Scoping review maps psychological well-being and burnout in nursing faculty, indicating key factors for improvement.
Introduction: Workplace well-being is essential for professionals’ health and satisfaction, influencing organizational success. Among lecturers, including nursing faculty in higher education, high demands and publication pressure compromise well-being, with high levels of emotional exhaustion identified. Promoting well-being is crucial for student success, professional performance, and healthy academic environments. Therefore, it is essential for institutions to integrate development programs that include well-being promotion strategies, recognizing the workplace as a strategic setting for health and disease prevention, thereby improving teaching quality and professional satisfaction. Objectives: To map scientific evidence on the psychological well-being of higher education faculty. Methodology: Scoping review protocol based on Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA-ScR®. Research conducted in August 2025 using the descriptors “psychological well-being", “mental health”, “emotional well-being", “life satisfaction”, “burnout”, “stress”, “resilience”, “nursing faculty”, “nursing professors”, “nursing educators”, “academic staff”, “higher education”, “university” and “college” in MEDLINE Complete® (via PubMed®), SCOPUS®, CINAHL Complete®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews®, MedicLatina® (via EBSCOhost®), and Consensus®. Studies on the psychological well-being of nursing faculty in higher education, in English, Spanish, or Portuguese, available in free full text, were considered. Selection will be done in Rayyan® by two independent reviewers, with a third reviewer resolving disagreements. Data will be organized in tables by the authors. Registered in Open Science Framework® (DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/N7YHP). Conclusion: This scoping review will map the available evidence on the psychological well-being of nursing faculty in higher education, highlighting key constructs, risk and protective factors, and knowledge gaps to support future research and institutional strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ferreira et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: