Cited by 453Employment and Welfare StudiesWorkplace Health and Well-beingEducation and Work Dynamics

The mental health benefits of employment: results of a systematic meta-review

Open access
Modini, Matthew, Joyce, Sadhbh, Mykletun, Arnstein, Christensen, Helen, Bryant, Richard A, Mitchell, Philip B, Harvey, Samuel B·2016·Australasian Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective: The literature on mental health in the workplace largely focuses on the negative impacts of work and how work may contribute to the development of mental disorders. The potential mental health benefits of employment have received less attention. Method: A systematic search of reviews or meta-analyses that consider the benefits of work in regards to mental health was undertaken using academic databases. All relevant reviews were subjected to a quality appraisal. Results: Eleven reviews were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria, with four deemed to be of at least moderate quality. The available evidence supports the proposition that work can be beneficial for an employee’s well-being, particularly if good-quality supervision is present and there are favourable workplace conditions. The benefits of work are most apparent when compared with the well-documented detrimental mental health effects of unemployment. Conclusions: The potential positive effects of good work and the role work can play in facilitating recovery from an illness and enhancing mental well-being need to be highlighted and promoted more widely. Future research should aim to further investigate what constitutes a ‘good’ workplace or a ‘good’ job in terms of mental health outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1039856215618523

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Savings from effective prevention may not accrue for many years, nor benefit the healthcare sector, creating resource disincentives to take action.

    “There are, however, economic challenges to implementation: savings from effective prevention may not accrue for many years, nor benefit the healthcare sector, creating resource disincentives to take action. 413,414”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Modini, M., Joyce, S., Mykletun, A., Christensen, H., Bryant, R. A., Mitchell, P. B., & Harvey, S. B.
Affiliations
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
  • Black Dog Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Harvey, Samuel B
Venue
Australasian Psychiatry
Published
2016-07-10
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
331-336
ISSN
  • 1039-8562 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1665
OpenAlex
W2346365317
Cited by
453
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 74 · 2024: 69 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 4
FWCI
35.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Australasian Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNSWorks (UNSW Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Beyond Blue
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Education and Work Dynamics
Keywords
employee well-being, good work, supervision, working conditions, unemployment, mental illness, recovery from illness, good jobs
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Employment, Humans, Mental Health, Organizational Innovation, Organizational Culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review