CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 138

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis

Hazell, Cassie M., Chapman, Laura, Valeix, Sophie F., Roberts, Paul, Niven, Jeremy E., Berry, Clio·2020·Systematic Reviews
DOI 10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1PMC PMC7450565
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Data from studies with undergraduate and postgraduate taught students suggest that they are at an increased risk of having mental health problems, compared to the general population. By contrast, the literature on doctoral researchers (DRs) is far more disparate and unclear. There is a need to bring together current findings and identify what questions still need to be answered. Methods: We conducted a mixed methods systematic review to summarise the research on doctoral researchers’ (DRs) mental health. Our search revealed 52 articles that were included in this review. Results: The results of our meta-analysis found that DRs reported significantly higher stress levels compared with population norm data. Using meta-analyses and meta-synthesis techniques, we found the risk factors with the strongest evidence base were isolation and identifying as female. Social support, viewing the PhD as a process, a positive student-supervisor relationship and engaging in self-care were the most well-established protective factors. Conclusions: We have identified a critical need for researchers to better coordinate data collection to aid future reviews and allow for clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration CRD42018092867

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 PRISMA diagram of literature review process
Fig. 1 PRISMA diagram of literature review processCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 A meta-analysis of between-group effect sizes (Cohen’s d) comparing PSS scores (both 10- and 14-item versions) from DRs and normative population data. *Studies using the 14 item version of the PSS; a positive effect size indicates DRs had a higher score on the PSS; a negative effect size indicates that the normative data produced a higher score on the PSS; black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); d = Cohen’s d; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p value
Fig. 2 A meta-analysis of between-group effect sizes (Cohen’s d) comparing PSS scores (both 10- and 14-item versions) from DRs and normative population data. *Studies using the 14 item version of the PSS; a positive effect size indicates DRs had a higher score on the PSS; a negative effect size indicates that the normative data produced a higher score on the PSS; black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); d = Cohen’s d; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p valueCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Forest plot and meta-analysis of correlation coefficients testing the relationship between stress and perceived support. Black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); r = Pearson’s r; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p value
Fig. 3 Forest plot and meta-analysis of correlation coefficients testing the relationship between stress and perceived support. Black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); r = Pearson’s r; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p valueCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Forest plot and meta-analysis of correlation coefficients testing the relationship between stress and performance. Black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); r = Pearson’s r; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p value
Fig. 4 Forest plot and meta-analysis of correlation coefficients testing the relationship between stress and performance. Black diamond = total effect size (based on random effects model); r = Pearson’s r; Q = heterogeneity; Z = z score; I2 = proportion of variance due to between-study heterogeneity; p = exact p valueCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Correlation coefficients testing the relationship between a mental health outcome and other construct. Correlation coefficients are given in brackets (r); *p < .05; each correlation coefficient reflects the results from a single study
Fig. 5 Correlation coefficients testing the relationship between a mental health outcome and other construct. Correlation coefficients are given in brackets (r); *p < .05; each correlation coefficient reflects the results from a single studyCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. YouGov. One in four students suffer from mental health problems. 2016. Available from: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/obtomdatp4/Survey_Results.pdf. Cited 2017 Oct 6.
  2. Oswalt SB, Lederer AM, Chestnut-Steich K, Day C, Halbritter A, Ortiz D. Trends in college students’ mental health diagnoses and utilization of services, 2009–2015. J Am Coll Health. 2018;68:41–51. · DOI
  3. NCES. Number of doctoral degrees earned in the United States from 1949/50 to 2028/29, by gender. 2019. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/185167/number-of-doctoral-degrees-by-gender-since-1950/.
  4. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37–46 Available from: http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=1960-06759-001. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159 Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2529310?origin=crossref. Cited 2017 Mar 8. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Noblit GW, Hare RD. Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies: Sage Publications; 1988. p. 88. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Cohen S, Williamson GM. Perceived stress in a probability sample of the U.S. In: Spacapam S, Oskamp S, editors. The social psychology of health: Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1988.
  8. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983;24(4):385–96. · DOI · Paper page
  9. MedCalc Software bvba. MedCalc Statistical Software. Belgium: Ostend; 2016.
