Conectar
by Emma Senior, Amanda Clarke, Gemma Wilson-Menzfeld
Limited evidence surrounds the lived experiences of military spouses whose partner has mental health issues. This lack of evidence may be due to factors such as global austerity, underfunding of armed forces, and inadequate healthcare systems. As a result, family members—especially spouses—often end up being the primary caregivers for their military partners with mental health issues. The study used a qualitative, biographical methodology, collecting data through life stories. Two face-to-face semi-structured interviews took place with nine military spouse recruited through military spouse networks and snowballing. Lieblich et al.’s (1998) framework provided analytical pluralism, which allowed for both narrative and thematic analysis. Stories are presented in the stages ‘in the beginning’, changing times’ and ‘this is me’. Thematic analysis identified six overarching categories; Living with disruption, living in the midst of it all, It isn’t enough, seeking support, Diagnosis and treatment, Living alongside. Whilst the first of its kind in the UK, this biographical study advances both national and global understanding of military spouse experiences in the context of mental health. Both the stories and the categories indicate that living with a serving partner who has mental health issues is a complex journey marked by both struggle and growth. A uniqueness arising from this study highlights the period leading up to a mental health diagnosis, emphasising the prolonged emotional and psychological strain experienced by military spouses before any formal recognition of mental illness in their serving partner. The study adds a new dimension to understanding the emotional toll on military spouses and underscores the importance of early recognition and support. While participants faced emotional detachment and feelings of invisibility, they also identified gains in resilience and strengthened relationships. Through the convergence of the narrative and thematic analysis the participants experience throughout their partners mental health issue is conceptualised in a Relationship Trajectory model. It illustrates the positive, early relational strength, superseded by relationship decline followed with relationship reinvention.Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are a leading cause of global mortality, disproportionately affecting low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Physical inactivity, a key contributor to NCDs, is prevalent worldwide despite evidence supporting the health benefits of physical activity (PA). Cities, while often associated with barriers to PA, also present unique opportunities to enhance PA through systemic, context-sensitive interventions or so-called actions. However, evidence on effective city-level PA strategies, particularly in LMICs, remains limited. The CITY based interventions to stimulate active MOVEment for health (CITY-MOVE) project aims to accelerate, support and evaluate the implementation of PA actions at the city level by adapting the WHO Global Action Plan on Physical Activity into locally relevant strategies across six cities worldwide, accompanied by a cross-contextual evaluation framework to ensure transferability and scalability.
This multicase study examines 13 PA actions in six cities (Bogotá, Lima, Kampala, Antwerp, Rotterdam and Ljubljana) across three continents, addressing both early (design and implementation) and late (evaluation) action stages. Early-stage actions employ action research in Living Labs to codesign and implement PA initiatives with local stakeholders, while late-stage interventions focus on retrospective evaluations of implementation outcomes. The framework integrates the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions with the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions. Mixed methods are employed, including document review, interviews, participatory workshops and quantitative analysis of PA and NCD indicators. A cross-contextual Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework will synthesise findings to inform scalability and transferability of actions.
Ethics approvals were obtained from local review boards in the participating cities.
Dissemination will occur at three levels: local, regional and global. Locally, findings will be shared with city authorities, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and healthcare providers through Living Labs and policy dialogues. At the regional level, knowledge will be spread across cities in Europe, Latin America and East Africa through Communities of Practice and the use of tools like the MCDA framework. Globally, the project will contribute to the scientific community and international organisations such as the WHO and UN-Habitat, by sharing results through open access publications, conferences and global networks to ensure widespread dissemination and sustainability of the project’s impacts.
This study and its outcomes are publicly accessible on OSF (https://osf.io/mn8zd/) and ZENODO (
This study validates the previously tested Screening for Poverty And Related social determinants to improve Knowledge of and access to resources (‘SPARK Tool’) against comparison questions from well-established national surveys (Post Survey Questionnaire (PSQ)) to inform the development of a standardised tool to collect patients’ demographic and social needs data in healthcare.
Cross-sectional study.
Pan-Canadian study of participants from four Canadian provinces (SK, MB, ON and NL).
192 participants were interviewed concurrently, completing both the SPARK tool and PSQ survey.
Survey topics included demographics: language, immigration, race, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation; and social needs: education, income, medication access, transportation, housing, social support and employment status. Concurrent validity was performed to assess agreement and correlation between SPARK and comparison questions at an individual level as well as within domain clusters. We report on Cohen’s kappa measure of inter-rater reliability, Pearson correlation coefficient and Cramer’s V to assess overall capture of needs in the SPARK and PSQ as well as within each domain. Agreement between the surveys was described using correct (true positive and true negative) and incorrect (false positive and false negative) classification.
There was a moderate correlation between SPARK and PSQ (0.44, p60), SPARK correctly classified 90.5% (n=176/191).
SPARK provides a brief 15 min screening tool for primary care clinics to capture social and access needs. SPARK was able to correctly classify most participants within each domain. Related ongoing research is needed to further validate SPARK in a large representative sample and explore primary care implementation strategies to support integration.
FreshRSS 