ArticleBMJ open2025
Mental health-promoting intervention models in university students: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Meta-Analysis Examining the Efficacy and Predictors of Change in Mindfulness- and Self-Compassion-Based Interventions (MBSCIs) in Reducing Psychological Distress Among University Students.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Review
- Havruta-structured dialogue as a social-emotional competence intervention: multi-stakeholder evidence on university students' mental health.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Drivers of psychological distress among first year female public university students in South Africa: A qualitative exploratory study.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Psychometric Assessment of Screening Measures for Depression, Anxiety, Somatization, and Life Satisfaction in Honduran University Students.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe transition to higher education represents a demanding adaptation process with several socioeconomic factors involved. Mental health problems among university students have been worsening since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective is to create scientific evidence about the models of mental health-promoting interventions among higher education students applied in academic environments, as well as their effectiveness. We aim to synthesise the scientific evidence on the models of an intervention promoting mental health among university students applied in academic environments as well as their results. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review of the literature will be conducted. The research will be carried out using the EBSCO databases (CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE Complete, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection), PubMed and Scopus. The research strategy includes the following MeSH or similar terms: Universities [Mesh], Students [Mesh], Education [Mesh], Undergraduate, "Higher Education", Universit*, College, Student*; "Psychosocial intervention" [Mesh], "Non-pharmacological", "Intervention model*", "Mental health promotion program*", Intervention*; "Randomized Controlled Trial", RCT; "Mental health" [Mesh], Depression [Mesh], Anxiety [Mesh], "Stress, psychological" [Mesh], "Quality of life" [Mesh], and "Psychological well-being" [Mesh]. All experimental studies with mental health-promoting interventions for university students that were published between January 2017 and November 2024 in English will be eligible. Two independent reviewers will apply the inclusion and exclusion criteria, analyse the quality of the data and extract it for synthesis. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. All randomised controlled trial studies with interventions in university students and their efficacy (with means and SD) will be included in the systematic review of the literature. The standardised mean difference will be used as the effect size to standardise individual results. Sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis and meta-regression will be conducted to explore the causes of heterogeneity and the robustness of the results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study as it is based on the review of previously published data. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at academic conferences, as well as in events organised by student associations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022359608.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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 Socratic graph.