Prevalence and Correlates of Likely Major Depressive Disorder among Medical Students in Alberta, Canada

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Sep 13;19(18):11496. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191811496.

Abstract

Background: Medical students are exposed to multiple factors during their academic and clinical studies that contribute to depression.

Aims: This study aims to examine the prevalence and correlates of likely major depressive disorder (MDD) among medical students.

Methods: This study utilized a descriptive cross-sectional design. Data were collected through a self-administered online survey, which included questions on sociodemographic characteristics and likely MDD using the PHQ-9. Data were analyzed using a descriptive, Chi-square test and logistic regression model.

Results: There were 246 medical students who participated in the survey. The majority were females, 155 (65.1%); Caucasian, 158 (66.4%); and in a relationship, 168 (70.5%). The prevalence of likely MDD was 29.1%. Respondents who did not feel supported and respondents who were neutral about their social support, friends, and family, were 11 and 4 times more likely to experience MDD than those who felt well supported (OR = 11.14; 95% CI: 1.14-108.80) and (OR = 4.65; 95% CI: 1.10-19.56), respectively.

Conclusions: This study suggests a high prevalence of likely MDD among medical students who do not feel they have sufficient social support from friends and family. Social adjustments, including talking to friends and family and participating in leisure activities, could reduce the level of depression among medical students.

Keywords: major depressive disorder; medical students; prevalence; social support.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Alberta / epidemiology
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Depression / epidemiology
  • Depressive Disorder, Major* / epidemiology
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Prevalence
  • Students, Medical*

Grants and funding

This study was supported by grants from the Mental Health Foundation and Douglas Harding Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, collection, management, analysis, interpretation of the data; preparation, review, and approval of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the results for publication.