The mental health and wellbeing of spouses, partners and children of emergency responders: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emergency responders (ERs), often termed First Responders, such as police, fire and paramedic roles are exposed to occupational stressors including high workload, and exposure to trauma from critical incidents, both of which can affect their mental health and wellbeing. Little is known about the impact of the ER occupation on the mental health and wellbeing of their families. The aim of the current study was to investigate what mental health and wellbeing outcomes and experiences have been researched internationally in ER families, and to examine the prevalence and associated risk and protective factors of these outcomes. We conducted a systematic review in accordance with an a priori PROSPERO approved protocol (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019134974). Forty-three studies were identified for inclusion. The majority of studies used a quantitative, cross-sectional design and were conducted in the United States; just over half assessed police/law enforcement families. Themes of topics investigated included: 1) Spousal/partner mental health and wellbeing; 2) Couple relationships; 3) Child mental health and wellbeing; 4) Family support and coping strategies; and 5) Positive outcomes. The review identified limited evidence regarding the prevalence of mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Family experiences and risk factors described were ER work-stress spillover negatively impacting spousal/partner wellbeing, couple relationships, and domestic violence. Traumatic exposure risk factors included concerns family had for the safety of their ER partner, the negative impact of an ER partners' mental health problem on the couples' communication and on family mental health outcomes. Protective factors included social support; however, a lack of organisational support for families was reported in some studies. Study limitations and future research needs are discussed. Progressing this area of research is important to improve knowledge of baseline needs of ER families to be able to target interventions, improve public health, and support ER's operational effectiveness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".