ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Impact factors of Arctic research stations on the mental health of team members.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: The extreme, closed, and isolated environments of Arctic research stations have resulted in substantial challenges in the daily life and work of polar science expedition team members, often leading to various mental health problems. The mental health of the Arctic team members is related to the restorative quality of the station environment, which is primarily influenced by design factors. However, previous studies have mainly discussed these factors separately using a single approach, rarely providing comprehensive understanding into team members' perceptions of the station environment in an integrated manner. Methods: This study uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to determine the design factors and dimensions that affect the restorative potential of Arctic research stations, filling the gap in the design weight of restorative potential factors. First, environmental factors related to the mental health of team members in Arctic research stations were gradually screened through a literature review and semi-structured interviews. Then, questionnaire was used to collect the perspectives of 63 Chinese scientific research team members. Correlation analysis, principal component analysis, and statistical weight calculation were applied to the responses to investigate the restorative quality of design characteristics within a framework. Results: The findings showed that 24 design factors were associated with a restorative scientific research station environment. Among them, privacy of space was the most significant factor that could influence psychological recovery. Five primary components were identified: indoor conditions, configuration of space, physical environment, spatial perception, and space safety. Additionally, nine secondary components were identified: appearance design, spatial scale, interior facilities, space function, outdoor environmental influences, room adjustments, personal contact, interaction, and space safety. The weight calculation shows that indoor conditions and space configuration are the most significant dimensions that influence the restorative quality. Discussion: This study provides a targeted analysis of the environmental factors and key dimensions of Arctic research stations, offering a theoretical basis and practical suggestions for architectural design of Arctic research stations that are more suitable for team members.
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.