ArticlePloS one2023
SPARK Resilience in the workplace: Effectiveness of a brief online resilience intervention during the COVID-19 lockdown.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Forecasting stress transitions using ecological momentary assessment data and machine learning.Internet interventions · 2026Article
- Optimism, Resilience, and General Self-Efficacy Predict Lower Somatic Burden during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Science asserts that resilience at work can be developed, with evidence pinpointing to multiple resources that can be built through deliberate coaching, training and interventions. This paper presents a mixed-methods study exploring the effectiveness of group coaching using SPARK Resilience training, a model and a structured coaching protocol that have been administered in educational and workplace settings in face-to-face format and remotely. The study used a non-randomised controlled design with a pre-test and a post-test in a sample of French adults (N = 101 in the intervention group and N = 86 in the waitlist control group). The SPARK Resilience programme was administered online with 8 sessions spanning 4 weeks in April 2020, during the very early stage of the pandemic and lockdown in France. The results indicate beneficial effects of the intervention on meaning, resilience, positive affect, and perceived stress outcomes (d in the .40-.56 range), as well as weaker effects on negative affect (d = .35) and work engagement (d = .21). Moderator analyses suggest that the effects of the intervention on perceived stress and negative affect tended to be stronger for older adults. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the intervention and provided 151 responses to three open-ended questions that were coded using thematic analysis, revealing specific benefits of the intervention. The findings are interpreted within the pandemic context, showing the way resilience interventions can help people overcome unprecedented challenges.
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.