Screening University Students for Health Checks With an Electronic Health Questionnaire in Finland: Protocol for a Retrospective, Register-Based Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health questionnaires and health checks are an established part of preventive health care services in Finland. However, only very limited research of these has been conducted. The Finnish Student Health Service (FSHS) provides primary health care services to all bachelor's and master's degree university students (approximately 134,500 students) in Finland. FSHS's statutory health examination process of university entrants includes an electronic health questionnaire (eHQ) and, based on the students' eHQ responses, a subsequent health check if necessary. To our knowledge, no previous studies have been published on the use of questionnaires for screening students for general health checks. OBJECTIVE: The general aim of the study is to evaluate the health examination process of university entrants. The objectives are to determine how students' self-reported health in the eHQ and participation in the health examination process are associated with graduation, mental health problems, and the use of student health care services. METHODS: This is an ongoing, nationwide, retrospective, register-based cohort study with a 6-year follow-up. The study population is the cohort of university entrants (N=15,723) from the 2011-2012 academic year. These students were sent the eHQ, which consisted of 26 questions about health, health habits, social relations, and studying. Based on the eHQ responses, students were referred to one of the following interventions: (1) a health check, (2) an appointment other than a health check (eg, physiotherapy), or (3) electronic feedback to support a healthy lifestyle, when the other interventions were not necessary. Multiple comparisons will be made within these groups using logistic regression. The primary outcome variables are graduation, having a mental health problem, and attending a health check. The use of FSHS health care services will be studied with the cluster analysis method. The data have been obtained from three nationwide registers: the eHQ register, the medical records of FSHS, and the Higher education achievement register. The data have been linked using personal identity codes. RESULTS: As of August 2019, the data collection and processing are complete and the statistical analyses are in progress. Preliminary results are expected in autumn 2019. Further publications are expected in 2020, and two PhD theses are expected to be completed by the end of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Studying practical procedures in primary health care is highly important for resource allocation and the development of evidence-based processes. This study will be the first to assess the usage of a health questionnaire in screening students for health checks. The findings of this study will contribute to the field of preventive health care. The main practical implication is the development of the FSHS's health examination process. We hypothesize that participation in the health examination process enhances academic achievement and the detection of university students' mental health problems early on in their studies. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14535.
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 | 0.020 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".