Sources of Stress in Canadian Dental Students: A Prospective Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to describe sources of stress in predoctoral dental students and first-year residents at one dental school and to understand how these sources evolved during the four-year curriculum and in the first year after graduation. The study used a mixed methods design. Quantitative data were collected from subjects in each of the five cohorts of students and residents, every month for a period of one year (other than the summer holiday period; N varied each month from 77 to 127). Sources of stress were measured using the Dental Environment Stress questionnaire (DES). The investigators administered the DES twice, once at the end of each academic semester, and used DES categories that emerged from factor analysis to assess monthly sources of stress. Qualitative data collected through individual interviews (N=6) were aimed at understanding the main sources of stress in each year of the curriculum. Results from both quantitative and qualitative phases demonstrated that the main stressors for all dental students throughout the year were examinations and grades as well as workload. Students in the clinical years were also concerned about patient treatment. The residents and final-year students reported future plans as an additional stressor. Over the year, there was a significant increase for workload stress in the fourth year (p<0.05); in the third year there was a significant increase in patient treatment stress (p<0.05) with a significant decrease for personal factors (p<0.05). The study demonstrated that sources of stress in these students and first-year residents varied according to their stage in the program and the period of the year.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".