Students’ perspectives on interventions to reduce stress in medical school: A qualitative study
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 15, Issue: 10 October, Page: e0240587
2020
- 25Citations
- 111Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations25
- Citation Indexes25
- 25
- Captures111
- Readers111
- 111
Article Description
The mental health of medical students remains to be a matter of concern. Numerous setting-based and individual-based interventions for student mental health have been proposed in the literature. However, the student perspective on those interventions has been largely neglected. This study aims to explore how medical students perceive different interventions and if they desire any additional changes with regard to their studies. Eight focus groups with 71 participants were conducted at a large German medical school. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and content-analyzed using MAXQDA 18. We found that medical students prefer setting-based interventions. Most proposed interventions were on a setting-based level. For instance, students asked for more information on the university’s psychosocial counseling services and for better information management regarding contact persons. Interventions proposed in the literature received mixed reactions: Several participants did not favour a pass/fail grading system. Students considered a peer-to-peer mentoring program for freshmen very helpful. Students had diverse attitudes towards Balint groups. They approved of several self-management courses, most of them being related to time or stress management. Interestingly, the most urgently wanted interventions appear to be rather easy to implement (e.g. a mentoring program). This study explored the medical student perspective on student mental health interventions. Additionally, our study illustrates the benefit and feasibility of involving students early on in the conception of interventions. Further research with a representative sample is needed to obtain broader information on the acceptance of the suggested interventions.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85092761987&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240587; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33057431; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240587; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240587; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240587
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know