The coronavirus global pandemic interrupted teaching at Australian universities. Face‐to‐face teaching was replaced by online delivery. This presented challenges for nursing programmes due to the hands‐on teaching requirements and clinical placements. Questions were raised around students’ resilience and stress in the face of adversity. This study explored undergraduate nursing students’ resilience, challenges experienced, and supports utilized during the pandemic. Convenience sampling recruited students from one nursing programme (n = 340). Quantitative and qualitative data were collected. The Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale (CD‐RISC‐25) examined resilience scores through non‐parametric analysis. Narrative responses were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. 121 surveys (40.3%) were completed. Most participants were from second year (n = 77, 63.6%). The difference in median resilience scores among employed participants was statistically significant (P = 0.029) and higher than the unemployed. The median scores of students working in nursing‐related roles were higher than others. Median resilience score across all year levels was 70 (IQR = 62–80), in the lowest score range. Major themes identified were fear of the virus, isolation, and mental health problems. The coping strategies identified were developing daily routines, staying connected, and establishing self‐help techniques. This research has implications to optimize students’ learning experience, enhance resilience, and promote mental health and well‐being.

The stepped care model (SCM) is a patient‐centred approach to mental health care, offering a range of services from least to most intensive, tailored to individual needs. This scoping review examines the adoption, effectiveness, challenges and implications associated with applying SCM within primary mental health service delivery. Evidence from global sources suggests the model is viable, effective and useful. This review explores the literature available, clarifies fundamental concepts and identifies existing knowledge gaps. The literature search included CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, the Federation University library, Google and Google Scholar databases. A systematic keyword‐based search using terms like “stepped care model,” “mental health,” and “primary care”; and a combination of keywords and subject headings, were used. The search strategy was refined by considering factors such as relevance, publication date, objectives and outcomes. This strategy yielded 20 papers compiled in this review. They include randomised controlled trials and cross‐sectional studies. The review supports SCM adoption in primary mental health care but acknowledges the need for further research. Key inclusions of the review include cost‐effectiveness, diverse diagnoses, efficacy and the model's structural configuration. Clear treatment details, delivery methods, intervention durations and chronological sequences are essential. This systematic approach enhances generalisability across different SCM models and areas, strengthening reliable inferences. In summary, the SCM holds promise for enhancing mental health service delivery. However, there is a need to further examine the factors that determine its effectiveness and understand the different ways in which SCM is implemented. Such inquiry forms the foundation for implementing and advancing mental health care services in Australia and internationally.