Understanding and supporting the mental health and professional quality of life of academic mental health researchers: results from a cross-sectional survey.

Abstract

Background: Academic mental health research is critical to understanding, treating and preventing poor mental health. Researchers often have their own lived experience of a mental health condition, but despite potential exposure to distressing research material, the mental health and work-related quality of life of mental health researchers is not systematically supported in UK universities. This study aimed to quantitatively characterise the mental health experiences, professional quality of life and workplace support needs of this group.

Methods: UK academic mental health researchers (n = 254) answered an online survey in March 2024. Using linear regression modelling, we tested associations between socio-demographic, mental and physical health and work-related factors alongside negative and positive aspects of professional quality of life, i.e., secondary traumatic stress, burnout and compassion satisfaction, as well as maladaptive coping strategies such as alcohol and drug use or sickness absence from work. We also compared researchers' workplace support experience with their perceived support need and examined implications for funding applications.

Results: Having personal lived experience of a mental health condition showed the strongest association with poorer professional quality of life outcomes. Mental health researchers using qualitative methods also reported higher levels of secondary traumatic stress and burnout than those using quantitative methods, as did those with a disability or chronic illness (compared to those without). Researchers with personal lived experience of a mental health condition also showed ten times the odds of taking sickness leave to cope with work related feelings. There were important differences between the types of workplace support researchers experience with those they report needing. Our evidence also points to more guidance needed on factoring support into research projects.

Conclusions: Our findings highlight the wealth of lived experience amongst mental health researchers, and the importance of providing systematic proactive support for this group, as well as for those with a disability or chronic illness, or those using qualitative methodologies. With sickness absence having considerable economic and organisational consequences for employers and funders, recommendations include developing researcher well-being plans, regular end of project debriefs, development and training on challenging topics, and clearer consideration of researcher support in funding applications.