Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39875936›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2025

Resilience-based interventions in the public sector workplace: a systematic review.

Malin H L Hollaar, Bram Kemmere, Paul L Kocken, Semiha Denktaş

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Malin H L HollaarErasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. hollaar@essb.eur.nl.ORCID 0009-0003-6825-1412
Bram KemmereErasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0000-6507-4981
Paul L KockenErasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7901-5800
Semiha DenktaşErasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1617-2379

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious studies have advocated the benefits of resilience-based interventions for creating a healthy and sustainable workforce. However, resilience is defined and measured in diverse ways. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is (1) to identify how resilience is defined within different workplace interventions, translated into intervention content, and measured in these interventions; and (2) to synthesize the effectiveness of these interventions.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted and included articles from 2013 - 2023. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria, covering a total of 26 unique interventions. Definitions were categorized as: resilience as a trait, process, or outcome. Cohen's D was calculated to depict the effect sizes within the intervention groups from pre-test to post-test and, when possible, from pre-test to 3-month follow-up.

resultsIncluded studies applied a wide range of definitions; most definitions fitted within the trait-orientation, conceptualizing resilience as an individual characteristic or ability, or the process-orientation, conceptualizing resilience as a dynamic process. No studies solely used the outcome-orientation, but some did combine elements of all three orientations. Various definitions, measures and intervention strategies were applied, however, almost half of the studies (46%) showed inconsistencies within these choices. Furthermore, findings show that most resilience-based interventions in the workplace have a positive impact. While educational workshops with a higher frequency and duration had medium to large effects, solely digital interventions had small effects, changing to small to medium when combined with non-digital elements.

conclusionsFindings suggest that resilience-based can benefit employees by enhancing their psychological well-being. This, in turn, can lead to improved work-related outcomes such as productivity, thereby offering advantages to employers as well. This underscores the growing recognition that resilience should be viewed as a shared responsibility between the individual and the organization. Further advancement in the field of resilience-based interventions in the workplace calls for future research to focus on maintaining consistency when choosing a definition of resilience, developing intervention content, and choosing an outcome measure. PREREGISTRATION: The search protocol was preregistered in the Open Science Framework, see Hollaar et al. (2023). https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UKYF7 .

Indexed as

Public SectorResilience, PsychologicalWorkplaceHumansHealth promotionIntervention studiesMental healthOccupational healthPsychological resilience

Identifiers

PMID39875936
PMCPMC11773882

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.