Medical students are exposed to multiple factors during their academic and clinical study that have been shown to contribute to high levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. The purpose of this article was to explore the issue of depression in the medical student population, including prevalence, causes, and key issues, along with suggestions for early identification and support from one medical school in New Zealand. After establishing that the prevalence of depression is higher for medical students than the general population, the key issues explored include assessment used in the program, characteristics of the student population (such as Type A personality and perfectionism), resilience, selection procedures, students’ motivation, and the nature of the clinical environment. This review includes several recommendations to improve students’ psychological health such as positioning well-being within an overarching comprehensive workplace wellness model and integrating peer and faculty-led support into the day-to-day running of the institution. It also highlights the advantages of the addition of a well-being curriculum, as skills to prevent and manage distress and depression are relevant in supporting the competencies required by medical practitioners. It concludes that medical schools need wide-ranging strategies to address the complexities associated with the particular student population attracted to medicine and calls for educators to act, by noticing opportunities where they can introduce such initiatives into their medical programs.
A systematic review was conducted to determine the relationship between academic assessment and medical student psychological distress with the aim of informing assessment practices. A systematic literature search of six electronic databases (Medline, Medline IN PROCESS, PubMed, EMBASE, Psychinfo, ERIC) from 1991 to May 2014 was completed. Articles focusing on academic assessment and its relation to stress or anxiety of medical students were included. From 3,986 potential titles, 82 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 23 studies met review inclusion criteria. Studies focused on assessment stress or anxiety, and assessment performance. Consistent among the studies was the finding that assessment invokes stress or anxiety, perhaps more so for female medical students. A relationship may exist between assessment stress or anxiety and impaired performance. Significant risks of bias were common in study methodologies. There is evidence to suggest academic assessment is associated with psychological distress among medical students. However, differences in the types of measures used by researchers limited our ability to draw conclusions about which methods of assessment invoke greater distress. More rigorous study designs and the use of standardized measures are required. Future research should consider differences in students’ perceived significance of assessments, the psychological effects of constant exposure to assessment, and the role of assessment in preparing students for clinical practice.
BackgroundProgress Tests (PTs) draw on a common question bank to assess all students in a programme against graduate outcomes. Theoretically PTs drive deep approaches to learning and reduce assessment-related stress. In 2013, PTs were introduced to two year groups of medical students (Years 2 and 4), whereas students in Years 3 and 5 were taking traditional high-stakes assessments. Staged introduction of PTs into our medical curriculum provided a time-limited opportunity for a comparative study. The main purpose of the current study was to compare the impact of PTs on undergraduate medical students’ approaches to learning and perceived stress with that of traditional high-stakes assessments. We also aimed to investigate the associations between approaches to learning, stress and PT scores.MethodsUndergraduate medical students (N = 333 and N = 298 at Time 1 and Time 2 respectively) answered the Revised Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) at two time points to evaluate change over time. The R-SPQ-2F generated a surface approach and a deep approach score; the PSS generated an overall perceived stress score.ResultsWe found no significant differences between the two groups in approaches to learning at either time point, and no significant changes in approaches to learning over time in either cohort. Levels of stress increased significantly at the end of the year (Time 2) for students in the traditional assessment cohort, but not in the PT cohort. In the PT cohort, surface approach to learning, but not stress, was a significant negative predictor of students’ PT scores.ConclusionsWhile confirming an association between surface approaches to learning and lower PT scores, we failed to demonstrate an effect of PTs on approaches to learning. However, a reduction in assessment-associated stress is an important finding.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.