrating psychosocial care into humanitarian responses to improve both mental health and educational outcomes for crisis-affected children.

Topics structure

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. HiH cohort enrollment, completion, study sampling and attrition (10- to 14-year-old females only)

Figure 1

Figure 1. Illustration of the study design. The HiH program was implemented sequentially across five time periods (gray): April–August 2021, October–December 2021, April–June 2022, August–October 2022 and November 2022–January 2023, with data collection occurring at the start and end of each program (white stars), in addition to October 2022 and February 2023 (black stars).

Figure 2

Table 2. Data collection schedule

Figure 3

Table 3. Demographic and education characteristics of girls enrolled in the study

Figure 4

Figure 2. Boxplots of depression, anxiety and self-esteem average scores by time.

Figure 5

Table 4. Proportion (and 95% CIs) of girls who screened positive for depression and anxiety, average self-esteem score by time and cohort

Figure 6

Figure 3. Boxplot of days absent over the last 4 weeks for Cohort 5 by pretest and posttest.

Figure 7

Table 5. Regression models for anxiety and depression, all cohorts (N = 438; observations = 1,462)

Figure 8

Table 6. Regression models for self-esteem and Poisson link model for school absenteeism, Cohort 5 only

Supplementary material: File

Zook et al. supplementary material

Zook et al. supplementary material
Download Zook et al. supplementary material(File)
File 48.4 KB

Author comment: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R0/PR1

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Review: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. The study addresses a valuable topic and contributes to the understanding of how music therapy interventions may impact mental health and school attendance in the challenging context of DRC.

See below some general and line-specific comments.

General Comments:

1. Population: Clarify how the intervention, which involved boys, girls, and adult women, resulted in a sample limited to girls only. This needs to be explicitly detailed in the methods section.

2. Time Points: The issue of timepoints for follow-up assessments needs to be addressed. The effects of the intervention may vary depending on the time since its conclusion. This should be acknowledged in the discussion/limitations section and/or better explained in the methods section.

3. Intervention Intensity: Cohort 1 had one session only, while cohorts 2-5 had two sessions per week. How was this disparity handled methodologically? If it was not accounted for, please acknowledge this in the discussion/limitations section.

4. Conclusion: The phrasing “had a positive impact” implies causality, which does not seem to be supported by the study’s design. Consider rephrasing this statement to reflect an association with the positive changes observed, rather than implying a causal relationship.

Line-Specific Comments:

• Abstract: It would be helpful to report significance levels/confidence intervals for all the reported findings.

• Page 6, Line 88: Ceccarelli et al. is not a meta-analysis but a systematic review. Please correct.

• Page 9, Line 171: “of’6 days” — correct the spelling.

• Page 9, Line 176: Consider removing the mention of the additional qualitative study at this stage. This could be integrated into the discussion if tied to future research.

• Page 11, Line 202: The paragraph interpreting results in the context of the study might not be appropriate for the methods section. Consider moving this to the discussion and integrating it there.

• Page 12, Line 225: Substantiate the choice of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale by referring specifically to their relevance to the population of interest (e.g., cultural appropriateness, local validation, etc.). Additionally, provide details on the translation and adaptation process for these measures that were carried out in this study.

• Page 12, Line 243: Provide a source for the method used to assess SES or other justification.

• Page 13, Line 254: Were there missing data? If so, how were they handled?

• Page 21, Line 367: A new update of the cited review is available (10.1111/jcpp.13891). Please refer to this most recent work.

• Page 21, Line 380: The work by Cikuru (2021) is interesting but would fit better in the introduction to build the rationale for the study.

• Page 23, Line 417: The introduction of a concept relating to stigma reduction and social inclusion seems to come out of the blue. Provide context or remove.

• Page 23, Line 420: This is a strong statement, but it lacks citations and is not directly tied to the reported results. Consider rephrasing or omitting.

