ArticlePloS one2025
"Skills for Resilience in Farming"; an evidence-based, theory driven educational intervention to increase mental health literacy and help-seeking intentions among Irish farmers.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Co-Designing a Consumer-Centred Educational Resource to Assist Australian Farmers with the Management of Persistent Pain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While mental health literacy is an important component to successful help-seeking, rural populations often face gaps in both knowledge and service provision. Informed by the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Self-Efficacy Theory, we designed the 'Skills for Resilience' as a brief, once-off, community-based educational intervention to increase Irish farmers' mental health literacy and help-seeking intentions. We adopted a quasi-experimental between (group: intervention and control) and within-group design (time: baseline [T1], immediately post-intervention [T2], and ≥ 1 month post-intervention [T3]). A total of 72 participants (intervention n = 37; control n = 35) were recruited from knowledge-sharing discussion groups. Although recruitment was also open to women, all discussion groups consisted of men. A trained facilitator delivered a discussion lasting between 30 and 90 minutes. Five intervention participants also participated in a qualitative interview after T3. Our results identified intervention participants' mental health literacy increased significantly at T2 and T3 compared to T1, but did not increase between T2 and T3. Mental health literacy was also significantly greater in the intervention group compared to the control group at T2 and T3. Help-seeking intentions and self-efficacy in seeking mental healthcare also increased significantly at T2 compared to T1, but did not increase between T1 and T3 or T2 and T3. There were no significant changes in outcome measures for the control group at any time point. Through reflexive thematic analysis we identified that the intervention also addressed stigma against mental health (Theme 1) and provided important resources for participants and their community's present and future coping (Theme 2). At T3, 100% of participants enjoyed the discussion and would recommend the intervention to other farmers. This intervention provides a successful example of integrating the Theory of Planned Behaviour and Self-Efficacy Theory to improve mental health literacy in farmers using a brief, educational 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.