ArticleMental health & prevention2025
Promoting teaching and non-teaching school staff resilience post-COVID pandemic.
Article in Mental health & prevention, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: School-based professional development interventions are hopeful mechanisms for promoting teacher/staff mental health and resilience. This study aimed to examine changes in key contributors to mental health and resilience of North Carolina (United States) teaching and non-teaching staff working in school districts that volunteered to participate in the Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE) professional development program. Methods: This prospective cohort study assessed school staff resilience before, one week after, and 2 months after the CARE program, using the Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale, Maslach Burnout Inventory, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; Patient Health Questionnaire 8; Perceived Stress Scale, and Experiences with the CARE for Teachers and Staff Professional Development Program. Results: Fifty-three participants were included (70 % teachers, 79 % female, 77 % White, 47 % high school, 47 % elementary school). Across all participants, improvements were observed at one week and two months post-intervention in overall sense of efficacy (mean difference [MD] 0.92; 95 % CI, 0.50-1.38 and MD 0.78; 95 % CI, 0.32-1.26, respectively); emotional exhaustion (MD -5.84; 95 % CI, -10.93 to -0.72 and MD -6.59; 95 % CI, -11.79 to -0.29, respectively); anxiety (MD -3.59; 95 % CI, -6.21 to -0.76 and MD -3.27; 95 % CI, -5.83 to -0.71, respectively); and depression (MD -3.64; 95 % CI, -6.17 to -0.78 and MD -3.19; 95 % CI, -5.73 to -0.63, respectively). Teachers' perceived stress was lower at one week post-intervention (MD -1.59; 95 % CI, -3.03 to -0.12.). Conclusion: Findings demonstrate improvements in participants' sense of self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, stress, with more pronounced improvements in teaching compared with non-teaching staff.
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.