MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403012509 · doi:10.55489/njcm.151020244529

Prevalence of Depression, Anxiety, Stress and Suicide Ideation Among Undergraduate Medical Students in India: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4403012509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Harpreet Kaur, Varsha Gupta, Aseem Garg, Sangeeta, Bijaya Kumar Padhi

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Journal of Community Medicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationAnxietyMeta-analysisDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyIdeationPsychologyMedicineSystematic reviewPsychiatryMEDLINESuicide preventionPoison controlEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Studies reported significant levels of psychological morbidity from across the globe among undergraduate medical students. Present meta-analysis aimed to provide a most up to date comprehensive insight into the prevalence of depression, stress, anxiety and suicidal ideation among undergraduate medical students in India. Material and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in three databases PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar from July 2023 to August 2023. Quality of included studies (43 studies, N=15557) was assessed using modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale and data was analyzed using MetaXL version 5.3. Pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were determined using the random-effects model. Results: The pooled prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress and suicide ideation was 48% (95% CI: 41-55%) (P 0.000, I2 = 98%), 54% (95% CI 42-58%) (P =0.00, I2 = 98%), 50% (95% CI 45-63%) (P =0.001, I2 = 99%) and 21% (95% CI: 9-35%) (P =0.000, I2 = 98%) respectively. Subgroup analysis showed more females than males students were affected from depression, anxiety, stress and suicide ideation. Conclusion: High prevalence of psychological disorders in medical students in India emphasize the need for the counselling services to control this morbidity and implement long term policies and programs at institutional level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Journal of Community MedicineSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207