Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41007597›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025

Evidenced Interventions Supporting the Psychological Wellbeing of Disaster Workers: A Rapid Literature Review.

Carolyn Deans, Shannon Carter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Carolyn DeansAustralian Psychological Society, Melbourne 3000, Australia.ORCID 0009-0004-6230-8286
Shannon CarterFaculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne 3800, Australia.ORCID 0009-0005-6240-3213

Funding

Department of Health and Aged Care FOIDP4689
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This rapid literature review was conducted to better understand the evidence base for interventions aimed at improving psychological well-being in disaster response workers. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, and Embase. Grey literature reviewed included results of a Google Scholar search and organisation-recommended reports and articles. Of the 959 screened records, 25 studies were included, 13 of which evidenced the benefit of the studied intervention, and two included screening tools to identify at-risk workers. The results showed that evidence-based interventions exist to support disaster response workers to varying degrees in terms of perceived stress, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms, burnout, sleep quality, somatic symptoms, irrational performance beliefs, and emotional and social well-being. Identified interventions featured neurofeedback, psychoeducation, mindfulness, reflective practice, and adjustments to cognitions or behaviours. Interventions varied in delivery (online with pre-recorded content, asynchronous, and guided learning), context (delivered to groups, individuals, and in work or private settings), and facilitator (psychologists, mental health practitioners, and medical doctors). Several interventions improved aspects of psychological well-being in disaster response workers; however, most findings were produced by quasi- or non-experimental designs, suggesting further research is required to clearly ascertain their benefits.

Indexed as

DisastersMental HealthHumansStress Disorders, Post-Traumaticcrisisdisasteremergencyemergency servicesfrontline workersinterventionmental healthpsychological healthpsychological well-beingsupport

Identifiers

PMID41007597
PMCPMC12470247

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.