Cited by 48

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nationwide assessment of the mental health of UK Doctoral Researchers

Hazell, Cassie M., Niven, Jeremy E., Chapman, Laura, Roberts, Paul E., Cartwright-Hatton, Sam, Valeix, Sophie, Berry, Clio·2021·Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Abstract

Doctoral Researchers (DRs) are an important part of the academic community and, after graduating, make substantial social and economic contributions. Despite this importance, DR wellbeing has long been of concern. Recent studies have concluded that DRs may be particularly vulnerable to mental health problems, yet direct comparisons of the prevalence of mental health problems between this population and control groups are lacking. Here, by comparing DRs with educated working controls, we show that DRs report significantly greater anxiety and depression, and that this difference is not explained by a higher rate of pre-existing mental health problems. Moreover, most DRs perceive poor mental health as a ‘normal’ part of the PhD process. Thus, our findings suggest a hazardous impact of PhD study on mental health, with DRs being particularly at risk of developing common mental health problems. This provides an evidence-based mandate for universities and funders to reflect upon practices related to DR training and mental health. Our attention should now be directed towards understanding what factors may explain heightened anxiety and depression among DRs so as to inform preventative measures and interventions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/s41599-021-00983-8

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 CONSORT diagram of sample sizes and reasons that data was removed. Note: Complete data here is classed as any participant where they provided some level of demographic data and complete data for at least one of the clinical outcome measures. WP working professionals, DR doctoral researchers.
Fig. 1 CONSORT diagram of sample sizes and reasons that data was removed. Note: Complete data here is classed as any participant where they provided some level of demographic data and complete data for at least one of the clinical outcome measures. WP working professionals, DR doctoral researchers.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Altman EG, Hedeker D, Peterson JL, Davis JM (1997) The Altman self-rating Mania scale. Biol Psychiatry 42:948–955. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3223(96)00548-3 · DOI
  2. Berry C, Niven J, Hazell C (2021) Personal, social and relational predictors of UK postgraduate researcher mental health problems. BJPsych Open, 7:E205. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2021.1041 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Casey BH (2009) The economic contribution of PhDs. J High Educ Policy Manag 31:219–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600800902974294 · DOI
  4. Castaneda AE, Tuulio-Henriksson A, Marttunen M et al. (2008) A review on cognitive impairments in depressive and anxiety disorders with a focus on young adults. J Affect Disord 106:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2007.06.006 · DOI
  5. Castillejos MC, Huertas P, Martín P, Moreno Küstner B (2020) Prevalence of suicidality in the european general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Suicide Res 0:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2020.1765928 · DOI
  6. Goldberg DP (1972) The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. Maudsley Monogr 21: Oxford University Press
  7. Hankins M (2008a) Clinical Practice and Epidemiology Executive function abnormalities in pathological gamblers. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health 6:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-0179-4-Received · DOI
  8. Hankins M (2008b) The reliability of the twelve-item general health questionnaire (GHQ-12) under realistic assumptions. BMC Public Health 8:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-355 · DOI
  9. Hazell CM, Chapman L, Valeix SF et al. (2020) Understanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Syst Rev 9:1–30 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Henderson C, Evans-Lacko S, Flach C, Thornicroft G (2012) Responses to mental health stigma questions: the importance of social desirability and data collection method. Can J Psychiatry 57:152–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371205700304 · DOI
  11. Kehm BM (2006) Doctoral education in Europe and North America: a comparative analysis. In: Teichler U (ed) The formative years of scholars. Wenner-Gren International Series. Portland Press, London, UK, pp. 67–78
  12. Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O et al. (2005) Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62:593–602. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.593 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Kessler RC, Üstün BB (2004) The World Mental Health (WMH) Survey Initiative version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Int. J. Methods Psychiatr. Res. 13:93–117 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Metcalfe J, Wilson S, Levecque K (2018) Exploring wellbeing and mental health and associated support services for postgraduate researchers. Cambridge
  15. Nature (2019a) The mental health of PhD researchers demands urgent attention. Nature 575:257–258. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03489-1 · DOI
  16. Nature (2019b) Academia’s mental-health woes. Nature 569:307
  17. Osman A, Bagge CL, Gutierrez PM et al. (2001b) The Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R): validation with clinical and nonclinical samples. Assessment 8:443–454 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Polatöz Ö, Kuğu N, Doğan O, Akyüz G (2011) The prevalence of suicidal behaviour and its correlation with certain sociodemographic variables in Sivas province. Dusunen Adam J Psychiatry Neurol Sci 24:13–23. https://doi.org/10.5350/dajpn2011240102 · DOI
  19. Rock PL, Roiser JP, Riedel WJ, Blackwell AD (2014) Cognitive impairment in depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med 44:2029–2040. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291713002535 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Shackman AJ, Sarinopoulos I, Maxwell JS et al. (2006) Anxiety selectively disrupts visuospatial working memory. Emotion 6:40–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.6.1.40 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Shields GS, Moons WG, Tewell CA, Yonelineas AP (2016) Anxiety not anger impairs executive functionioning. Emotion 16:792–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.antiviral.2015.06.014.Chronic · DOI
  22. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW et al. (2006) A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder. Arch Intern Med 166:1092. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Group PHQPCS (1999) Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ Primary Care Study. JAMA 282:1737. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.18.1737 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Woolston C (2019) PhD poll reveals fear and joy, contentment and anguish. Nature 575:403–406. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03459-7 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Woolston C (2020) Pandemic and panic for US graduate students. Nature 585:147–148. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02439-6 · DOI
  26. Ye S (2009) Factor structure of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): The role of wording effects. Pers Individ Dif 46:197–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.027 · DOI
  27. Zhang XC, Kuchinke L, Woud ML et al. (2017) Survey method matters: online/offline questionnaires and face-to-face or telephone interviews differ. Comput Hum Behav 71:172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.006 · DOI
  28. Zolas N, Goldschlag N, Jarmin R et al. (2015) Wrapping it up in a person: examining employment and earnings outcomes for Ph.D. recipients. Science (80–) 350:1367–1371. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac5949 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Hazell, C. M., Niven, J. E., Chapman, L., Roberts, P. E., Cartwright-Hatton, S., Valeix, S., & Berry, C.
Venue
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Published
2021-12-09
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2662-9992
Cited by
48
References
6
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review