Review: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

This manuscript describes the result of a pre-post evaluation of the Healing in Harmony program, a music-based therapy program, on mental health and school attendance among young adolescent girls in a conflict setting in the Democratic Republic of Congo. This manuscript is well-written, and presents findings from an important investigation, which suggests music therapy as a potentially promising method of improving mental health and school attendance among young adolescent girls. There are a few points of clarification that I think are important to address – listed in order below.

1. Abstract: hard to know really what the median scores for depression and anxiety mean as we don’t know the scale or the score range at this point.

2. Abstract: it would be ideal to include always the 95% CI at a minimum (and P as well) when reporting risk ratios (when stating “RR = 0.27 for depression….”.

3. Abstract: the line in the conclusion “Although food and economic insecurity…” – feels like a lot to put in the abstract and might be better to just discuss in the main paper. (The rationale is that there is already a lot of information in the abstract, and this statement in the conclusion raises more questions than providing a summary because it is not central to the main results).

4. Introduction: Para 2 (starting line 69 as the authors have assigned lined numbers) is “an emerging evidence base suggests the value of mental health interventions” – is this specifically for humanitarian settings?

5. Introduction Paras 2 and 3: The authors state “two meta-analyses included only studies of adults” and “Three meta-analyses included studies with children and adults” are the meta-analyses the authors cite the result of a systematic search, or are these more “sentinel” papers or recent meta-analyses?

6. Introduction Para 3 line 79-80: what sorts of interventions did the meta-analyses addressed look at? (i.e. what was the actual form/content of interventions – broadly grouped?) This would be helpful to understand and contextualize e.g. to what extent music therapy or similar techniques have been done before.

7. In line with the above point – for the Intro/Discussion – how much previous evidence is there specifically about music-based therapy for mental health? I found this to be slightly missing.

8. Introduction and Discussion – the authors cite Partap et al. 2023 and Grande et al. 2023 as suggesting that supporting mental health can lead to increased school attendance. Looking at these references, Partap et al. 2023 looked at depression or school-going status (not attendance) as exposures and risky behaviors as outcomes – but did not explicitly cross-tabulate or look at the association between depression/mental health and how this affects school going status. Additionally, Grande et al was a systematic review that looked at school-based interventions to improve mental health, but I did not see that the authors stated or reported school attendance as outcomes. I would recommend that the authors double check these references, and update with more suitable ones.

9. Methods Line 141-142. I appreciate that some details about the HiH program have been previously published, and Cikuru et al, 2021 has been cited. However, Cikuru et al 2021 is a paper on the same program but in a different population as I understand. The approach in this paper is described in the supplementary in terms of general stages. I think it would b helpful to add as supplementary here and also add more details. Approximately how long did each stage last across the 12 weeks? Was there tailoring to different age groups? Was the same content delivered across all cohorts (and was it that only the frequency and overall length of intervention delivery was different for cohort 1?). These are good to understand since it appears from some of the results that depression and anxiety scores over time (pre- and post-treatment) appear to really vary by cohort, and one question is to what extent this might be a result of differences in how the intervention was delivered across cohorts.

10. Results Table 3: For Grade and Disability, first column (overall), the numbers do not add up to 483. If there are missing data, these should be reported in this table as a separate category for each of these variables.

11. Table 4: it is very interesting to see that there aren’t really any pronounced effects on depression between T0 and T1 in the first three cohorts. Is there anything that could explain this that the authors could touch upon in the Discussion?

12. Also – for Figure 1, it may be nice to see actually boxplots that, similar to table 4, split up the cohort-specific distributions by time point as well – just to see how these line up with the proportions in Table 4.

13. Results line 315, figure 2 and generally throughout – may be good to be consistent with the terms and use either pre-test/post-test OR pre-treatment post-treatment

14. Discussion line 359: for the cited meta-analysis, what sorts of interventions did this look at? It would be helpful to know how these compare to the very distinctive music therapy that is reported on in this paper

15. Discussion lines 388-392 – the paragraph is duplicated (appears also in lines 374-378).

16. Discussion and limitations:

a. maybe good to make very clear in the methods itself that ultimately, only school-going children were recruited for this.

b. Other limitations maybe important to include – I understand the depression tool has been previously validated in similar populations, but what about the anxiety tool and others?

