4.5 Article

Anxiety, depression and stressful life events among medical students: a prospective study in Antalya, Turkey

期刊

MEDICAL EDUCATION
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 12-17

出版社

BLACKWELL SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00726.x

关键词

anxiety, epidemiology; depression, epidemiology; follow-up studies; life change events; prospective studies; students, medical, psychology; Turkey, epidemiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To assess psychological changes in medical students in Antalya, Turkey during their undergraduate education. The first-year follow-up outcomes are presented in this article. Design All first-year undergraduate students were given a detailed, self-report questionnaire and another in the second year. They were asked to complete the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Setting The Faculties of Medicine, Economics and Physical Education (PE) of the Akdeniz University, Antalya, Turkey. Participants All first-year undergraduate students in the Faculties of Medicine, Economics and PE who were registered in 1996. Results The findings showed that psychological test scores on the GHQ, the STAI and the BDI rose significantly in medical students between the first and second years. Using the GHQ, with different cut-off scores, the percentage of students scoring above the thresholds was higher in medical students in year 2, compared with economics and PE students. In addition, the scores for some stressful life events of medical students showed a significant rise from year 1 to year 2. Multiple regression analyses indicated that some stressful life events related to social activities were associated with the psychological test scores for medical students. Conclusion The results indicate that there is a decrease in the psychological health of first-year medical students. Some inadequacies in the social activities of the students might play a role in this type of disturbance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据