No abstract

Background: Data from studies with undergraduate and postgraduate taught students suggest that they are at an increased risk of having mental health problems, compared to the general population. By contrast, the literature on doctoral researchers (DRs) is far more disparate and unclear. There is a need to bring together current findings and identify what questions still need to be answered. Methods: We conducted a mixed methods systematic review to summarise the research on doctoral researchers' (DRs) mental health. Our search revealed 52 articles that were included in this review. Results: The results of our meta-analysis found that DRs reported significantly higher stress levels compared with population norm data. Using meta-analyses and meta-synthesis techniques, we found the risk factors with the strongest evidence base were isolation and identifying as female. Social support, viewing the PhD as a process, a positive student-supervisor relationship and engaging in self-care were the most well-established protective factors. Conclusions: We have identified a critical need for researchers to better coordinate data collection to aid future reviews and allow for clinically meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration CRD42018092867

No abstract

In parallel with the recent world-wide promotion of One Health (OH) as a policy concept, a growing body of social science studies has raised questions about how successful OH policies and programs have been in managing some global health issues, such as zoonotic diseases. This paper briefly reviews this literature to clarify its critical perspective. Much of the literature on OH also is focused on health management at an international level and has paid less attention to implementation programs and policies for OH at the national and local levels, especially in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs). Programs to implement OH often are linked to the concept of “integration”, a notion that lacks a universal definition, but is nonetheless a central tenet and goal in many OH programs. At the local and national levels, strong differences in perspectives about OH among different professions can be major barriers to integration of those professions into OH implementation. Policies based on integration among professions in sectors like animal, human and environmental health can threaten professions’ identities and thus may meet with resistance. Taking into account these criticisms of OH research and implementation, this paper proposes a research framework to probe the dominant social dimensions and power dynamics among professional participants that affect OH implementation programs at the local and national levels in a low-income country. The proposed research focus is the veterinary profession and one aspect of OH in which veterinarians are necessary actors: zoonotic disease management. Results from research framed in this way can have immediate application to the programs under study and can inform more expansive research on the social determinants of successful implementation of OH programs and policies.

Doctoral Researchers (DRs) are an important part of the academic community and, after graduating, make substantial social and economic contributions. Despite this importance, DR wellbeing has long been of concern. Recent studies have concluded that DRs may be particularly vulnerable to mental health problems, yet direct comparisons of the prevalence of mental health problems between this population and control groups are lacking. Here, by comparing DRs with educated working controls, we show that DRs report significantly greater anxiety and depression, and that this difference is not explained by a higher rate of pre-existing mental health problems. Moreover, most DRs perceive poor mental health as a ‘normal’ part of the PhD process. Thus, our findings suggest a hazardous impact of PhD study on mental health, with DRs being particularly at risk of developing common mental health problems. This provides an evidence-based mandate for universities and funders to reflect upon practices related to DR training and mental health. Our attention should now be directed towards understanding what factors may explain heightened anxiety and depression among DRs so as to inform preventative measures and interventions.

No abstract

Purpose Postgraduate researchers (PGRs) appear to be particularly vulnerable to mental health problems. Mental health-related stigma and discrimination may be endemic within universities, creating a threatening environment that undermines PGRs’ health and well-being. These environmental characteristics may increase PGRs’ absenteeism and presenteeism, attendance behaviours that have great personal and institutional consequences. The study of this issue, however, has been limited to date. Design/methodology/approach This was a mixed methods psychological study using cross-sectional data provided by 3,352 UK-based PGRs. Data were collected in a new national survey (U-DOC) led by a British University in 2018–2019. We used structural equation modelling techniques to test associations between workplace mental health-related stigma and discrimination, presenteeism, absenteeism and demographic characteristics. The authors analysed qualitative survey data with framework analysis to deductively and inductively explore associations between workplace culture, stigma and discrimination, and attendance behaviours. Findings The authors found that some PGRs report positive perceptions and experiences of the academic mental health-related workplace culture. However, experiences of mental health stigma and discrimination appear widespread. Both quantitative and qualitative results show that experiences of mental health-related stigma are associated with greater absenteeism and presenteeism. People with mental health problems appear especially vulnerable to experiencing stigma and its impacts. Practical implications Key implications include recommendations for universities to improve support for PGR mental health, and to encourage taking annual leave and necessary sickness absences, by providing a more inclusive environment with enhanced mental health service provision and training for faculty and administrative staff. Originality/value This study presents the first large-scale survey of PGR experiences of mental health-related stigma and discrimination, and their associations with absenteeism and presenteeism.

Sri Lanka is a tropical nation within a zoogeographic zone that is at high risk for infectious disease emergence. In 2010, a study was conducted on the feasibility of enhancing capacity in Sri Lanka to manage wildlife diseases through the establishment of a national wildlife health centre. The Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre was assessed as a potential model for adaptation in Sri Lanka. Interviews and group meetings were conducted with potential key participants from the Sri Lankan Departments of Wildlife Conservation and Animal Production and Health, and the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science of the University of Peradeniya. In addition, site visits were made to potentially participating facilities and the literature on best practices in building scientific capacity was consulted. With strategic enhancements in education and training, additional personnel, improvements in transportation and diagnostic facilities, and central coordination, Sri Lanka appears very well positioned to establish a sustainable wildlife health centre and programme.