Researchers' mental health and quality of life: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background and Aims: Although several previous studies have examined the determinants of research productivity, the conditions under which researchers achieve high performance remain poorly understood. This protocol aims to lay the groundwork for a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the factors associated with researchers' mental health (RMH) and quality of life (RQoL) across public and private institutions, to provide future evidence to inform targeted policies. Methods: The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42025635600) following PRISMA‐P 2015 guidelines. Seven databases will be searched (CINAHL, LILACS, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and PsycArticles) for observational studies. Two independent reviewers will screen titles/abstracts and full texts, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. Methodological quality (GRADE), risk of bias (Downs and Black scale), and interrater reliability (Cohen's κ) will be assessed. Descriptive synthesis and meta‐analysis (when appropriate) will explore subgroup analyses by sex/gender, academic role, and geographic region. Heterogeneity will be assessed using Cochran's Q and I2 statistics. Results: This is a study protocol, therefore no results are available at this stage. The review will systematically synthesize the available evidence on the association between RQoL and RMH and, where possible, provides combined effect estimates through meta‐analysis. Conclusion: The systematic review and meta‐analysis will highlight challenges in the academic environment and provide evidence to inform the development of more sustainable working conditions.