A qualitative study of the capabilities of family members of veterans living with operational stress injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective This qualitative study explores the experiences of 26 family members supporting Canadian Armed Forces veterans living with mental health problems including operational stress injuries (OSIs). Background The research focusing on military‐connected families emphasizes the impacts of service on the families. Little is known about how families impact military veterans, particularly those diagnosed with OSIs. This research addresses that gap by revealing the capabilities and demands characterizing their everyday lives. Method Semistructured interviews with 26 individuals identifying as family members of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) veterans and three focus groups (three participants in each group for a total of nine) with family members of CAF veterans released within the preceding 10 years were conducted. The veterans were living with broadly defined diagnosed and undiagnosed mental health problems including OSIs. Using the family adjustment and adaptation (FAAR) model as an organizational framework, demands and capabilities embodied within the everyday lives of the family members were revealed. Results Monitoring the well‐being of the veteran, managing daily life, accessing and mobilizing resources, and caregiving were discussed as capabilities by participants in this study. These capabilities buffer the demands associated with the veteran's mental health problems. Conclusions Results of this study endorse recommendations for family‐centered program and service development, modeled on approaches that recognize the systemic and relational contexts instrumental in supporting positive outcomes for veterans with OSIs. Implications Further research exploring the complex, interdependent, and interactional role of families supporting veterans with OSIs is warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".