Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41316335›Full record

ArticleConflict and health2025

"How can we talk about our struggles?" reflections on researcher wellbeing and recommendations for psychosocial support for researchers in conflict-affected areas.

Laura Jeffery, Lucy Lowe, Jean-Benoît Falisse, Rina Ghafoerkhan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conflict and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Laura JefferyUniversity of Edinburgh, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, UK. Laura.Jeffery@ed.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6015-6045
Lucy LoweUniversity of Edinburgh, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1552-8441
Jean-Benoît FalisseUniversity of Edinburgh, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0291-731X
Rina GhafoerkhanARQ National Psychotrauma Centre, Diemen, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1847-2968

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/T004479/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years, research has revealed the emotionally demanding side of research for researchers (in addition to research participants). This research provides useful guidance, especially for researchers who work with research participants facing difficult situations such as illness, forced displacement, and conflict. Yet, they tend to focus on research projects in the Global North. We explore emotionally demanding research and its impact on researcher wellbeing, and formal support systems and informal mitigation measures in a Global South context marked by conflict and violence and a complex international and interdisciplinary collaboration.

methodsWe interviewed thirteen researchers and one psychosocial staff support specialist involved in a UK Global Challenges Research Fund project on improving healthcare at the intersection of gender and protracted displacement amongst Somali and Congolese refugees and internally displaced people in Somalia, DR Congo, Kenya, and South Africa (2020-2024). The analysis explores the intersections of four recurrent themes: fieldwork conditions, researcher symptoms, support systems, and mitigation measures.

resultsResearching protracted displacement exposed the teams to multiple forms of emotionally demanding work, leading to distress, exhaustion, sleep disruption, guilt, and features of vicarious trauma and moral injury. These impacts were heightened by researchers' own histories, socio-economic inequalities, COVID-19, and insecurity. Formal psychosocial support was provided, but uptake was low due to timing, online delivery, trust, and unfamiliarity; participants recommended compulsory, continuous, locally grounded, and one‑to‑one options. Informal measures - team debriefings, buddying, adaptive safety practices, and peer support - were widely used and valued. Ethical tensions around aid expectations coming from the research participants persisted.

conclusionsFirst, echoing calls for a feminist ethics of care, the article recognises emotional responses as an inherent part of ethical research practice. Second, it articulates the benefits of local wellbeing champions. Third, it highlights that researcher wellbeing support should be a multifaceted and ongoing process rather than a one size fits all once-off event. Fourth, it calls for structural change to recognise emotional challenges as part of research ethics and integrity processes (rather than solely the responsibility of individual researchers) and to budget for devolved and locally appropriate psychosocial support service provision for researchers.

Indexed as

ConflictDisplacementEmotionally demanding researchInternational collaborationPsychosocial supportResearcher wellbeingTrauma-informed research

Identifiers

PMID41316335
PMCPMC12664217

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.