Abstract
The increasing visibility of mental health challenges for academic and graduate trainee populations has led to discussion of the role higher education institutions should play to address trainee mental health, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing racial injustice. To address the growing concern about training impacts on medical and biomedical doctoral trainee mental health, a cross-sectional study (n=957) was conducted using institutional annual survey data analyzed by type of training program, race/ethnicity, and survey year on measures of depression, anxiety, hazardous alcohol use, problems related to substance use, and suicidal ideation. Results indicated significant differences for rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation, with biomedical doctoral trainees showing greater incidence than medical doctoral trainees, and underrepresented minority trainees showing greater incidence than well-represented trainees. The concerningly high rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation among these trainee populations suggest that medical and biomedical doctoral training environments must be transformed in addition to expanding mental health support resources.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Salary support for this work for RLL and AS were partially provided through the National Institute of General Medical Sciences Science of Science Policy Approach to Analyzing and Innovating the Biomedical Research Enterprise SCISIPBIO Award - 1R01GM140282. RLL salary support during data collection was additionally provided through the National Institutes of Health Common Fund Directors Biomedical Research Workforce Innovation Broadening Experiences in Scientific Training BEST Award - DP7OD020317. The funders did not have any part in study design nor does this work represent the view of the National Institutes of Health.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (UNC IRB #18-0112) as exempt survey-based research (Category #2).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos