Healthcare staff resilience review favored several approaches, with uncertain differences between them
Among healthcare professionals, a review reported better resilience and lower stress with several psychological approaches. Its comparisons combined direct and indirect evidence, and the abstract did not specify the reference conditions.
Based on the published abstract. The full paper may contain additional methods, results and limitations.
The 30-second takeaway
The review reported improved resilience, meaning the ability to cope with adversity, and reduced stress with positive psychology, mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy. The authors ranked positive psychology highest, including at follow-up. However, the abstract does not provide direct differences between these approaches or identify the reference conditions behind the reported effect estimates.
The abstract omits trial and participant totals, reference conditions and program durations. It gives individual effect estimates and rankings without the between-approach estimates needed to judge whether the approaches differ reliably.
How the comparisons worked
A network meta-analysis combines trials that directly compare interventions with indirect comparisons across the trial network. This can estimate relative effects across several approaches, but a ranking alone does not show how certain a difference is.
What was actually measured
Resilience and stress scores were the main outcomes, with resilience reassessed later. The authors linked their conclusions to workplace well-being and performance, but the abstract does not report a job-performance outcome demonstrating that those score changes improved work.
The original publication
Comparative effectiveness of resilience-related interventions on resilience and stress for healthcare professionals: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Janitra FE, Chen R, Sung CM et al.
Int J Nurs Stud · 2025
- PubMed ID
- 40664044
- Record checked
AI-assisted research and writing. This explains one selected publication; it is not a complete review of everything known. Our approach.
One more question, understood.
Keep track of the research you’ve explored.