The impact of working in academia on researchers' mental health and well-being: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

PLoS One. 2022 May 25;17(5):e0268890. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268890. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

Objective: To understand how researchers experience working in academia and the effects these experiences have on their mental health and well-being, through synthesizing published qualitative data.

Method: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted to gain a comprehensive overview of what is currently known about academic researchers' mental health and well-being. Relevant papers were identified through searching electronic databases, Google Scholar, and citation tracking. The quality of the included studies was assessed and the data was synthesised using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: 26 papers were identified and included in this review. Academic researchers' experiences were captured under seven key themes. Job insecurity coupled with the high expectations set by the academic system left researchers at risk of poor mental health and well-being. Access to peer support networks, opportunities for career progression, and mentorship can help mitigate the stress associated with the academic job role, however, under-represented groups in academia are at risk of unequal access to resources, support, and opportunities.

Conclusion: To improve researchers' well-being at work, scientific/academic practice and the system's concept of what a successful researcher should look like, needs to change. Further high-quality qualitative research is needed to better understand how systemic change, including tackling inequality and introducing better support systems, can be brought about more immediately and effectively. Further research is also needed to better understand the experiences and support needs of post-doctoral and more senior researchers, as there is a paucity of literature in this area.

Trial registration: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021232480).

Publication types

  • Systematic Review
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Mental Health*
  • Organizations*
  • Qualitative Research

Grants and funding

This publication was made possible through funding provided by a Bloomsbury Colleges Studentship in partnership with The McPin Foundation (Grant reference: ES/P000592/1). This report is independent research supported by the National Institute for Health Research ARC North Thames. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care. A representative of The McPin Foundation - a mental health research charity - provided feedback on the final draft of this manuscript.