  10. Hedges LV, Ollkin L. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press; 1985. Available from:. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386.refs. · DOI
  11. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley; 2009. Cited 2019 Jan 10. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470743386. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Fisher RA. Frequency distribution of the values of the correlation coefficient in samples from an indefinitely large population. Biometrika. 1915;10(4):507–21 Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/185167/number-of-doctoral-degrees-by-gender-since-1950/.
  13. Lachal J, Revah-Levy A, Orri M, Moro MR. Metasynthesis: an original method to synthesize qualitative literature in psychiatry. Front Psychiatry. 2017;8:269. · DOI
  14. Braun V, Clarke V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 2013.
  15. Bhaskar R. The possibility of naturalism: a philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. London: Routledge; 2014. · DOI
  16. Fletcher AJ. Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2017;20(2):181–94. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Walsh D, Downe S. Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2005;50(2):204–11. · DOI · Paper page
  18. Maton K. Reflexivity, relationism, & research: Pierre Bourdieu and the epistemic conditions of social scientific knowledge. Sp Cult. 2003;6(1):52–65. · DOI
  19. Acker S, Haque E. The struggle to make sense of doctoral study. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(2):229–41. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.956699. · DOI
  20. Devonport TJ, Lane AM. In it together: Dyadic coping among doctoral students and partners. J Hosp Leis Sport Tour Educ. 2014;15:124–34. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2014.08.002. · DOI
  21. Bazrafkan L, Shokrpour N, Yousefi A, Yamani N. Management of stress and anxiety among PhD students during thesis writing: a qualitative study. The Health Care Manager. 2016;35:231–40. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Cotterall S. More than just a brain: emotions and the doctoral experience. High Educ Res Dev. 2013;32(2):174–87. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Kenty JR. Stress management strategies for women doctoral students. Nurse Educ. 2000;25(5):251–4 Available from: http://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/pt/mdl-16646205. · DOI
  24. Usman Yousaf S, Akram M, Usman B. Exploring the causes of stress and coping with it amongst doctoral level students: highlighting the importance of information collection and management. Pakistan J Inf Manag Libr. 2016;18(2):12–25 Available from: https://search.proquest.com/openview/68246cbba8a9da0ec067d56631b479f1/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=54989.
  25. Sandelowski M, Voils CI, Barroso J. Defining and designing mixed research synthesis Studies. Res Sch. 2006;13(1):29 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20098638%0Ahttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC2809982.
  26. Begun AL, Carter JR. Career Implications of Doctoral Social Work Student Debt Load. J Soc Work Educ. 2017;53(2):161–73. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2016.1243500. · DOI
  27. Benjamin S, Williams J, Maher MA. Focusing the lens to share the story: using photographs and interviews to explore doctoral students’ sense of well-being. Int J Dr Stud. 2017;12:197–217.
  28. Bireda AD. Challenges to the doctoral journey: a case of female doctoral students from Ethiopia. Open Prax. 2015;7(4):287–97. · DOI
  29. Bolliger DU, Halupa C. Student perceptions of satisfaction and anxiety in an online doctoral program. Distance Educ. 2012;33(1):81–98. · DOI
  30. Devine K, Hunter KH. PhD student emotional exhaustion: the role of supportive supervision and self-presentation behaviours. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2017;54(4):335–44. · DOI
  31. Dumitrescu GA. Self-efficacy, locus of control , perceived stress and student satisfaction as correlates of dissertation completion: Andrews University; 2016.
  32. El-Ghoroury NH, Galper DI, Sawaqdeh A, Bufka LF. Stress, coping, and barriers to wellness among psychology graduate students. Train Educ Prof Psychol. 2012;6(2):122–34.
  33. Haynes C, Bulosan M, Citty J, Grant-Harris M, Hudson J, Koro-Ljungberg M. My world is not my doctoral program…Or is it?: Female students’ perceptions of well-being. Int J Dr Stud. 2012;7:001–17.
  34. Hill LM. Perceived stress, academic support, social support, and professional support factors as predictors of student success in distributed-learning doctoral education: Fielding Graduate University; 2010. · DOI
  35. Holahan CK. Stress experienced by women doctoral students, need for support, and occupational sex typing: An interactional view. Sex Roles. 1979;5(4):425–36. · DOI
  36. Hunter KH, Devine K. Doctoral students’ emotional exhaustion and intentions to leave academia. Int J Doctoral Stud. 2016;11. · DOI
  37. Kaufman JA. Stress and social support among online doctoral psychology students. J College Stud Psychother. 2006;20(3):79–88 Available from: http://search.proquest.com/docview/57185202?accountid=12253%5Cnhttp://man-fe.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/openurl/44MAN/44MAN_services_page?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=journal&genre=unknown&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Aeducation&atitle=Stress+and+Social+Support+among+. · DOI
  38. Lonka K, Chow A, Keskinen J, Hakkarainen K, Sandström N, Pyhältö K. How to measure PhD students’ conceptions of academic writing - and are they related to wellbeing? J Writ Res. 2014;5(3):245–69. · DOI
  39. Marais GAB, Shankland R, Haag P, Fiault R, Juniper B. A survey and a positive psychology intervention on French PhD student well-being. Int J Dr Stud. 2018;13:109–38.
  40. Martinez E, Ordu C, Sala MRD, McFarlane A. Striving to obtain a school-work-life balance: The full-time doctoral student. Int J Dr Stud. 2013;8:39–59.
