Systematicity of receiving mental health care predicts better subjective well-being of Ukrainians during the second year of the Russian invasion

IF 1 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Mental Health Review Journal Pub Date : 2024-04-24 DOI:10.1108/mhrj-01-2024-0006
Mariana Velykodna, Oksana Tkachenko, Oksana Shylo, Kateryna Mitchenko, Zoia Miroshnyk, Natalia Kvitka, Olha Charyieva
{"title":"Systematicity of receiving mental health care predicts better subjective well-being of Ukrainians during the second year of the Russian invasion","authors":"Mariana Velykodna, Oksana Tkachenko, Oksana Shylo, Kateryna Mitchenko, Zoia Miroshnyk, Natalia Kvitka, Olha Charyieva","doi":"10.1108/mhrj-01-2024-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to develop and test a multivariable psychosocial prediction model of subjective well-being in Ukrainian adults (n = 1,248) 1.5 years after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe research design followed the “Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis” checklist. The online survey combined a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics and specifics of living in wartime, as well as validated self-reported inventories: The Modified BBC Subjective Well-being Scale, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – Version 2 and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale-10.\n\n\nFindings\nThe initially developed model was tested through regression analysis, which revealed nine variables as predictors of the subjective well-being scores within the sample, explaining 49.3% of its variance. Among them, the strongest were living with a friend and receiving mental health care systematically. They were almost twice as influential as forced displacement abroad and trauma exposure, which predicted lower well-being, and living with a spouse, which forecasted higher well-being scores. Two resilience subscales – adjustment and restoring and resistance – as predictors of better well-being and perceived unsuccess in life and age as predictors of lower well-being were relatively weaker but statistically significant.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe obtained results support the previous evidence on the essential role of accessible mental health services and social support in times of war, as well as the deteriorative effect of trauma exposure and forcible taking refuge on subjective well-being.\n","PeriodicalId":45687,"journal":{"name":"Mental Health Review Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mental Health Review Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mhrj-01-2024-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to develop and test a multivariable psychosocial prediction model of subjective well-being in Ukrainian adults (n = 1,248) 1.5 years after the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Design/methodology/approach The research design followed the “Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis” checklist. The online survey combined a questionnaire on sociodemographic characteristics and specifics of living in wartime, as well as validated self-reported inventories: The Modified BBC Subjective Well-being Scale, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – Version 2 and Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale-10. Findings The initially developed model was tested through regression analysis, which revealed nine variables as predictors of the subjective well-being scores within the sample, explaining 49.3% of its variance. Among them, the strongest were living with a friend and receiving mental health care systematically. They were almost twice as influential as forced displacement abroad and trauma exposure, which predicted lower well-being, and living with a spouse, which forecasted higher well-being scores. Two resilience subscales – adjustment and restoring and resistance – as predictors of better well-being and perceived unsuccess in life and age as predictors of lower well-being were relatively weaker but statistically significant. Originality/value The obtained results support the previous evidence on the essential role of accessible mental health services and social support in times of war, as well as the deteriorative effect of trauma exposure and forcible taking refuge on subjective well-being.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
接受心理保健的系统性预示着俄罗斯入侵第二年乌克兰人的主观幸福感会更好
本研究旨在开发和测试 2022 年俄罗斯入侵乌克兰 1.5 年后乌克兰成年人(n = 1,248 人)主观幸福感的多变量社会心理预测模型。在线调查结合了社会人口学特征和战时生活具体情况的问卷,以及经过验证的自我报告清单:研究结果通过回归分析检验了最初建立的模型,结果显示有九个变量可以预测样本的主观幸福感得分,解释了49.3%的方差。其中,与朋友同住和系统地接受心理健康护理对主观幸福感的影响最大。这两项指标的影响力几乎是被迫流落海外和遭受创伤(这两项指标预测的幸福感较低)以及与配偶同住(这两项指标预测的幸福感较高)的两倍。两个复原力子量表--适应、恢复和抵抗--是较高幸福感的预测因子,而生活中的不成功感和年龄是较低幸福感的预测因子,这两个子量表的影响力相对较弱,但在统计学上具有重要意义。 原创性/价值 所获结果支持了之前的证据,即在战争时期可获得的心理健康服务和社会支持的重要作用,以及遭受创伤和被迫避难对主观幸福感的恶化影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Understanding gender-responsive needs of girls in the Children and Young People Secure Estate (CYPSE): menstrual cycle considerations Editorial: The British and Irish group for the study of personality disorder: reflections on the 23rd annual conference The “Team Tree” Professional Tree of Life intervention: development and evaluation within the acute inpatient psychiatric setting Systematicity of receiving mental health care predicts better subjective well-being of Ukrainians during the second year of the Russian invasion Comparing service user perspectives of an early intervention in psychosis service before and during COVID-19 lockdowns: a service evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1