Minding many minds: An assessment of mental health and resilience among undergraduate and graduate students; a mixed methods exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective/Participants: The American College Health Association (ACHA) found that 65.4% of Ontario (Canada) students feel overwhelming anxiety and 89.5% of students feel overwhelmed by all of their obligations. Thus, this study assessed the current state of full-time undergraduate (UGS) and graduate students’ (GS) mental health and resilience.Methods: A total of 598-796 UGS and GS completed three questionnaires (BRS, MHI, and SF-36) and a demographic questionnaire, which were distributed campus-wide. Focus groups/individual interviews (n = 30) explored students’ mental health- and resilience-related experiences.Results/Conclusions: Quantitatively, participants produced normal levels of resilience on the BRS, below-the-norm levels of anxiety on the MHI, and above-the-norm levels of physical functioning, but below-the-norm levels of six mental-health-related constructs on the SF-36. Qualitatively, GS and UGS felt physical activity (PA) benefited their mental health and resilience, and voiced the need for more counselors. Overall, participants’ mental health and resilience were similar to the population.
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 | 0.004 | 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".