MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309322908 · doi:10.12688/mep.19115.1

Barriers faced by medical students in seeking mental healthcare: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4309322908 on OpenAlexafffund
Maria Berliant, Nabiha Rahman, Christopher Mattice, Chirayu Bhatt, Kay-Anne Haykal

Bibliographic record

VenueMedEdPublish · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa Hospital
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMental healthHealth carePsychologyNursingMedical educationFamily medicineMedicinePsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Medical students commonly exhibit mental health issues. Despite the availability of professionals on medical campuses, seeking help continues to be a challenge for some students. Our review aimed to identify the barriers medical students face when seeking professional mental healthcare. Methods: A Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) search was created for articles using PubMed, Embase, and PsychINFO databases to identify articles specifically about medical students and their barriers to professional mental healthcare. Inclusion criteria included articles in which barriers to mental healthcare were either the primary variable or one of multiple study results. No date limits were imposed. Reviews, pilot projects, or articles that did not address barriers to mental healthcare faced by medical students or focused on veterinary or dental students were excluded. A total of 454 articles were identified and screened by title/abstract and then full text. Data were extracted from 33 articles using an independent framework. Barriers identified were compiled and reported. Results: From a total of 33 articles, the most identified barriers were fear of negative effect on residency/career opportunities, fear of confidentiality breach, stigma and fear of shaming from peers, lack of perceived seriousness/normalization of symptoms, lack of time, and fear of documentation on academic record. Students also preferred to seek care outside of their institution from fear of their provider being an academic preceptor. Conclusions: Many of the barriers to mental healthcare faced by medical students relate to a fear of academic and career reprisal, and fear of confidentiality breach. It appears that despite recent efforts to decrease stigma surrounding mental illness, many medical students struggle to seek appropriate support. Access to mental healthcare can be improved by increasing transparency regarding what information will be displayed on academic records, dispelling common myths about mental healthcare, and increasing awareness about resources available for medical students.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0160.015
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.413 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedEdPublishSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207