Cited by 1Agriculture and Farm SafetyMental Health Treatment and AccessAgricultural Development and Management

Recognising and Managing Distress Among Farming Clients: An Evaluation of Brief Training for Rural Financial Counsellors and Other Non‐Clinical Rural Support Workers

Open access
Skaczkowski, Gemma, Hughes‐Barton, Donna, Loxton, Sophie, Gunn, Kate·2025·Australian Journal of Rural Health

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a tailored, brief, 3‐h training program to help Rural Financial Counsellors and other non‐clinical rural support workers recognise and manage distress experienced by their farming clients. Setting: Rural, regional and remote Australia. Participants: Rural support workers (N = 75; primarily Rural Financial Counsellors and Family and Business mentors) undertaking a 2‐part, online training programme for recognising and managing distress in farmers. Design: Individual questionnaires were collected before the first workshop, after the second workshop, and 3 months post completion of both workshops. Results: S eventy‐five participants provided pre‐training data. A series of mixed models for repeated measures identified significant improvements in participants' confidence in recognising and managing farmers' distress pre‐ to post‐training. Specifically, increases in confidence in differentiating mild distress from distress requiring professional help (F = 11.30, p < 0.001), skills to use time well (F = 14.17, p < 0.001), recognising distress (F = 9.16, p < 0.001), dealing with the needs of distressed farmers (F = 22.93, p < 0.001), talking to farmers about their wellbeing (F = 16.47, p < 0.001), knowing when to refer farmers for additional support (F = 19.10, p < 0.001), knowing where to refer farmers for additional support (F = 14.00, p < 0.001), were maintained at the 3‐month follow‐up. Pre‐ post‐training, participants' behavioural intentions to refer their clients to a farmer‐specific mental health intervention (www.ifarmwell.com.au) increased (F = 48.26, p < 0.001), which was maintained at 3‐month follow‐up. The training did not significantly change participants' quality of life or work stress. Conclusions: Findings suggest that a brief, tailored training programme significantly increases rural support workers' confidence in recognising and managing distress in their farming clients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajr.70027

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Skaczkowski, G., Hughes‐Barton, D., Loxton, S., & Gunn, K.
Affiliations
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • IIMPACT in Health, Department of Rural Health, Allied Health and Human Performance University of South Australia Adelaide South Australia Australia
Corresponding author
Gunn, Kate
Venue
Australian Journal of Rural Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2025-03-17
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
e70027-e70027
ISSN
  • 1038-5282 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1584
OpenAlex
W4408503642
Cited by
1
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australian Journal of Rural Health (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
University of South Australia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture and Farm Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agricultural Development and Management
Keywords
farmer distress, distress management, psychiatric referral, farmer well-being, rural mental health, training evaluation, occupational stress, quality of life
MeSH terms
Farmers, Counselors, Adult, Australia, Counseling, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rural Population, Stress, Psychological

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review