Author
Listed:
- Melina Dederichs
- Jeannette Weber
- Thomas Muth
- Peter Angerer
- Adrian Loerbroks
Abstract
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.
Suggested Citation
Melina Dederichs & Jeannette Weber & Thomas Muth & Peter Angerer & Adrian Loerbroks, 2020.
"Students’ perspectives on interventions to reduce stress in medical school: A qualitative study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, October.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0240587
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240587
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0240587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.