17. It would be good if the authors could discuss any other notes about interventions that would be effective in this setting. As the authors themselves state, food insecurity appears to be an important contributor to depression and anxiety in this setting. To what extent then could the current intervention help reduce the burden of such disorders? Or, what do the authors think about integrating approaches to more effectively address mental health in these settings?

18. Any discussion on feasibility of implementation and scale-up?

19. I may have missed this in the methods, but why focus on evaluating just girls in this context – particularly if the participants included others too? (If the authors are planning to do separate analyses, perhaps this could be highlighted). Any thoughts or discussion on whether additional populations should be targeted in future assessments?

Recommendation: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R0/PR4

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R1/PR6

Comments

Thank you very much for your interest in our manuscript. Below are our responses to the reviewer and editorial comments. All page numbers and line items reference the tracked changes document.

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS AND EDITORIAL COMMENTS

EDITORS COMMENTS

- Please include the abstract in the main text document. Done, line 8

- Please include an Impact Statement below the abstract (max. 300 words). This must not be a repetition of the abstract but a plain worded summary of the wider impact of the article. Done, line 42

- Submission of graphical abstracts is encouraged for all articles to help promote their impact online. A Graphical Abstract is a single image that summarises the main findings of a paper, allowing readers to quickly gain an overview and understanding of your work. Ideally, the graphical abstract should be created independently of the figures already in the paper, but it could include a (simplified version of) an existing figure or a combination thereof. Graphical abstracts should not be too text-heavy, in order to be easily viewable at thumbnail size. If you do not wish to include a graphical abstract please let me know. A graphical abstract is now included as a separate file.

- Please ensure references are correctly formatted. In text citations should follow the author and year style. When an article cited has three or more authors the style ‘Smith et al. 2013’ should be used on all occasions. At the end of the article, references should first be listed alphabetically, with a full title of each article, and the first and last pages. Journal titles should be given in full. Done

- Statements of the following are required in the main text document at the end of all articles: ‘Author Contribution Statement’ Done, line 541, ‘Financial Support’ Done, line 549, ‘Conflict of Interest Statement’ Done, ‘Ethics statement’ (if appropriate) Done, ‘Data Availability Statement’ Done, line 552. Please see the author guidelines for further information.

- Please submit figures as separate files and please ensure all files are submitted in an editable electronic format. Have submitted as requested as separate files.

Reviewer: 1

Thank you for the opportunity to review your manuscript. The study addresses a valuable topic and contributes to the understanding of how music therapy interventions may impact mental health and school attendance in the challenging context of DRC. Thank you.

General Comments:

1. Population: Clarify how the intervention, which involved boys, girls, and adult women, resulted in a sample limited to girls only. This needs to be explicitly detailed in the methods section.

RESPONSE: We added the following paragraph in Study Participants sub-section of the methodology on page 10, line 218.

“This research focused on girls because this study was funded as part of the World Vision’s EGAL project. EGAL aimed to develop effective strategies to help girls in the DRC cope with trauma from gender-based violence and reduce anxiety, depression, and PTSD and to improve school attendance. Evaluation was limited to the 10-14 year age group as funding was limited and only this age group was well-represented across all five rounds of the HiH program implementation.”

2. Time Points: The issue of timepoints for follow-up assessments needs to be addressed. The effects of the intervention may vary depending on the time since its conclusion. This should be acknowledged in the discussion/limitations section and/or better explained in the methods section.

RESPONSE: We have added text in the second paragraph of the Methods, Data Collection section (Page 9, starting at line 208) to clarify the follow-up time points.

“Informed undertook data collection at in October 2022 and January 2023. For a random sample of 10-14-year-old girls, Informed conducted the post-interview and a 4-month follow-up interview for cohort 4 and the pre and post-interviews for cohort 5. During each data collection period, Informed also collected follow-up interviews with a random sample of 10-14 year-old girls in cohorts 1-3 at 4, 10, and 14-months and 8, 14 and 18-months, respectively.”

