Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36216429›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Why do ambulance employees (not) seek organisational help for mental health support? A mixed-methods systematic review protocol of organisational support available and barriers/facilitators to uptake.

Sasha Johnston, Kristy Sanderson, Lucy Bowes, Jennifer Wild

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sasha JohnstonSouth Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK sasha.johnston@psy.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9904-8834
Kristy SandersonSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3132-2745
Lucy BowesDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jennifer WildDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5463-1711
University of Oxford · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating a wide range of symptoms of poor mental health among emergency medical service (EMS) ambulance populations. Evidence suggests that using organisational support can improve employee outcomes and in turn, patient outcomes. Understanding why EMS staff do and do not use support services is therefore critical to improving uptake, ensuring equitable access, and potentially influencing workforce well-being, organisational sustainability and patient care delivery. This systematic review aims to identify what support is available and any perceived barriers and facilitators to accessing and utilising organisational support. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Searches performed between 18 February 2022 and 23 February 2022 will be used to identify studies that report barriers and facilitators to EMS employee support among all government/state commissioned EMS ambulance systems. Electronic databases, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, EMCARE, HMIC, Medline and PsycINFO will be searched. All relevant English-language studies of adult employees of government/state commissioned EMS ambulance organisations published since December 2004 will be screened and relevant data extracted by two independent reviewers. A third reviewer will resolve any disagreements.The primary outcome is the identification of perceived barriers or facilitators to EMS staff using organisational support for mental health. The secondary outcome is the identification of supportive interventions offered through or by ambulance trusts. Study selection will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and the methodological quality of included studies will be appraised by administering rating checklists. A narrative synthesis will be conducted to report qualitative and quantitative data and will include population characteristics, methodological approach and information about barriers and facilitators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because only available published data will be analysed. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022299650.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mental HealthAdultAmbulancesDelivery of Health CareHumansPandemicsResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicACCIDENT & EMERGENCY MEDICINEHealth & safetyHuman resource managementMENTAL HEALTHOrganisation of health services

Identifiers

PMID36216429
PMCPMC9557302
OpenAlexW4304080777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.