ArticleBJPsych open2021
Psychological distress across the deployment cycle: exploratory growth mixture model.
Article in BJPsych open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological distress across the deployment cycle: comparing pre- and peri-pandemic trajectories.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- The association of multi-system conditions on mental health trajectories during naval deployment.Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2025Article
- Longitudinal measurement invariance and growth curve modeling of psychological resilience across the deployment cycle.Military psychology : the official journal of the Division of Military Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2024Article
- Mental health across the early years in the military.Psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Deployment-related quarantining-a risk or resilience factor for German military service members? A prospective analysis during the third-fifth waves of COVID-19.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrior research has identified behavioural health outcomes as key sequelae to combat deployment. However, relatively little is known about differential patterns of change in depression or generalised anxiety linked to deployment to a combat zone. In this paper, we add to the existing trajectory literature and examine key predictive factors of behavioural health risk.
aimsThe primary aim is to leverage growth mixture modelling to ascertain trajectories of psychological distress, operationalised as a coherent construct combining depression and generalised anxiety, and to identify factors that differentiate adaptive and maladaptive patterns of change.
methodData were collected from a brigade combat team prior to a combat deployment to Afghanistan, during deployment, at immediate re-integration and approximately 2-3 months thereafter. The main outcome was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (PHQ-ADS).
resultsThree latent trajectories were identified: a low-stable trajectory, a declining trajectory and a rising trajectory. Most individuals aligned with the low-stable trajectory. A conditional model using covariates measured during deployment showed that the low-stable trajectory differed consistently from the remaining trajectories on self-reported loneliness and non-combat deployment stressors.
conclusionsThe examination of differential patterns of adaptation, to identify individuals at higher risk, is critical for the efficient targeting of resources. Our findings further indicate that loneliness may be a useful leverage point for clinical and organisational intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.