ArticleBMC psychiatry2025
Recommendations to support the mental health and wellbeing of response-focused civil servants asked to work from home during public health emergencies in the United Kingdom: a Delphi study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA recent research project sought to explore the experience of UK response-focused civil servants asked to work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic and to create a series of recommendations for future public health emergencies requiring response-focused homeworking. In general, civil servants from one select government organisation were able to convey a plethora of lessons learnt, reflections on experience, and suggestions for future support offers should another public health emergency require homeworking. Recommendations were derived from the evidence, but it remained important to ensure that the recommendations were useful, fit for purpose, and actionable. This required collaboration with experts in appropriate fields (in this case, mental health, occupational health, and government affiliated individuals).
methodThis Delphi study sought to refine and operationalise evidence-based recommendations designed to support the mental health and wellbeing of future UK response-focused civil servants asked to work from home during public health emergencies. A total of 32 experts were recruited into the study; these individuals provided feedback and rated recommendations over three iterative rounds.
resultsA total of 19 recommendations reached consensus at a > 90% level of agreement. In line with feedback from experts, these were categorised into preparedness and response focused recommendations to aid with implementation. Collectively, these recommendations establish the importance of organisation/employer level initiatives to protect mental health and wellbeing in response-focused civil servants working from home.
conclusionThe key outcome of this work has been the importance of employees, managers, and organisations retaining flexibility when working from home, as a range of factors (e.g., living circumstances, others in household, relationships with colleagues) can influence experience, and each employee will face theird own barriers and facilitators to working from home.
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.