What is the effectiveness of stress interventions for men: a systematic review

Abstract

Background : Men and women have different stress responses, both psychologically and biologically, with men observed to generally have higher rates of maladaptive coping behaviours. They are also more likely than women to take their own lives, which is associated with being less likely to seek help for mental health issues. Methods : Interventional studies were examined addressing elevated levels of stress in healthy males. A systematic literature search was conducted across nine databases up to 14 December 2022. Interventional studies involving adult males or reporting male-specific outcomes that addressed and demonstrated a change in stress from baseline, were peer-reviewed, and published in English language were included in the review. An updated surveillance search using the original search strategy and eligibility criteria was conducted across PubMed, MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Psychological Information Database (PsycINFO) and Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) for studies published between 15 December 2022 and 27 July 2026. Results : A total of 2201 studies were identified, of which 16 studies were included in the systematic review. Oral administration of a medication or dietary supplement was the most frequently studied intervention type, with six studies identified. Four studies focused on meditation or mindfulness and two on cognitive behavioural therapy. The remaining intervention categories each had one study: green social prescribing, exercise and lifestyle, manual therapy, and short periods of sleep. The updated surveillance search identified no additional eligible studies. Conclusions : Despite a range of interventions being identified, the systematic review suggests a lack of evidence on the effectiveness of stress interventions for men. Although all included studies reported significant results, methodological and analytical limitations were evident across the evidence base and the findings should, therefore, be interpreted with caution. The absence of eligible studies identified through the updated surveillance search further highlights the scarcity of male-specific intervention research in this area. The PROSPERO Registration : https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023392091, CRD42023392091.