ArticleBMC public health2025
Understanding and supporting the mental health and professional quality of life of academic mental health researchers: results from a cross-sectional survey.
Article 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Positive and Negative Impacts of Researching Emotionally Challenging Topics.Journal of academic ethics · 2026Article
- Biological research involving people with lived experience of childhood trauma: a trauma-informed approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Psychosocial correlates of co-workers' responses to alcohol problems in the workplace - a cross-sectional survey among medical personnel in Poland.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2025Article
- Coping with Emotionally Challenging Research: Developing a Strategic Approach to Researcher Wellbeing.Journal of academic ethics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcademic mental health research is critical to understanding, treating and preventing poor mental health. Researchers often have their own lived experience of a mental health condition, but despite potential exposure to distressing research material, the mental health and work-related quality of life of mental health researchers is not systematically supported in UK universities. This study aimed to quantitatively characterise the mental health experiences, professional quality of life and workplace support needs of this group.
methodsUK academic mental health researchers (n = 254) answered an online survey in March 2024. Using linear regression modelling, we tested associations between socio-demographic, mental and physical health and work-related factors alongside negative and positive aspects of professional quality of life, i.e., secondary traumatic stress, burnout and compassion satisfaction, as well as maladaptive coping strategies such as alcohol and drug use or sickness absence from work. We also compared researchers' workplace support experience with their perceived support need and examined implications for funding applications.
resultsHaving personal lived experience of a mental health condition showed the strongest association with poorer professional quality of life outcomes. Mental health researchers using qualitative methods also reported higher levels of secondary traumatic stress and burnout than those using quantitative methods, as did those with a disability or chronic illness (compared to those without). Researchers with personal lived experience of a mental health condition also showed ten times the odds of taking sickness leave to cope with work related feelings. There were important differences between the types of workplace support researchers experience with those they report needing. Our evidence also points to more guidance needed on factoring support into research projects.
conclusionsOur findings highlight the wealth of lived experience amongst mental health researchers, and the importance of providing systematic proactive support for this group, as well as for those with a disability or chronic illness, or those using qualitative methodologies. With sickness absence having considerable economic and organisational consequences for employers and funders, recommendations include developing researcher well-being plans, regular end of project debriefs, development and training on challenging topics, and clearer consideration of researcher support in funding applications.
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.