ArticleBMJ open2026
Evaluating the impact and acceptability of a mental health literacy course for UK university students: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore students' experiences of engaging with an asynchronous, elective, digital mental health literacy (MHL) course adapted for delivery within UK higher education settings. Specifically, the study examined the perceived impact on MHL and acceptability. To identify recommendations for future course development.
designQualitative study using focus groups. Focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis.
settingTwo universities (University of Exeter and Newcastle University).
participantsNineteen undergraduate students predominantly studying psychology and social science subjects participated in one of five focus groups.
resultsFour themes were identified from students' experiences of the course, including a greater understanding of mental health, greater self-awareness and understanding of others experiencing mental health difficulties. Students perceived the course as relevant, useful and accessible, and provided recommendations for future course development. Students also highlighted a need for greater guidance on responding to mental health difficulties in others, including emotional boundaries, crisis response and appropriate signposting to professional support.
conclusionOur findings suggest that MHL interventions may support greater understanding of well-being and mental ill-health, greater self-reflection and better understanding of the mental health of others within university settings. Students perceived the MHL course as relevant, acceptable and beneficial but identified uncertainty regarding how to safely respond to peers experiencing mental health difficulties. Future MHL interventions need to consider how to help students safely apply MH knowledge within their everyday interactions with peers and wider support networks.
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.