Trial reportBMC psychology2026
Effectiveness of a blended learning program for enhancing mental health literacy among university students: a randomized educational study.
Trial report in BMC psychology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental health literacy remains insufficient among university students, even as mental health difficulties grow more prevalent in this population. Blended learning approaches that combine digital and face-to-face components may hold advantages over conventional delivery methods, though empirical evidence supporting their effectiveness is still limited.
methodsWe conducted a randomized educational evaluation study with 300 university students randomly assigned to either a blended learning program (n = 150) or waitlist control group (n = 150). The eight-week educational curriculum integrated self-paced online modules with weekly face-to-face facilitation sessions. Primary outcomes included educational achievements in mental health literacy measured by the Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS), with secondary educational measures assessing stigma awareness, help-seeking knowledge, and factual understanding. Assessments occurred at baseline, immediate post-educational program, and three-month follow-up.
resultsCompared with controls, the educational program group showed statistically significant improvements with large effect sizes for total mental health literacy (Cohen's d = 1.82), though such magnitudes warrant cautious interpretation given the waitlist control design and reliance on self-report measures. Gains were observed across all subscales, including disorder recognition (d = 1.68), knowledge (d = 1.76), and attitudes (d = 1.35), and these improvements remained significant at three-month follow-up. Digital engagement and learning satisfaction partially mediated program effects. No significant moderation was detected by gender, baseline literacy levels, or mental health history.
conclusionsWithin this single-institution context, a culturally adapted blended learning program was associated with significant improvements in mental health literacy among university students, with effects persisting over three months. These findings suggest that integrating online flexibility with face-to-face interaction holds promise for mental health education, although replication across diverse settings is needed before broader claims can be made.
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.