Department of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Department of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2022 Jul 29;17(7):e0266725. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266725. eCollection 2022.
The review of reviews had three aims: (i) to synthesize the available evidence on interventions to improve college and university students' mental health and wellbeing; (ii) to identify the effectiveness of interventions, and (iii) to highlight gaps in the evidence base for future study.
Electronic database searches were conducted to identify reviews in English from high-income OECD countries published between 1999 and 2020. All review-level empirical studies involving post-secondary students attending colleges of further education or universities that examined interventions to improve general mental health and wellbeing were included. Articles were critically appraised using an amended version of the AMSTAR 2 tool. Evidence from the included reviews were narratively synthesized and organised by intervention types.
Twenty-seven reviews met the review of reviews inclusion criteria. The quality of the included reviews varied considerably. Intervention types identified included: mindfulness-based interventions, psychological interventions, psychoeducation interventions, recreation programmes, relaxation interventions, setting-based interventions, and stress management/reduction interventions. There was evidence that mindfulness-based interventions, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), and interventions delivered via technology were effective when compared to a passive control. Some evidence suggested that the effects of CBT-related interventions are sustained over time. Psychoeducation interventions do not appear to be as effective as other forms of intervention, with its effects not enduring over time.
The review of reviews located a sizeable body of evidence on specific interventions such as mindfulness and cognitive-behavioural interventions. The evidence suggests that these interventions can effectively reduce common mental health difficulties in the higher education student body. Gaps and limitations in the reviews and the underlying body of evidence have been identified. These include a notable gap in the existing body of review-level evidence on setting-based interventions, acceptance and commitment training, and interventions for students attending colleges in UK settings.
本次综述有三个目的:(一)综合现有关于改善大学生心理健康和幸福感的干预措施的证据;(二)确定干预措施的有效性;(三)突出未来研究中证据基础的差距。
检索了英语文献数据库,以确定 1999 年至 2020 年期间在高收入经合组织国家发表的综述。所有涉及接受大专教育或高等教育的大学生的、以改善一般心理健康和幸福感为目标的、以干预为基础的实证研究都包含在本综述中。使用改进版 AMSTAR 2 工具对文章进行了批判性评价。对纳入综述的证据进行了叙述性综合,并根据干预类型进行了组织。
有 27 篇综述符合纳入标准。纳入综述的质量差异很大。确定的干预类型包括:正念干预、心理干预、心理教育干预、娱乐项目、放松干预、环境干预和压力管理/减少干预。有证据表明,与被动对照相比,正念干预、认知行为疗法(CBT)和通过技术提供的干预措施是有效的。一些证据表明,CBT 相关干预的效果可以持续一段时间。心理教育干预似乎不如其他形式的干预有效,其效果不会随着时间的推移而持久。
本综述找到了大量关于特定干预措施(如正念和认知行为干预)的证据。这些证据表明,这些干预措施可以有效减轻高等教育学生群体中常见的心理健康问题。在综述和基础证据中已经发现了一些差距和局限性。其中包括在现有的基于综述的环境干预、接受与承诺训练和英国院校学生干预措施的证据方面存在明显差距。