We have also added the following text to the limitations section in the discussion (Page 24, line 490)

“As efforts to conduct follow-up interviews to evaluate the longer-term impacts of participation in HiH were only undertaken once Informed began data-collection, time since completion of the program varied across cohorts. Thus we are not able to assess whether the shorter and longer-term impact differed across cohorts.”

3. Intervention Intensity: Cohort 1 had one session only, while cohorts 2-5 had two sessions per week. How was this disparity handled methodologically? If it was not accounted for, please acknowledge this in the discussion/limitations section.

RESPONSE: We have also added the following text to the limitations section in the discussion (Page 24, line 481)

“The global COVID-19 pandemic led to an alteration in programming for cohort 1, which only received one HiH session per week while cohorts 2-5 had two sessions per week. This difference in dosage could not be fully accounted for in the analysis.”

4. Conclusion: The phrasing “had a positive impact” implies causality, which does not seem to be supported by the study’s design. Consider rephrasing this statement to reflect an association with the positive changes observed, rather than implying a causal relationship.

RESPONSE: The conclusion now reads (Page 25, line 505)

“In conclusion, this study found that the HiH music therapy program was associated with improvements in girl’s depression and anxiety, with the most notable changes observed several months after program completion. In addition, we observed increases in participants self-esteem and improved school attendance.”

Line-Specific Comments:

• Abstract: It would be helpful to report significance levels/confidence intervals for all the reported findings. Added as requested

• Page 6, Line 88: Ceccarelli et al. is not a meta-analysis but a systematic review. Please correct. Corrected as requested (page 5, line 97)

• Page 9, Line 171: “of’6 days” — correct the spelling. Corrected, page 9 line 207

• Page 9, Line 176: Consider removing the mention of the additional qualitative study at this stage. This could be integrated into the discussion if tied to future research. Deleted as requested, see tracked changes page 10, line 215.

• Page 11, Line 202: The paragraph interpreting results in the context of the study might not be appropriate for the methods section. Consider moving this to the discussion and integrating it there. We moved this paragraph to the discussion (Page 23, line 458) as suggested.

• Page 12, Line 225: Substantiate the choice of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale by referring specifically to their relevance to the population of interest (e.g., cultural appropriateness, local validation, etc.). Additionally, provide details on the translation and adaptation process for these measures that were carried out in this study.

RESPONSE: We have revised the Mental Health Assessment section of the Methods to address these points (Page 12, line 269) as follows:

“Mental Health Assessment. Measures included the Birleson Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS) for Children (Birleson et al, 1987); the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) (Parloff at al., 1954) to assess anxiety and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) (Rosenberg, 1965). The DSRSis depression scale has been applied across diverse cultural settings including among children in Afghanistan and Nepal (Panter-Brick et al., 2009; Kohrt et al., 2011). The HSCL has been used extensively used in high-conflict, cross-cultural contexts to assess mental health symptoms. (Tay, et al., 2017) Including inNotable studies include a nationwide survey across 8 conflict-affected districts in Sri Lanka (Tay, et al., 2017) and a study among adolescents in conflict-affected regions of Eastern DRC (Mels, et al., 2010). Similarly, the RSES Self-Esteem scale is a well-established measure of self-esteem for assessment in adolescents having been used most notably it was used in a study among adolescent refugee girls in Ethiopia (Stark, et al, 2018). To ensure the cultural appropriateness of these measures, we undertook a translation and adaptation process including forward and backward translation by bilingual experts, reconciliation of discrepancies, and pilot interviews with a sample of participants to assess comprehension and cultural relevance.”

• Page 12, Line 243: Provide a source for the method used to assess SES or other justification.

RESPONSE: We have now added the following reference to the UNICEF MICS survey, the source of the list of household possessions (mentioned on Page 14, line 311):

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). (2019). Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys: Delivering Robust Data on Children and Women across the Globe. New York: UNICEF.

