AI Insight
A study at the University of Klagenfurt tested SAM, a 21-day online program combining self-care, mindfulness, and self-compassion for university students. While the program showed no significant advantage over a basic educational control group, both groups demonstrated improvements in well-being and self-compassion, along with reductions in depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms. Individual-level analyses revealed that approximately 13-21% of participants experienced clinically meaningful improvements in key outcomes, though some participants also showed deterioration, indicating high variability in individual responses.
Why it matters
This research suggests that even minimal online interventions may support university student mental health, though the lack of differential effects indicates the SAM program requires refinement. The findings highlight the importance of examining individual-level changes rather than solely group averages when evaluating mental health interventions.
Understand the Science
AimAs students are vulnerable to mental disorders, interventions for promoting mental health and well-being are urgently needed. Third-wave behavioural therapy programmes (e.g., ACT and MSC) have shown promising results in addressing these issues. The online health promotion programme SAM was developed in a multistage process using a participatory design with students at the University of Klagenfurt, Austria. The name SAM was derived from the German terms for the three main components of programme content: self-care (Selbstfürsorge), mindfulness (Achtsamkeit), and self-compassion (Mitgefühl). It was hypothesised that SAM would (1) increase students’ mindfulness, self-compassion, and well-being and (2) decrease levels of depression, anxiety, and stress.Subject and methodsParticipants were randomly assigned to either the SAM (n = 53) or the low-dose educational group (n = 65), both receiving basic content on nutrition, exercise, relaxation, and stress reduction. Students in the SAM group received a self-administered 21-day intervention, and outcomes were assessed using questionnaires.ResultsA total of 118 students participated in both the baseline assessment and postassessment. A mixed-model MANOVA yielded nonsignificant interaction and group effects but a significant time effect in the expected direction for most outcomes. Across both conditions, participants showed improvements in well-being, and self-compassion as well as decreases in depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms at postassessment. Whilst no significant group-level time effect was observed for mindfulness, Reliable Change Index (RCI) analyses indicated clinically meaningful improvement in mindfulness for 13.6% of participants. The highest rates of reliable improvement were found for well-being (21.2%) and self-compassion (20.3%). However, RCI analyses also identified clinically meaningful deterioration in a subset of participants, particularly for depression (19.5%) and stress (13.7%), highlighting substantial heterogeneity in individual responses despite relatively modest changes at the group level.ConclusionAlthough no differential effects of the SAM programme were observed, the findings highlight the potential impact of small interventions and offer valuable insights for future research. However, the SAM programme could benefit from these insights and is currently under revision.