4.6 Article

Efficacy of a Brief Screening Tool to Identify Medical Students in Distress

期刊

ACADEMIC MEDICINE
卷 86, 期 7, 页码 907-914

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31821da615

关键词

-

资金

  1. Mayo Clinic
  2. Mayo Clinic Department of Medicine, Division of Primary Care
  3. Mayo Clinic, Department of Medicine
  4. Mayo Clinic College of Medicine Office of Medical Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To determine whether the Medical Student Well-Being Index (MSWBI) can serve as a brief assessment tool to identify medical students in severe psychological distress. Method The authors used data from 2,248 medical students at seven U.S. medical schools who responded to a 2007 survey to explore the accuracy of the MSWBI in identifying medical students with three outcomes: low mental quality of life (QOL; defined by having a Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey mental component summary score >= 1/2 standard deviation below that of the age-and gender-matched population norm), suicidal ideation, or serious thoughts of dropping out. The authors confirmed their analyses using data from a separate sample of 2,682 students evaluated in 2009. Results Students with low mental QOL, suicidal ideation, or serious thoughts of dropping out were more likely to endorse each individual MSWBI item and a greater number of total items than were students without such distress (all P < .001). The likelihood ratio for low mental QOL among students with MSWBI scores <4 was 0.47 as compared with 4.79 for those with scores >= 4. At an MSWBI threshold score of >= 4, the MSWBI's sensitivity and specificity for identifying students with low mental QOL or recent suicidal ideation/serious thoughts of dropping out were both >= 90%. On multivariable logistic regression, all MSWBI items were independently associated with at least one outcome. Conclusions The MSWBI is a useful brief screening tool to help identify students with severe distress.

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

4.6
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