• Page 13, Line 254: Were there missing data? If so, how were they handled? RESPONSE: We have added the following sentence in the statistics section of the methods (Page 15, line 334)

“ Observations with missing data were excluded from the regression models.”

• Page 21, Line 367: A new update of the cited review is available (10.1111/jcpp.13891). Please refer to this most recent work. We now cite the updated work throughout the paper – see page 5, line 94; page 4, line 82.

• Page 21, Line 380: The work by Cikuru (2021) is interesting but would fit better in the introduction to build the rationale for the study. We have moved the paragraph to the introduction (Page 6, line 133) as requested.

• Page 23, Line 417: The introduction of a concept relating to stigma reduction and social inclusion seems to come out of the blue. Provide context or remove.

RESPONSE: We have revised this sentence as follows in the concluding paragraph (Page 25, line 512)

“Additionally, exploring the societal impact of participants’ songs and community engagement—such as potential reductions in stigma or increased social inclusion—would provide valuable insights (McFerran et al., 2020).”

• Page 23, Line 420: This is a strong statement, but it lacks citations and is not directly tied to the reported results. Consider rephrasing or omitting. RESPONSE: We have changed the final sentence to read (Page 25, line 514)

“These promising findings support scaling up the intervention, with the success of such expansion dependent on recruiting sufficient numbers of qualified psychologists to deliver the program.”

Reviewer: 2

This manuscript describes the result of a pre-post evaluation of the Healing in Harmony program, a music-based therapy program, on mental health and school attendance among young adolescent girls in a conflict setting in the Democratic Republic of Congo. This manuscript is well-written, and presents findings from an important investigation, which suggests music therapy as a potentially promising method of improving mental health and school attendance among young adolescent girls. Thank you.

There are a few points of clarification that I think are important to address – listed in order below.

1. Abstract: hard to know really what the median scores for depression and anxiety mean as we don’t know the scale or the score range at this point. We removed mean scores from abstract.

2. Abstract: it would be ideal to include always the 95% CI at a minimum (and P as well) when reporting risk ratios (when stating “RR = 0.27 for depression….”.

RESPONSE: We have added CI as requested. The text now reads (Page 2, line 21):

“The probability of screening positive for anxiety declined by about half post participation in HiH compared to the pre-test, (RR=0.46, 95% CI=0.41-0.53). The probability of screening positive for depression declined by about 75% (RR=0.27, 95% CI=0.22-0.32).”

3. Abstract: the line in the conclusion “Although food and economic insecurity…” – feels like a lot to put in the abstract and might be better to just discuss in the main paper. (The rationale is that there is already a lot of information in the abstract, and this statement in the conclusion raises more questions than providing a summary because it is not central to the main results). We have removed this sentence from the abstract, see tracked changes on page 3 line 35.

4. Introduction: Para 2 (starting line 69 as the authors have assigned lined numbers) is “an emerging evidence base suggests the value of mental health interventions” – is this specifically for humanitarian settings?

RESPONSE: We have clarified that the studies cited are relevant to LMICs but not necessarily humanitarian crises. This sentence now reads (Page 4, line 80):

“While data on the effectiveness of mental health interventions in humanitarian crises is limited (Kamali et al., 2020), emerging evidence supports their value in low- and middle-income countries (Ceccarelli et al., 2024; Alozkan-Sever et al., 2023; Uppendahl et al., 2019; Bangpan et al., 2024; Purgato et al., 2018; Morina et al., 2017).”

5. Introduction Paras 2 and 3: The authors state “two meta-analyses included only studies of adults” and “Three meta-analyses included studies with children and adults” are the meta-analyses the authors cite the result of a systematic search, or are these more “sentinel” papers or recent meta-analyses?

6. Introduction Para 3 line 79-80: what sorts of interventions did the meta-analyses addressed look at? (i.e. what was the actual form/content of interventions – broadly grouped?) This would be helpful to understand and contextualize e.g. to what extent music therapy or similar techniques have been done before.

