2023
DOI: 10.1177/10443894231152511
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Systematic Review of Family Stress Theory in Mental Health Research (2010–2020)

Abstract: To better assist families experiencing stress, providers must understand the translation of family stress theory to their clinical application. The present study synthesized knowledge by performing a systematic review of journal articles published from 2010 to 2020. Studies were systematically screened, and 23 empirical articles met final inclusion. We reviewed how family stress theory was used in previous studies and what recommendations were suggested for mental health providers. Our findings revealed that f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 31 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Financial hardship can affect relationships negatively (Dew, 2008;Falconier & Jackson, 2020;Jackson et al, 2023;LeBaron-Black et al, 2022), in line with theoretical models such as the Family Stress model (Casaburo et al, 2023;Conger et al, 1994Conger et al, , 2010 and the Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation model (Karney & Bradbury, 1995). Both these models posit that external stressors (such as financial hardship and worry) can affect close relationship functioning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…Financial hardship can affect relationships negatively (Dew, 2008;Falconier & Jackson, 2020;Jackson et al, 2023;LeBaron-Black et al, 2022), in line with theoretical models such as the Family Stress model (Casaburo et al, 2023;Conger et al, 1994Conger et al, , 2010 and the Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation model (Karney & Bradbury, 1995). Both these models posit that external stressors (such as financial hardship and worry) can affect close relationship functioning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 78%