Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42534013›Full record

ReviewJournal of military, veteran and family health2025

Combatting job stress: Integrating healthy workplace and stress models to support military member well-being.

Arla Day, Éloïse de Grandpré, Jaedan Link

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of military, veteran and family 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

3 authors.

Arla DaySaint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8683-0587
Éloïse de GrandpréSaint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Jaedan LinkSaint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Supporting worker well-being and reducing stress is important in all jobs, and even more so in a military environment. Military members may be subjected to a unique set of stressors and demands (e.g., deployments, combat), as well as demands that are typical across occupations (e.g., work overload), which are associated with significant organizational (e.g., recruitment, retention) and individual (e.g., PTSD, burnout) outcomes. Although less frequently studied, military occupations also are associated with positive work (e.g., skill development) and life (e.g., resilience, sense of purpose) outcomes. Even though identifying mechanisms to support military member health can be daunting (especially given the variety of stress and well-being models), identifying potential points of intervention is vital to understanding worker health. Methods: The authors identified and reviewed seminal stress, well-being, healthy workplace, and intervention models and theories to integrate both unique and common work-related factors that were pertinent to a military population. Results: The authors summarized these key models and theories and developed a military well-being framework including key intervention points to help militaries actively address member well-being from multiple points. Discussion: The goal of the study was to provide an updated, workable framework to address well-being within a military population, while emphasizing key job, interpersonal, and organizational demands/resources. It affords a unique perspective and tool to support future research and practice by linking demands/resources and well-being to primary, secondary, and tertiary workplace interventions.

Indexed as

job demandsjob resourcesjob stress and well-beingjob stress modelsmilitary well-beingpsychologically healthy workplaces

Identifiers

PMID42534013
PMCPMC13293205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.