农民心理健康和幸福帮助热线:农民心理健康和幸福帮助热线:对世界各地目前使用的心理健康和幸福帮助热线的使用情况、可接受性和有效性的范围审查。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Donna Hughes-Barton, Gemma Skaczkowski, Hannah Starick, Kate M Gunn
{"title":"农民心理健康和幸福帮助热线:农民心理健康和幸福帮助热线:对世界各地目前使用的心理健康和幸福帮助热线的使用情况、可接受性和有效性的范围审查。","authors":"Donna Hughes-Barton, Gemma Skaczkowski, Hannah Starick, Kate M Gunn","doi":"10.1080/1059924X.2024.2418816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Farmers have higher risk of suicide than the general working population but are less likely to seek help from mainstream mental health services. Farmer-focused sources of support such as farmer helplines may be a viable alternative, and several currently operate internationally. However, it is unclear whether these specialized helplines collectively tend to be used and are acceptable or effective in reducing farmers' distress. This review aimed to fill this important knowledge gap.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PRISMA 2020 guidelines, in consultation with the extension for scoping reviews, guided the review process. The search included 13 academic databases and grey literature via Google.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The database search yielded 1,337 initial results and a Google search strategy resulted in 620 links to investigate. Data extraction was sought from 28 papers and 332 online links. We identified 35 unique helplines operating across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, India, and Austria. Farmers do use helplines when experiencing stress; however, we found little empirical evidence of the acceptability or effectiveness of helplines. Anecdotal evidence suggested farmers are more likely to trust telephone support services operated by people who understand the farming way of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Research in this area is scant but promising. Farmers and farming communities will use farmer helplines in times of elevated stress. However, there is a pressing need for more rigorous evaluation studies to determine their effectiveness in this at-risk group. Further, when designing farmer helplines, careful consideration should be given to the extent to which those answering calls understand farming.</p>","PeriodicalId":49172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agromedicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mental Health and Wellbeing Helplines for Farmers: A Scoping Review of Usage, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Those Currently in Operation Around the World.\",\"authors\":\"Donna Hughes-Barton, Gemma Skaczkowski, Hannah Starick, Kate M Gunn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1059924X.2024.2418816\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Farmers have higher risk of suicide than the general working population but are less likely to seek help from mainstream mental health services. Farmer-focused sources of support such as farmer helplines may be a viable alternative, and several currently operate internationally. However, it is unclear whether these specialized helplines collectively tend to be used and are acceptable or effective in reducing farmers' distress. This review aimed to fill this important knowledge gap.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PRISMA 2020 guidelines, in consultation with the extension for scoping reviews, guided the review process. The search included 13 academic databases and grey literature via Google.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The database search yielded 1,337 initial results and a Google search strategy resulted in 620 links to investigate. Data extraction was sought from 28 papers and 332 online links. We identified 35 unique helplines operating across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, India, and Austria. Farmers do use helplines when experiencing stress; however, we found little empirical evidence of the acceptability or effectiveness of helplines. Anecdotal evidence suggested farmers are more likely to trust telephone support services operated by people who understand the farming way of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Research in this area is scant but promising. Farmers and farming communities will use farmer helplines in times of elevated stress. However, there is a pressing need for more rigorous evaluation studies to determine their effectiveness in this at-risk group. Further, when designing farmer helplines, careful consideration should be given to the extent to which those answering calls understand farming.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agromedicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agromedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2024.2418816\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agromedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2024.2418816","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:农民的自杀风险高于一般劳动人口,但较少向主流心理健康服务机构寻求帮助。以农民为重点的支持来源,如农民求助热线,可能是一个可行的替代办法,目前有几个在国际上运作。然而,目前尚不清楚这些专门的求助热线是否被集体使用,是否可以接受或有效地减少农民的痛苦。这篇综述旨在填补这一重要的知识空白。方法:PRISMA 2020指南与扩展范围审查协商,指导审查过程。通过谷歌检索了13个学术数据库和灰色文献。结果:数据库搜索产生了1337个初始结果,谷歌搜索策略产生了620个要调查的链接。从28篇论文和332个在线链接中提取数据。我们在加拿大、美国、英国、爱尔兰、澳大利亚、印度和奥地利确定了35条独特的求助热线。农民在遇到压力时确实会使用求助热线;然而,我们发现很少有经验证据表明求助热线的可接受性或有效性。坊间证据表明,农民更有可能信任由了解农业生活方式的人运营的电话支持服务。结论:该领域的研究尚不充分,但前景广阔。农民和农业社区将在压力加剧时使用农民求助热线。然而,迫切需要进行更严格的评估研究,以确定它们在这一高危群体中的有效性。此外,在设计农民求助热线时,应仔细考虑接听电话的人对农业的了解程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mental Health and Wellbeing Helplines for Farmers: A Scoping Review of Usage, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Those Currently in Operation Around the World.

Objectives: Farmers have higher risk of suicide than the general working population but are less likely to seek help from mainstream mental health services. Farmer-focused sources of support such as farmer helplines may be a viable alternative, and several currently operate internationally. However, it is unclear whether these specialized helplines collectively tend to be used and are acceptable or effective in reducing farmers' distress. This review aimed to fill this important knowledge gap.

Methods: The PRISMA 2020 guidelines, in consultation with the extension for scoping reviews, guided the review process. The search included 13 academic databases and grey literature via Google.

Results: The database search yielded 1,337 initial results and a Google search strategy resulted in 620 links to investigate. Data extraction was sought from 28 papers and 332 online links. We identified 35 unique helplines operating across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, India, and Austria. Farmers do use helplines when experiencing stress; however, we found little empirical evidence of the acceptability or effectiveness of helplines. Anecdotal evidence suggested farmers are more likely to trust telephone support services operated by people who understand the farming way of life.

Conclusion: Research in this area is scant but promising. Farmers and farming communities will use farmer helplines in times of elevated stress. However, there is a pressing need for more rigorous evaluation studies to determine their effectiveness in this at-risk group. Further, when designing farmer helplines, careful consideration should be given to the extent to which those answering calls understand farming.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Agromedicine
Journal of Agromedicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
20.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agromedicine: Practice, Policy, and Research publishes translational research, reports and editorials related to agricultural health, safety and medicine. The Journal of Agromedicine seeks to engage the global agricultural health and safety community including rural health care providers, agricultural health and safety practitioners, academic researchers, government agencies, policy makers, and others. The Journal of Agromedicine is committed to providing its readers with relevant, rigorously peer-reviewed, original articles. The journal welcomes high quality submissions as they relate to agricultural health and safety in the areas of: • Behavioral and Mental Health • Climate Change • Education/Training • Emerging Practices • Environmental Public Health • Epidemiology • Ergonomics • Injury Prevention • Occupational and Industrial Health • Pesticides • Policy • Safety Interventions and Evaluation • Technology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信