  41. McGregor BA, Antoni MH, Ceballos R, communication BBBS. very low CD19+ B-lymphocyte percentage is associated with high levels of academic stress among healthy graduate students. Stress Heal. 2008;24(5):413–8. · DOI
  42. Pifer MJ, Baker VL. “It could be just because I’m different”: Otherness and its outcomes in doctoral education. J Divers High Educ. 2014;7(1):14–30. · DOI
  43. Platt J, Schaefer C. Clinical psychological students’ subjective stress ratings during their doctoral training. Psychol Rep. 1995;76:994 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7568619. · DOI
  44. Pychyl TA. Personal projects, subjective well-being and the lives of doctoral students. Ottawa: Carleton University; 1995.
  45. Pychyl TA, Little BR. Dimensional specificity in the prediction of subjective well-being: Personal projects in pursuit of the PhD. Soc Indic Res. 1998;45(1–3):423–73 Available from: file://d/d/Texte/Guenter/Literatu/Original/Journals/SIR98-45-423-473.pdf. · DOI
  46. Rocha-Singh IA. Perceived stress among graduate students: development and validation of the Graduate Stress Inventory. Educ Psychol Meas. 1994;54(3):714–27. · DOI
  47. Sekas G, Wile MZ. Stress-related illnesses and sources of stress: comparing M.D., Ph.D., M.D. and Ph.D. students. J Med Educ. 1980;55:440–6 Available from: http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L10000589%5Cnhttp://sfx.library.uu.nl/utrecht?sid=EMBASE&issn=00222577&id=doi:&atitle=Stress-related+illnesses+and+sources+of+stress%3A+comparing+M.D.-Ph.D.%2C+M.D.+and+Ph.D.+student.
  48. Stubb J, Pyhältö K, Lonka K. Balancing between inspiration and exhaustion: PhD students’ experienced socio-psychological well-being. Stud Contin Educ. 2011;33(1):33–50. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Ülkü-Steiner B, Kurtz-Costes B, Kinlaw CR. Doctoral student experiences in gender-balanced and male-dominated graduate programs. J Educ Psychol. 2000;92(2):296–307. · DOI
  50. Volkert D, Candela L, Bernacki M. Student motivation, stressors, and intent to leave nursing doctoral study: a national study using path analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;61:210–5. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.11.033. · DOI
  51. Waaijer CJF, Heyer A, Kuli S. Effects of appointment types on the availability of research infrastructure, work pressure, stress, and career attitudes of PhD candidates of a Dutch university. Res Eval. 2016;25(4):349–57.
  52. Wang C-H, Chen Y-W, Wu T-Y. Self-guided bibliotherapy: a case study of a Taiwanese doctoral student. Int J Humanties. 2010;8(1):413–22.
  53. Wright T. Issues in brief counselling with postgraduate research students. Couns Psychol Q. 2006;19(4):357–72. · DOI
  54. Scrubb MM. An examination of the Doctoral Student Stress Survey (DSSS) as an instrument for measuring the effects of stress as perceived by doctoral students in a distance learning university, vol. 58: Walden University; 1998. p. 3041. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. Available from: http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=psyc3&NEWS=N&AN=1998-95003-070.
  55. Hadden BW, Smith CV. I gotta say, today was a good (and meaningful) day: daily meaning in life as a potential basic psychological need. J Happiness Stud. 2017:1–18. · DOI
  56. Butler G. Definitions of stress. Occas Pap R Coll Gen Pract. 1993;(61):1–5 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8199583%0Ahttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC2560943.
  57. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1984.
  58. Marin MF, Lord C, Andrews J, Juster RP, Sindi S, Arsenault-Lapierre G, et al. Chronic stress, cognitive functioning and mental health. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2011;96(4):583–95. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2011.02.016. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Ward M. The gender salary gap in British academia. Appl Econ. 2001;33(13):1669–81. Cited 2019 May 23. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840010014445. · DOI
  60. Howe-Walsh L, Turnbull S. Barriers to women leaders in academia: tales from science and technology. Stud High Educ. 2016;41(3):415–28. Cited 2019 May 23. Available from. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.929102. · DOI
  61. Gardiner M, Tiggemann M. Gender differences in leadership style, job stress and mental health in male- and female-dominated industries. J Occup Organ Psychol. 1999;72(3):301–15. · DOI
  62. Brook AT, Garcia J, Fleming M. The effects of multiple identities on psychological well-being. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2008;34(12):1588–600. · DOI
  63. Faragher EB, Cass M, Cooper CL. The relationship between job satisfaction and health: a meta-analysis. Occup Environ Med. 2005;62(2):105–12. · DOI
  64. Macfarlane B. Student performativity in higher education: converting learning as a private space into a public performance. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(2):338–50. · DOI
  65. Daniels K. Perceived risk from occupational stress: a survey of 15 European countries. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61(5):467–70. · DOI
  66. Twenge JM. Time period and birth cohort differences in depressive symptoms in the U.S., 1982–2013. Soc Indic Res. 2015;121(2):437–54. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 138

Metadata

Authors
Hazell, C. M., Chapman, L., Valeix, S. F., Roberts, P., Niven, J. E., & Berry, C.
ORCID
Hazell, Cassie M.
Venue
Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-08-26
Volume
9
Issue
1
ISSN
2046-4053
DOI
10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1
PMC
PMC7450565
Cited by
138
References
21
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Office for Students

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1
The paper
Hazell, C. M., Chapman, L., Valeix, S. F., Roberts, P., Niven, J. E., & Berry, C. (2020). Understanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1