7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Digital training for building resilience: Systematic review, meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Abstract Resilience is learnable and broadly described as an individual's adaptive coping ability, its potential value for stress reduction must be explored. With a global coronavirus pandemic, innovative ways to deliver resilience training amidst heightened mental health concerns must be urgently examined. This systematic review aimed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of digital training for building resilience and reducing anxiety, depressive and stress symptoms and (2) to identify essential features for designing future digital training. A three‐step search was conducted in eight electronic databases, trial registries and grey literature to locate eligible studies. Randomised controlled trials examining the effects of digital training aimed at enhancing resilience were included. Data analysis was conducted using the Stata version 17. Twenty‐two randomised controlled trials involving 2876 participants were included. Meta‐analysis revealed that digital training significantly enhanced the participants' resilience with moderate to large effect (g = 0.54–1.09) at post‐intervention and follow‐up. Subgroup analyses suggested that training delivered via the Internet with a flexible programme schedule was more effective than its counterparts. This review supports the use of digital training in improving resilience. Further high‐quality randomised controlled trials with large sample size are needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references149

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

              David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Stress and Health
                Stress and Health
                Wiley
                1532-3005
                1532-2998
                December 2022
                April 28 2022
                December 2022
                : 38
                : 5
                : 848-869
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
                [2 ]Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
                [3 ]Department of Psychological Medicine Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
                Article
                10.1002/smi.3154
                0c251621-79b2-4ab6-9c2a-a72ee04401ac
                © 2022

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article