Trial reportMedicine2020
Effect of a critical thinking intervention on stress management among undergraduates of adult education and extramural studies programs.
Trial report in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stress management interventions for university students in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Linking Critical Thinking Dispositions to Well-Being in Higher Education: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bipolar disorder in an evolutionary framework: rethinking adaptation, vulnerability, and stigma.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Editorial: Violence and mental health. focus on schizophrenia spectrum and psychotic disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Can adaptive hyperactivation result in a positive score on the Mood Disorder Questionnaire? Evidence from a case-control study over a community survey.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
19 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to examine the effect of a critical thinking intervention (CTI) on stress management among undergraduates of adult education and extramural studies programs.
methodA total of 44 undergraduates were randomly sorted into experimental and waitlist control groups. We used the Perceived Stress Scale for data collection at the pre-test, post-test, and follow-up stages. We used unpaired t and paired t-tests to analyze the data collected. SPSS version 22.0 was used for the data analyses (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
resultsIt was shown that the CTI was effective in reducing the mean stress of the participants compared to the control group both in the post-test (t[42] = -22.453, P < .001) and follow-up periods (t[42] = -34.292, P < .001). There were statistically significant changes in the mean stress of participants in the experimental group from the pre-test to post-test phases (t[23] = 26.30, P = .000, r = .08], and from pre-test to follow-up(t[23] = 37.10, P = .000, r = .30). The mean stress of the participants in the experimental group from post-test to follow-up signified the sustained positive influence of the CTI on the mean stress (t[23] = 2.41, P = .000, r = .46) of the undergraduates.
conclusionThis study adds to the literature by showing that a CTI is a valuable strategy for stress reduction in a university environment. Given that the CTI demonstrated the ability to reduce stress among undergraduates enrolled in adult education and extramural studies programs, we hope that similar interventions will be adopted to manage and prevent stress among students in other departments and disciplines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.