↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Prevalence of Depression, Depressive Symptoms, and Suicidal Ideation Among Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1497 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2564 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Prevalence of Depression, Depressive Symptoms, and Suicidal Ideation Among Medical Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, December 2016
DOI 10.1001/jama.2016.17324
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa S. Rotenstein, Marco A. Ramos, Matthew Torre, J. Bradley Segal, Michael J. Peluso, Constance Guille, Srijan Sen, Douglas A. Mata

Abstract

Medical students are at high risk for depression and suicidal ideation. However, the prevalence estimates of these disorders vary between studies. To estimate the prevalence of depression, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideation in medical students. Systematic search of EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, psycARTICLES, and psycINFO without language restriction for studies on the prevalence of depression, depressive symptoms, or suicidal ideation in medical students published before September 17, 2016. Studies that were published in the peer-reviewed literature and used validated assessment methods were included. Information on study characteristics; prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation; and whether students who screened positive for depression sought treatment was extracted independently by 3 investigators. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Differences by study-level characteristics were estimated using stratified meta-analysis and meta-regression. Point or period prevalence of depression, depressive symptoms, or suicidal ideation as assessed by validated questionnaire or structured interview. Depression or depressive symptom prevalence data were extracted from 167 cross-sectional studies (n = 116 628) and 16 longitudinal studies (n = 5728) from 43 countries. All but 1 study used self-report instruments. The overall pooled crude prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms was 27.2% (37 933/122 356 individuals; 95% CI, 24.7% to 29.9%, I2 = 98.9%). Summary prevalence estimates ranged across assessment modalities from 9.3% to 55.9%. Depressive symptom prevalence remained relatively constant over the period studied (baseline survey year range of 1982-2015; slope, 0.2% increase per year [95% CI, -0.2% to 0.7%]). In the 9 longitudinal studies that assessed depressive symptoms before and during medical school (n = 2432), the median absolute increase in symptoms was 13.5% (range, 0.6% to 35.3%). Prevalence estimates did not significantly differ between studies of only preclinical students and studies of only clinical students (23.7% [95% CI, 19.5% to 28.5%] vs 22.4% [95% CI, 17.6% to 28.2%]; P = .72). The percentage of medical students screening positive for depression who sought psychiatric treatment was 15.7% (110/954 individuals; 95% CI, 10.2% to 23.4%, I2 = 70.1%). Suicidal ideation prevalence data were extracted from 24 cross-sectional studies (n = 21 002) from 15 countries. All but 1 study used self-report instruments. The overall pooled crude prevalence of suicidal ideation was 11.1% (2043/21 002 individuals; 95% CI, 9.0% to 13.7%, I2 = 95.8%). Summary prevalence estimates ranged across assessment modalities from 7.4% to 24.2%. In this systematic review, the summary estimate of the prevalence of depression or depressive symptoms among medical students was 27.2% and that of suicidal ideation was 11.1%. Further research is needed to identify strategies for preventing and treating these disorders in this population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,615 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,564 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 2554 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 465 18%
Student > Master 214 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 210 8%
Researcher 162 6%
Student > Postgraduate 131 5%
Other 467 18%
Unknown 915 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 913 36%
Psychology 230 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 88 3%
Social Sciences 54 2%
Neuroscience 54 2%
Other 240 9%
Unknown 985 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2022. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2024.
All research outputs
#4,600
of 25,782,917 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#147
of 36,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57
of 422,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#5
of 417 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 417 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.