JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Academic staff and researchers experience high levels of stress, burnout, and psychological distress, driven by competitive work environments, job insecurity, heavy workloads, and performance pressures. These conditions have led to growing interest in interventions aimed at promoting mental health and well-being in higher education workplaces. Despite this expansion, existing evidence remains fragmented and has largely focused on students or healthcare professionals, with less attention to academic staff and researchers.

Objective:

This systematic review aimed to identify, evaluate, and synthesise interventions implemented to promote mental health and well-being among academic staff and researchers in higher education institutions. Specifically, the review examined which interventions have been applied, their effectiveness, and the opportunities and challenges associated with their implementation.

Methods:

Following PRISMA guidelines, systematic searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus for peer-reviewed articles published between 1994 and 2024. Eligible studies targeted academic staff and/or researchers, implemented interventions aimed at improving mental health or well-being, and reported empirical outcomes. Studies focusing exclusively on students, editorials, reviews, and studies assessed as having low methodological quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Screening was conducted independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO. Due to substantial heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes, and measurement tools, no meta-analysis was conducted; findings were synthesised narratively.

Results:

A total of fifty-three studies met inclusion criteria. Interventions were categorised into three groups: web-based programs (n = 14), hybrid formats combining digital and in-person components (n = 18), and in-person programs delivered on campus (n = 21). Web-based interventions commonly reported improvements in stress, anxiety, and coping but were frequently by challenges related to adherence and sustained engagement. Hybrid interventions demonstrated balanced benefits, combining flexibility with interpersonal support. In-person interventions reported more consistent improvements in stress reduction, well-being, and sense of community, although scalability and resource demands were commonly reported limitations. Across modalities, most studies reported at least one positive mental health or well-being outcome; however, the evidence base was constrained by small samples, short follow-up periods, single-site designs, and methodological heterogeneity.

Conclusions:

Interventions targeting mental health and well-being among academic staff and researchers show promise, with digital, hybrid, and in-person approaches each offering distinct strengths and limitations. Institutions should prioritise integrated, multimodal strategies that combine individual-level support with broader structural and cultural change. Future research should adopt more rigorous and longitudinal designs to strengthen the evidence based and clarify long-term effectiveness and sustainability. Clinical Trial: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251025454