Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38724055›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2024

Interventions to promote medical student well-being: an overview of systematic reviews.

Amber Bennett-Weston, Leila Keshtkar, Max Jones, Christopher Sanders, Cara Lewis, Keith Nockels, Josie Solomon, Jeremy Howick

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors.

Amber Bennett-WestonStoneygate Centre for Empathic Healthcare, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK abw13@leicester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5981-9393
Leila KeshtkarStoneygate Centre for Empathic Healthcare, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5249-3589
Max JonesLeicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK.
Christopher SandersLeicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK.
Cara LewisDartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA.
Keith NockelsUniversity Library, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Josie SolomonStoneygate Centre for Empathic Healthcare, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK.
Jeremy HowickStoneygate Centre for Empathic Healthcare, Leicester Medical School, University of Leicester College of Life Sciences, Leicester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0280-7206

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo conduct an overview of systematic reviews that explore the effectiveness of interventions to enhance medical student well-being.

designOverview of systematic reviews. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, APA PsychInfo, CINAHL and Scopus were searched from database inception until 31 May 2023 to identify systematic reviews of interventions to enhance medical student well-being. Ancestry searching and citation chasing were also conducted. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews V.2 tool was used to appraise the quality of the included reviews. A narrative synthesis was conducted, and the evidence of effectiveness for each intervention was rated.

results13 reviews (with 94 independent studies and 17 616 students) were included. The reviews covered individual-level and curriculum-level interventions. Individual interventions included mindfulness (n=12), hypnosis (n=6), mental health programmes (n=7), yoga (n=4), cognitive and behavioural interventions (n=1), mind-sound technology (n=1), music-based interventions (n=1), omega-3 supplementation (n=1), electroacupuncture (n=1) and osteopathic manipulative treatment (n=1). The curriculum-level interventions included pass/fail grading (n=4), problem-based curriculum (n=2) and multicomponent curriculum reform (n=2). Most interventions were not supported by sufficient evidence to establish effectiveness. Eleven reviews were rated as having 'critically low' quality, and two reviews were rated as having 'low' quality.

conclusionsIndividual-level interventions (mindfulness and mental health programmes) and curriculum-level interventions (pass/fail grading) can improve medical student well-being. These conclusions should be tempered by the low quality of the evidence. Further high-quality research is required to explore additional effective interventions to enhance medical student well-being and the most efficient ways to implement and combine these for maximum benefit.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalSystematic Reviews as TopicCurriculumHumansMental HealthMindfulnesshealth workforcemedical education & trainingmental healthsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38724055
PMCPMC11086405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.