Perceived impact of contextual determinants on depression, anxiety and stress: a survey with university students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young adults starting college or university education encounter multiple stressors related to transitional life-stage and novel environments. Current studies reveal high rates of symptoms related to common mental health problems like depression, anxiety and stress. However, limited knowledge exists on the determinants on these problems among Canadian students. The primary aim of the study was to investigate the impact of contextual determinants, as perceived by students, on self-reported mental health, and how these impacts varied by depression, anxiety and stress. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with students attending a large university in Toronto, Canada. Participants completed a self-administered online questionnaire as part of a larger project. The questions asked about contextual determinants related to personal, interpersonal, family, social, socio-economic and political factors along with levels of depression, anxiety and stress as measured by Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Beck Anxiety Inventory and Perceived Stress Scale. RESULTS: A total of 148 students completed the questionnaire (37 males and 111 females) with an age range of 19-54 years (median 22, IQR 21-24.8). English was reported as first language by 62.8% while 34.5% self-identified as white and 58.1% reported being born in Canada. Overall, 39.5% reported symptoms of moderate to severe depression, 23.8% reported moderate-severe anxiety and 80.3% reported moderate-severe levels of perceived stress, with no significant differences between males and females. In the final multivariate analysis, variables significantly associated with depression were grade-point-average (aOR 2.46, 95% CI 1.017-5.97), family factors (aOR 3.46, 95% CI 1.50-7.94), social factors (aOR 3.24, 1.30-8.1), self-rated health (aOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.82) and political factors (aOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.16-0.97). Anxiety was significantly associated with family factors (aOR 2.79, 1.09-7.18), socioeconomic factors (aOR 2.59, 95% CI 1.05-6.42) and age (aOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.11-0.98). The significant factors for stress were grade-point-average (aOR 2.41, 1.01-5.75) and social factors (aOR 3.87, 95% CI 1.59-9.43). CONCLUSION: Parent trial: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN92827275.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".