Aligning interventions with the University Mental Health Charter: A stratified review of reviews of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students
Rebecca Upsher , Sanjana Prabhakar , Tatjana Damjanovic , Sarah Conner , Jo Ward , Katie Rakow , Luqmaan Waqar , Helen Lawson , Nicola Byrom
{"title":"Aligning interventions with the University Mental Health Charter: A stratified review of reviews of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students","authors":"Rebecca Upsher , Sanjana Prabhakar , Tatjana Damjanovic , Sarah Conner , Jo Ward , Katie Rakow , Luqmaan Waqar , Helen Lawson , Nicola Byrom","doi":"10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This stratified review of reviews evaluates the alignment of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students within the University Mental Health Charter's domains. A narrative synthesis of 341 studies was conducted, extracted from 265 reviews. Interventions were stratified by the Mental Health Charter's domains—Live, Learn, and Support—and analysed for their impact on mental health outcomes. The “Live” domain, particularly proactive interventions and mentally healthy environments, had the highest number of studies, predominantly conducted via Randomised Controlled Trials. The “Learn” domain largely comprised quasi-experimental studies, while the “Support” domain featured pre-post designs without control groups. Interventions were primarily conducted in person and were universal, targeting undergraduate students, with North America being the most frequent research location. For the most frequent mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and stress), interventions showed mixed effectiveness across all domains, with no significant association between the type of intervention and its impact. Most studies were rated as having medium evidence strength, with less than 10 % classified as strong evidence. The findings highlight a critical need for diversified research focusing on underrepresented areas within the Mental Health Charter, such as academic progression and partnerships with external care providers. Additionally, there is a call for standardised outcome measures to enhance the robustness of future meta-analyses and the overall evidence quality. Addressing these gaps will support the effective implementation of a whole-university approach to student mental health.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48125,"journal":{"name":"Educational Research Review","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100716"},"PeriodicalIF":10.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Research Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X25000533","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This stratified review of reviews evaluates the alignment of mental health and wellbeing interventions for higher education students within the University Mental Health Charter's domains. A narrative synthesis of 341 studies was conducted, extracted from 265 reviews. Interventions were stratified by the Mental Health Charter's domains—Live, Learn, and Support—and analysed for their impact on mental health outcomes. The “Live” domain, particularly proactive interventions and mentally healthy environments, had the highest number of studies, predominantly conducted via Randomised Controlled Trials. The “Learn” domain largely comprised quasi-experimental studies, while the “Support” domain featured pre-post designs without control groups. Interventions were primarily conducted in person and were universal, targeting undergraduate students, with North America being the most frequent research location. For the most frequent mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and stress), interventions showed mixed effectiveness across all domains, with no significant association between the type of intervention and its impact. Most studies were rated as having medium evidence strength, with less than 10 % classified as strong evidence. The findings highlight a critical need for diversified research focusing on underrepresented areas within the Mental Health Charter, such as academic progression and partnerships with external care providers. Additionally, there is a call for standardised outcome measures to enhance the robustness of future meta-analyses and the overall evidence quality. Addressing these gaps will support the effective implementation of a whole-university approach to student mental health.
期刊介绍:
Educational Research Review is an international journal catering to researchers and diverse agencies keen on reviewing studies and theoretical papers in education at any level. The journal welcomes high-quality articles that address educational research problems through a review approach, encompassing thematic or methodological reviews and meta-analyses. With an inclusive scope, the journal does not limit itself to any specific age range and invites articles across various settings where learning and education take place, such as schools, corporate training, and both formal and informal educational environments.