Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40949350›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025

Well-being interventions in U.S. colleges: a scoping review from a positive higher education perspective.

Grace X Zhao, Maggie Y Zhao, Caitlin R Bean, Ashley S Robbins, Nicole E Mahrer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Grace X ZhaoGeneral Education Program, Music Department, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, United States.
Maggie Y ZhaoTeaching and Learning Innovation Centre, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Caitlin R BeanPsychology Department, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, United States.
Ashley S RobbinsPsychology Department, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, United States.
Nicole E MahrerPsychology Department, University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to growing concerns about student mental health, this scoping review synthesizes 40 peer-reviewed empirical studies published between 2009 and 2024 on well-being interventions for undergraduate students in U.S. higher education, examined through the emerging lens of Positive Higher Education. Drawing from diverse methodologies and interventions-including mindfulness, cognitive-behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, and positive psychology strategies-the review examines how well-being is defined, implemented, and assessed across curricular and co-curricular contexts. While many interventions demonstrated positive outcomes, particularly in reducing stress and enhancing psychological well-being, the field remains limited by conceptual ambiguity, inconsistent theoretical frameworks, and insufficient attention to long-term institutionalization and sustainability. Most studies lacked a clearly articulated definition of well-being, and relatively few were embedded in academic curricula. This review underscores the need for a coordinated, theory-informed approach to integrating well-being as a core educational outcome, aligned with the values of liberal arts education. It concludes with a call to develop a Positive Higher Education Implementation Toolkit to guide institutions in embedding well-being into policy, pedagogy, and practice.

Indexed as

higher educationpositive educationpositive higher educationwell-beingwell-being interventions

Identifiers

PMID40949350
PMCPMC12426774

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.