RESPONSE TO #5 and #6. We included recent meta-analyses that conducted systematic searches for existing literature. We have revised these two paragraphs to be more informative as (Page 4, line 80)

“While data on the effectiveness of mental health interventions in humanitarian crises is limited (Kamali et al., 2020), emerging evidence supports their value in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Ceccarelli et al., 2024; Alozkan-Sever et al., 2023; Uppendahl et al., 2019; Bangpan et al., 2024; Purgato et al., 2018; Morina et al., 2017). Two recent meta-analyses focused on adults. One found psychotherapy reduced PTSD and depression in survivors of mass violence (Morina et al., 2017), while the other showed mental health services reduced PTSD and improved functioning in adults affected by humanitarian crises in LMICs (Bangpan et al., 2019).

Three recent meta-analyses have Included studies that enrolled children and adolescents. One meta-analysis7 studies, n=130) found PTSD improved post-treatment, but the effect was not sustained at four months (Purgato et al., 2018). In contrast, a larger meta-analysis (13 studies, n=2626) of psychological interventions in LMICs found cognitive-behavioral therapy and group-based approaches effectively reduced PTSD, depression, and anxiety (Alozkan-Sever et al., 2023; Uppendahl et al., 2020). A third meta-analysis of 43 randomized clinical trials also reported that cognitive-behavioral therapy improved depression symptoms in children and adolescents affected by humanitarian emergencies (Bangpan et al., 2024). Another review highlighted that most studies focused on program implementation rather than impact on mental health outcomes (Ceccarelli et al., 2024).”

7. In line with the above point – for the Intro/Discussion – how much previous evidence is there specifically about music-based therapy for mental health? I found this to be slightly missing.

RESPONSE: Much of the literature on music therapy programs is theoretical with limited evaluation of intervention efficacy particularly in relation to LMICs and the context of humanitarian crises. We have now added more text about music therapy programs to better contextualize our research (Page 5, line 108). Also, as suggested by the reviewers we have moved the paragraph on the prior evaluation of an HiH program into the introduction.

“Emerging evidence suggests that music therapy that is coupled with lyrical music training can be effective in reducing anxiety, depression, and PTSD (Carr et al., 2012; Carr et al., 2013; Landis-Shack et al., 2017; Erkkilä et al., 2011; Aalbers et al., 2017). As music has been shown to stimulate brain areas related to traumatic memory and sensory-emotional processing (Koelsch, 2009), research suggested that music can facilitate the accessing and processing of severe past trauma (Johnson, 1987; Bensimon et al., 2012; Carr et al., 2012) especially given the photographic versus linguistic nature of traumatic memories (Johnson, 1987; Bensimon et al., 2012). Thus the symbols and metaphors present in music and lyric writing, can help survivors verbalize and process trauma. McFerran et al. proposed that musical therapy approaches can be organized into four categories -- stabilizing, entrainment, expressive, and performative (McFerran- et al., 2020). Performative approaches recognize the societal context of trauma enabling survivor’s identities to be reconstructed and ‘brought to life’ through song and public musical performance.”

8. Introduction and Discussion – the authors cite Partap et al. 2023 and Grande et al. 2023 as suggesting that supporting mental health can lead to increased school attendance. Looking at these references, Partap et al. 2023 looked at depression or school-going status (not attendance) as exposures and risky behaviors as outcomes – but did not explicitly cross-tabulate or look at the association between depression/mental health and how this affects school going status. Additionally, Grande et al was a systematic review that looked at school-based interventions to improve mental health, but I did not see that the authors stated or reported school attendance as outcomes. I would recommend that the authors double check these references, and update with more suitable ones.

RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment. We have now clarified that these articles looked at school-based MH interventions, rather than looking at the impact of that programming on absenteeism. We have revised the paragraph on schooling in the introduction to more accurately reflect the literature as follows (PAGE 5, line 100):

“The relationship between mental health and schooling in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is increasingly recognized (Aston et al., 2023). Schools, which play a crucial role in providing health education and services where healthcare systems are lacking (Sawyer, 2021), are exploring how school-based interventions can enhance mental health and well-being (Partap et al., 2023; Grande et al., 2023). Despite limited research on the impact of mental health interventions on school attendance, two recent meta-analyses have highlighted the link between anxiety and absenteeism or truancy (Dalforno et al., 2022; Finning et al., 2019).”

We have also revised the text in the discussion as follows (Page 22, line 443):

“The HiH program was implemented in a school-based program. Over 85% of the participants completed the program, providing additional evidence of the role that schools can playschools' role in improving adolescents’ access to mental health interventions (Partap et al., 2023; Grande et al., 2023). Consistent with prior studies, w We found that frequent absenteeism declined among program participants, suggesting a potential added educational benefit for of providing school-based mental health services. “

9. Methods Line 141-142. I appreciate that some details about the HiH program have been previously published, and Cikuru et al, 2021 has been cited. However, Cikuru et al 2021 is a paper on the same program but in a different population as I understand. The approach in this paper is described in the supplementary in terms of general stages. I think it would b helpful to add as supplementary here and also add more details. Approximately how long did each stage last across the 12 weeks? Was there tailoring to different age groups? Was the same content delivered across all cohorts (and was it that only the frequency and overall length of intervention delivery was different for cohort 1?). These are good to understand since it appears from some of the results that depression and anxiety scores over time (pre- and post-treatment) appear to really vary by cohort, and one question is to what extent this might be a result of differences in how the intervention was delivered across cohorts.

RESPONSE: As requested we now include the supplement (Supplementary Table S1) that outlines the HiH approach and have requested permission from this journal to republish it. A copy of that request has been included in our materials. Yes the same content was provided across all cohorts with only the frequency and length having been altered for Cohort 1 due to the Covid pandemic, as we now note in the limitations paragraph in the discussion (Page 24, line 481). As the program was conducted in the context of an ongoing humanitarian crisis, it is not surprising that pre- and post- treatment results differ across cohorts. We have discussed this in the discussion (Page 23, line 458).

10. Results Table 3: For Grade and Disability, first column (overall), the numbers do not add up to 483. If there are missing data, these should be reported in this table as a separate category for each of these variables. We have added the number of missing observations to the table as requested, see below snapshot of the table:

11. Table 4: it is very interesting to see that there aren’t really any pronounced effects on depression between T0 and T1 in the first three cohorts. Is there anything that could explain this that the authors could touch upon in the Discussion? We have provided additional insights and analysis regarding this observation (Page 25, line 469) now reads:

“We observed heterogeneity across cohorts in the timing of improvement in depression scores, with cohorts 1-3 showing improvement only in the follow-up interviews while cohorts 4 and 5 showed improvement from the pre- to the post test. This heterogeneity could be due to differences in the security contexts at the time of the intervention, differences in the time it took individuals to integrate the skills learned in the intervention, or to increasing familiarity and skill of the program psychologists in delivering the intervention across time. It is also possible that administration of the depression scale differed across the two data collection teams, although as discussed above extensive efforts were made to ensure comparability of testing by the Informed team.”

12. Also – for Figure 1, it may be nice to see actually boxplots that, similar to table 4, split up the cohort-specific distributions by time point as well – just to see how these line up with the proportions in Table 4. We have provided these boxplots in Supplementary Figure S2.

13. Results line 315, figure 2 and generally throughout – may be good to be consistent with the terms and use either pre-test/post-test OR pre-treatment post-treatment. Thank you. We now use pre-test and post-test consistently throughout the manuscript.

14. Discussion line 359: for the cited meta-analysis, what sorts of interventions did this look at? It would be helpful to know how these compare to the very distinctive music therapy that is reported on in this paper Clarified that it these interventions were CBT and group-based approaches (Page 22, line 436).

15. Discussion lines 388-392 – the paragraph is duplicated (appears also in lines 374-378). We apologize. The duplicate paragraph has been deleted.

16. Discussion and limitations:

a. maybe good to make very clear in the methods itself that ultimately, only school-going children were recruited for this.

RESPONSE: We now clarify in the second paragraph of Methods, Data Collection (Page 9, line 202) as follows:

“Subsequently, a second team, Informed International (hereafter referred to as Informed), was hired by World Vision to carry out an independent evaluation of the HiH component of the World Vision’s EGALEGAL project, which, as noted above, focused on enhancing girl’s agency. Thus this component of the data collection focused on girls aged 10-14.”

See also our response to Reviewer 1, point number 1.

b. Other limitations maybe important to include – I understand the depression tool has been previously validated in similar populations, but what about the anxiety tool and others? We have added additional information in the mental health assessment section of the methods as follows (Page 12, line 269):

“Mental Health Assessment. Measures included the Birleson Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS) for Children (Birleson et al, 1987); the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) (Parloff at al., 1954) to assess anxiety and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). This depression scale has been applied across diverse cultural settings including among children in Afghanistan and Nepal (Panter-Brick et al., 2009; Kohrt et al., 2011). The HSCL has been used extensively in high-conflict, cross-cultural contexts to assess mental health symptoms(Tay, et al., 2017) Including in a study among adolescents in conflict-affected regions of Eastern DRC (Mels, et al., 2010). Similarly, the Self-Esteem scale is a well-established measure for assessment in adolescents having been used most notably i in a study among adolescent refugee girls in Ethiopia (Stark, et al, 2018). To ensure the cultural appropriateness of these measures, we undertook a translation and adaptation process including forward and backward translation by bilingual experts, reconciliation of discrepancies, and pilot interviews with a sample of participants to assess comprehension and cultural relevance.”

17. It would be good if the authors could discuss any other notes about interventions that would be effective in this setting. As the authors themselves state, food insecurity appears to be an important contributor to depression and anxiety in this setting. To what extent then could the current intervention help reduce the burden of such disorders? Or, what do the authors think about integrating approaches to more effectively address mental health in these settings?

Thank you for this suggestion. We have added the following text to the paragraph on food insecurity in the discussion (Page 23, line 462):

“Qualitative interviews carried out in December 2022 suggested higher prices, up to 10 USD per kilo, and participants identified food insecurity as impacting their mental conditions and increasing tension within and between families. This highlights the importance of food security for mental health and suggests the importance of integrating programs and coordinating across agencies and non-governmental organizations to more effectively address mental health in the context of on-going humanitarian crises.”

18. Any discussion on feasibility of implementation and scale-up? Response: We have added the following sentence to the end of the conclusion. (Page 25, line 514):

“These promising findings support scaling up the intervention, with the success of such expansion dependent on recruiting sufficient numbers of qualified psychologists to deliver the program.”

19. I may have missed this in the methods, but why focus on evaluating just girls in this context – particularly if the participants included others too? (If the authors are planning to do separate analyses, perhaps this could be highlighted). Any thoughts or discussion on whether additional populations should be targeted in future assessments?

RESPONSE: We added the following paragraph in Study Participants sub-section of the methodology (page 10, line 218):

“This research focused on girls because this study was funded as part of the World Vision’s EGAL project. EGAL aimed to develop effective strategies to help girls in the DRC cope with trauma from gender-based violence and reduce anxiety, depression, and PTSD and to improve school attendance. Evaluation was limited to the 10–14-year age group as funding was limited and only this age group was well-represented across all five rounds of the HiH program implementation.”

Review: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R1/PR7

Conflict of interest statement

NA

Comments

Dear Authors,

the changes you have made have strengthened the overall quality of the manuscript. I have no further comments at this time.

Recommendation: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R1/PR8

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Impact of a music therapy program on mental health and school attendance among female adolescents in Kasai-Central province, Democratic Republic of Congo — R1/PR9

Comments

No accompanying comment.