Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 21Workplace Health and Well-beingWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingStress and Burnout Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Effects of time management interventions on mental health and wellbeing factors: A protocol for a systematic review

Open access
Young, Anna Navin, Bourke, Aoife, Foley, Sarah, Di Blasi, Zelda·2024·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Background: Poor employee mental health and wellbeing are highly prevalent and costly. Time-related factors such as work intensification and perceptions of time poverty or pressure pose risks to employee health and wellbeing. While reviews suggest that there are positive associations between time management behavior and wellbeing, there is limited rigorous and systematic research examining the effectiveness of time management interventions on wellbeing in the workplace. A thorough review is needed to synthesize time management interventions and their effectiveness to promote employee mental health and wellbeing. Method: A systematic search will be conducted using the following databases: PsychINFO via OVID (1806-Present), Web of Science, Scopus via Elsevier (1976-Present), Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library via Wiley (1992-Present), and MEDLINE via OVID (1946-Present). The review will include experimental and quasi-experimental studies that evaluate the effects of time management interventions on wellbeing outcomes on healthy adults in a workplace context. Only studies in English will be included. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, record screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of each study included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Data will be critically appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools. Depending on the data, a meta-analysis or a narrative synthesis will be conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in the development of this protocol. The protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD4202125715). Discussion: This review will provide systematic evidence on the effects of time management interventions on wellbeing outcomes in the workplace. It will contribute to our understanding of how time management approaches may help to address growing concerns for employee mental health and wellbeing.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0288887

Cites

19 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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 19 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. World Health Organization, 2022, Mental health at work;
  2. Current Priorities of the U.S. Surgeon General [Internet]., 2022, The U.S. Surgeon General’s framework for workplace mental health & well-being
  3. C Leclerc, 2022, OSH Pulse—Occupational safety and health in post-pandemic workplaces., European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.
  4. J. Zuzanek, 2004, Work and Leisure, 123
  5. J Higgins, Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022)., Cochrane
  6. JE McKenzie, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019).

Cited by

See all 21

Metadata

Authors
Young, A. N., Bourke, A., Foley, S., & Di Blasi, Z.
Affiliations
University College Cork (IE)
Corresponding author
  • Young, Anna Navin
  • Bourke, Aoife
  • Foley, Sarah
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2024-03-11
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
e0288887
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392662188
Cited by
21
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
employee mental health, employee well-being, time poverty, work intensification, time pressure, workplace interventions
MeSH terms
Systematic Reviews as Topic, Adult, Humans, Mental Health, Review Literature as Topic, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Occupational Health, Workplace, Time Management

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.