A Brief, Daily, Online Mental Health and Well-being Intervention for University Staff During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Program Description and Outcomes Using a Mixed Methods Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The unprecedented changes and isolation measures to contain COVID-19 have had multiple psychological and social impacts, with implications for professional and personal functioning. Evidence-informed interventions that can be rapidly implemented under pandemic conditions to support mental health during such times are urgently needed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the acceptability and preliminary outcomes of a daily online mental health promotion program for tertiary education staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The "Victoria University (VU) Elevenses" program was delivered as an uncontrolled intervention at Victoria University (VU) in the western metropolitan region of Melbourne, Australia. In April 2020, an email invitation was sent to all academic and professional staff inviting them to: (1) participate in the program and (2) opt-in to the research component. The "VU Elevenses" program provided 10-15-minute microinterventions comprising lifestyle and well-being strategies to promote mental health via an online meeting platform at 11 AM each weekday. A mixed methods approach was used to evaluate the program, combining structured questionnaires with semistructured interviews to investigate the experiences of staff who participated in the program. RESULTS: Between 16 and 90 participants provided weekly program feedback. A total of 106 university staff opted into the longitudinal research component and 10 staff participated in the interviews. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with sessions and perceived benefits for mental health. Approximately one quarter of participants reported moderate to severe symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress at baseline, with significant reductions in these symptoms in the first 7 weeks of the program, corresponding with easing in mandatory isolation ("lockdown") restrictions. Symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress all increased when lockdown measures were reintroduced, but not to the same levels as found during the initial lockdown period. Overall changes in depression and anxiety from baseline to the end of the program were explained by changes in COVID-19-related distress, whereas changes in self-compassion explained changes in stress. CONCLUSIONS: We show that it is feasible and acceptable to develop and deliver a program of brief interventions in a timely manner, using a simple and accessible online platform. Although participation in the program was initially associated with reduced symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress, participants' mental health worsened with the reintroduction of a "lockdown" period. However, as symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress did not return to levels observed at the start of the VU Elevenses program, participation in the uncontrolled intervention may have offered a protective benefit against the impact of the second significant lockdown period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".