Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36044424›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

"Give me a break!" A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of micro-breaks for increasing well-being and performance.

Patricia Albulescu, Irina Macsinga, Andrei Rusu, Coralia Sulea, Alexandra Bodnaru, Bogdan Tudor Tulbure

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. "It's Not Just a Pause": A Qualitative Exploration of Micro-Breaks Among Clinical Nurses.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. When Gig Work Gets Ruff: The Affective Benefits of Daily Human-Animal Interactions for Mental Health.International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Patricia AlbulescuDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0003-4949-7292
Irina MacsingaDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-9878-8136
Andrei RusuDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.
Coralia SuleaDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.
Alexandra BodnaruDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.
Bogdan Tudor TulbureDepartment of Psychology, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0001-8101-1753

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recovery activities during short breaks taken between work tasks are solutions for preventing the impairing effects of accumulated strain. No wonder then that a growing body of scientific literature from various perspectives emerged on this topic. The present meta-analysis is aimed at estimating the efficacy of micro-breaks in enhancing well-being (vigor and fatigue) and performance, as well as in which conditions and for whom are the micro-breaks most effective. We searched the existent literature on this topic and aggregated the existing data from experimental and quasi-experimental studies. The systematic search revealed 19 records, which resulted in 22 independent study samples (N = 2335). Random-effects meta-analyses shown statistically significant but small effects of micro-breaks in boosting vigor (d = .36, p < .001; k = 9, n = 913), reducing fatigue (d = .35, p < .001; k = 9, n = 803), and a non-significant effect on increasing overall performance (d = .16, p = .116; k = 15, n = 1132). Sub-groups analyses on performance types revealed significant effects only for tasks with less cognitive demands. A meta-regression showed that the longer the break, the greater the boost was on performance. Overall, the data support the role of micro-breaks for well-being, while for performance, recovering from highly depleting tasks may need more than 10-minute breaks. Therefore, future studies should focus on this issue.

Indexed as

FatigueHumans

Identifiers

PMID36044424
PMCPMC9432722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.