对23个退伍军人和急救人员心理健康和福利项目进行比较评价

IF 4.3 2区医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY

Comprehensive psychiatry Pub Date : 2025-05-03 DOI:10.1016/j.comppsych.2025.152599

S. Lukersmith , C. Woods , L. Salvador-Carulla , T. Niyonsenga , I. Mohanty , M.R. Gutierrez-Colosia , D. Diaz-Milanes , C.R. Garcia-Alonso , C.J. Büsst

{"title":"对23个退伍军人和急救人员心理健康和福利项目进行比较评价","authors":"S. Lukersmith , C. Woods , L. Salvador-Carulla , T. Niyonsenga , I. Mohanty , M.R. Gutierrez-Colosia , D. Diaz-Milanes , C.R. Garcia-Alonso , C.J. Büsst","doi":"10.1016/j.comppsych.2025.152599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Veterans and First Responders (VFR) are at risk of developing a range of mental health disorders because of cumulative exposure to critical incidents at work. Two Philanthropic organisations funded 15 organisations, which collectively implemented 23 highly heterogeneous and international early intervention mental ill-health and suicide prevention Projects. The aim was identify and collaborate with Projects with a multi-project evaluation. The evaluation examined multiple domains including intervention effectiveness but critically the implementation processes impacts for potential replication or scale up. This paper reports on the methods and evaluation results of implementation processes, impact analysis and sustainability.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The evaluation involved ecosystems and complex systems approaches using novel methods and tools. There was multiple preparatory evaluation steps including developing indices for complexity and context. The Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) toolkit was used to evaluate the implementation processes. Methodological tools included qualitative analysis, descriptive statistics, GIAF ladders/scales and checklists (qualitative and quantitative data).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We provide the results on characteristics (organisational, Project and participants), GIAF process components (planning, pre-engagement, pre-readiness/readiness, dissemination/diffusion, usability/sustainability, adoption and uptake). All Project interventions were assessed as usable, adoptable and have capacity to be sustained, with financial resources. Uptake of the intervention was mostly high.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Complex multi-project evaluation of highly heterogenous Projects implemented in the real world across different countries is possible and provides valuable information and learnings. The evaluation results establish benchmarks including Project pre-engagement with potential end-users, continuous, frequent collaboration between Project and evaluation teams, adequate contract duration for sufficient recruitment and intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10554,"journal":{"name":"Comprehensive psychiatry","volume":"141 ","pages":"Article 152599"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative evaluation of 23 projects on mental health and wellbeing for veterans and first responders\",\"authors\":\"S. Lukersmith , C. Woods , L. Salvador-Carulla , T. Niyonsenga , I. Mohanty , M.R. Gutierrez-Colosia , D. Diaz-Milanes , C.R. Garcia-Alonso , C.J. Büsst\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comppsych.2025.152599\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Veterans and First Responders (VFR) are at risk of developing a range of mental health disorders because of cumulative exposure to critical incidents at work. Two Philanthropic organisations funded 15 organisations, which collectively implemented 23 highly heterogeneous and international early intervention mental ill-health and suicide prevention Projects. The aim was identify and collaborate with Projects with a multi-project evaluation. The evaluation examined multiple domains including intervention effectiveness but critically the implementation processes impacts for potential replication or scale up. This paper reports on the methods and evaluation results of implementation processes, impact analysis and sustainability.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The evaluation involved ecosystems and complex systems approaches using novel methods and tools. There was multiple preparatory evaluation steps including developing indices for complexity and context. The Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) toolkit was used to evaluate the implementation processes. Methodological tools included qualitative analysis, descriptive statistics, GIAF ladders/scales and checklists (qualitative and quantitative data).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We provide the results on characteristics (organisational, Project and participants), GIAF process components (planning, pre-engagement, pre-readiness/readiness, dissemination/diffusion, usability/sustainability, adoption and uptake). All Project interventions were assessed as usable, adoptable and have capacity to be sustained, with financial resources. Uptake of the intervention was mostly high.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Complex multi-project evaluation of highly heterogenous Projects implemented in the real world across different countries is possible and provides valuable information and learnings. The evaluation results establish benchmarks including Project pre-engagement with potential end-users, continuous, frequent collaboration between Project and evaluation teams, adequate contract duration for sufficient recruitment and intervention.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"141 \",\"pages\":\"Article 152599\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comprehensive psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X25000264\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comprehensive psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X25000264","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

退伍军人和急救人员（VFR）由于长期暴露于工作中的重大事件，有患一系列精神健康障碍的风险。两个慈善组织资助了15个组织，这些组织共同实施了23个高度多样化的国际早期干预精神疾病和自杀预防项目。其目的是通过多项目评估确定项目并与项目合作。评估审查了多个领域，包括干预有效性，但关键是实施过程对潜在复制或扩大规模的影响。本文报告了实施过程、影响分析和可持续性的方法和评价结果。方法采用新颖的方法和工具，对生态系统和复杂系统进行评价。有多个预备评价步骤，包括制定复杂性和背景指标。全球影响分析框架（GIAF）工具包用于评估实施过程。方法工具包括定性分析、描述性统计、GIAF阶梯/量表和核对表（定性和定量数据）。我们提供了关于特征（组织、项目和参与者）、GIAF过程组件（计划、预参与、预准备/准备、传播/扩散、可用性/可持续性、采用和吸收）的结果。所有项目干预措施都被评估为可用、可采用和有能力在财政资源的情况下持续下去。大多数人对干预措施的接受程度很高。结论对现实世界中不同国家实施的高度异质项目进行复杂的多项目评估是可能的，并提供了有价值的信息和学习。评估结果建立了基准，包括项目与潜在最终用户的预先接触，项目和评估团队之间持续、频繁的合作，为充分的招聘和干预提供足够的合同期限。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A comparative evaluation of 23 projects on mental health and wellbeing for veterans and first responders

Background

Veterans and First Responders (VFR) are at risk of developing a range of mental health disorders because of cumulative exposure to critical incidents at work. Two Philanthropic organisations funded 15 organisations, which collectively implemented 23 highly heterogeneous and international early intervention mental ill-health and suicide prevention Projects. The aim was identify and collaborate with Projects with a multi-project evaluation. The evaluation examined multiple domains including intervention effectiveness but critically the implementation processes impacts for potential replication or scale up. This paper reports on the methods and evaluation results of implementation processes, impact analysis and sustainability.

Method

The evaluation involved ecosystems and complex systems approaches using novel methods and tools. There was multiple preparatory evaluation steps including developing indices for complexity and context. The Global Impact Analytics Framework (GIAF) toolkit was used to evaluate the implementation processes. Methodological tools included qualitative analysis, descriptive statistics, GIAF ladders/scales and checklists (qualitative and quantitative data).

Results

We provide the results on characteristics (organisational, Project and participants), GIAF process components (planning, pre-engagement, pre-readiness/readiness, dissemination/diffusion, usability/sustainability, adoption and uptake). All Project interventions were assessed as usable, adoptable and have capacity to be sustained, with financial resources. Uptake of the intervention was mostly high.

Conclusion

Complex multi-project evaluation of highly heterogenous Projects implemented in the real world across different countries is possible and provides valuable information and learnings. The evaluation results establish benchmarks including Project pre-engagement with potential end-users, continuous, frequent collaboration between Project and evaluation teams, adequate contract duration for sufficient recruitment and intervention.

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

Comprehensive psychiatry 医学-精神病学

CiteScore

12.50

自引率

1.40%

发文量

审稿时长

29 days

期刊介绍： "Comprehensive Psychiatry" is an open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the field of psychiatry and mental health. Its primary mission is to share the latest advancements in knowledge to enhance patient care and deepen the understanding of mental illnesses. The journal is supported by a diverse team of international editors and peer reviewers, ensuring the publication of high-quality research with a strong focus on clinical relevance and the implications for psychopathology. "Comprehensive Psychiatry" encourages authors to present their research in an accessible manner, facilitating engagement with clinicians, policymakers, and the broader public. By embracing an open access policy, the journal aims to maximize the global impact of its content, making it readily available to a wide audience and fostering scientific collaboration and public awareness beyond the traditional academic community. This approach is designed to promote a more inclusive and informed dialogue on mental health, contributing to the overall progress in the field.