Abstract
Background Academic pressure is a potential contributor to adolescent mental health problems, but international evidence on this association has never been synthesised.
Methods We conducted the first systematic review on the association between academic pressure and adolescent depression, anxiety, self-harm, suicidality, suicide attempts and suicide. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC and Web of Science (core collection) up to November 24, 2022, for studies of school-going children or adolescents, which measured academic pressure or timing within the school year as the exposure and depression, anxiety, self-harm, or suicidal ideation, attempts or suicide as outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. We used narrative synthesis to summarise the evidence. The review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021232702).
Results We included 52 studies primarily from Asia (n=26) and Europe (n=20). Most studies assessed mixed anxiety and depressive symptoms (n=20) or depressive symptoms (n=19). Forty-eight studies found evidence of a positive association between academic pressure or timing within the school year and at least one mental health outcome.
Limitations Most studies were cross-sectional (n=39), adjusted for a narrow range of confounders or had other limitations which limited the strength of causal inferences.
Conclusions We found evidence that academic pressure is a potential candidate for public health interventions which could prevent adolescent mental health problems. Large population-based cohort studies are needed to investigate whether academic pressure is a causal risk factor that should be targeted in school- and policy-based interventions.
Funding UCL Health of the Public; Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund.
Introduction
Depression and anxiety are the two most common mental health problems, and they often begin during adolescence (Solmi et al., 2021). Non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH) is also common among adolescents and often occurs alongside depression and anxiety (Lundh et al., 2011). Together, these mental health problems are leading risk factors for suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide (Castellví et al., 2017; Gili et al., 2019).
In many countries, including the UK, there is evidence that rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicide are rising among adolescents(Kõlves and de Leo, 2016; Rodway et al., 2020; Sadler et al., 2018). This rise was apparent before the COVID-19 pandemic which has led to a further increase in depressive symptoms among adolescents (Mansfield et al., 2022). Identifying modifiable risk factors for these mental health problems could inform public health interventions to reduce their rising incidence. Schools are a potential setting for public health interventions that would reach most adolescents. There is some evidence that school-based interventions improve mental health, but many are unsuccessful,(Bonell et al., 2018; Shinde et al., 2018; Šouláková et al., 2019; Weare and Nind, 2011) and we need a better understanding of which risk factors to target.
One common source of stress for adolescents is academic pressure. There is evidence that levels of academic pressure have risen among adolescents in recent decades (Löfstedt et al., 2020). In two large surveys (Fildes et al., 2014; YoungMinds, 2019) adolescents cited academic pressure as one of the top influences on their mental health. In a large study of adolescent suicides in the UK, academic pressure was one of the most reported antecedents in coroner investigations (Rodway et al., 2020).
There is also evidence that teachers and parents are concerned about rising levels of academic pressure and the potential association with adolescent mental health problems (National Education Union, 2019, 2018). Academic pressure is likely to be a broad and multifaceted construct, and there is no generally used definition. Consistent with existing studies, our Patient and Public Involvement work with adolescents and teachers has suggested that academic pressure can be defined as fear of failure, concerns about the future, chronic stress about workload and exams, worries about parental expectations, and competition with peers for grades (Shahmohammadi, 2011; Sun et al., 2011). Academic pressure can therefore be distinguished from transient experiences of test/exam anxiety, which resolve during the short-term. Our PPI work also suggested that academic pressure is influenced by individuals, schools, families, policy, and society. If academic pressure is a potential causal risk factor for adolescent mental health problems, it could be modified through interventions aimed at each of these levels, including universal whole-school approaches.
One meta-analysis of psychosocial risk factors for mental health problems among secondary school students in China found that higher levels of academic pressure were associated with increased depressive symptoms (Tang et al., 2020). However, this study only investigated depressive symptoms and the findings are unlikely to generalise to other countries due to vast differences in educational systems.
To our knowledge, no study has synthesised evidence on the association between academic pressure and a broad range of adolescent mental health outcomes across countries. We conducted the first systematic review investigating the association between academic pressure and adolescent depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicide.
Methods
This systematic literature review was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines (Page et al., 2021) The protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021232702.
Eligibility criteria
We included studies published in English that met the following criteria: Participants:
Children and adolescents attending primary or secondary schools, academies, and sixth-form colleges or their international equivalents. We included state, independent or special educational needs schools. Studies were included if the mean age of the sample was younger than 18 years old (the typical end of school age across many countries).
Exposures
We included studies reporting any measure of academic pressure or academic stress. We included studies that measured single or multiple components of academic pressure. Studies were included if they used timing within the year as exposures (considered to be a proxy measure of academic pressure). We excluded studies that only considered test anxiety, as we assumed that this referred to transient anxiety experienced during evaluative testing only, rather than prolonged concerns and stress regarding academic performance or demands linked to the academic pressures of school (Zeidner, 2020).
Outcomes
We included studies that reported at least one of the following as outcomes: depression, anxiety, mixed anxiety and depression, NSSH, suicide attempts, suicidal ideation (thoughts or plans), and suicide. Studies were included if these outcomes were ascertained from validated scales, clinical diagnoses, mental health service use or official records, and were self-reported by the adolescent or reported by teachers, parents or clinicians.
Search strategy
We searched four electronic databases: Medline (OVID) (between 1946 and Feb 19, 2021), PsycINFO (OVID) (between 1806 and Feb 19, 2021), ERIC (ProQuest) (between 1966 and Feb 19, 2021) and Web of Science Core Collection (between 1900 and Feb 19, 2021). We used a combination of keyword and subject heading searches. Full search terms are available in the appendix. There were no limits on publication date.
We supplemented the search strategy with a backwards reference search of included studies, and a forward citation search using Web of Science Core Collection (carried out by TS on 10th June 2021). We ran an updated search of the four electronic databases (on 24th November 2022) to identify eligible studies published since the original search.
Study selection
Titles and abstracts were screened against eligibility criteria using the Rayyan systematic review web application (Ouzzani et al., 2016). TS screened all titles and abstracts, and CGM independently screened 10%. A third senior author (GL) independently resolved disagreements.
TS screened all papers at full text and CGM double-screened 50. GL resolved disagreements at this stage.
During full-text screening, published measures of academic pressure were inspected, when available, to ascertain whether scales and items were consistent with our definition and therefore met our inclusion criteria. We contacted the corresponding authors of seven studies via email for additional information about their measure of academic pressure. None responded, and no follow-up emails were sent. Four academic pressure scales were sent to translators so the items could be assessed in English.
Data extraction
Data were extracted by TS using an Excel-based form. We extracted citation details, country, sample size, population type, study design, study setting, and the academic pressure measure used. We extracted all reported effect sizes, effect estimates and confidence intervals from analyses aiming to identify the association between academic pressure and each mental health outcome. To check for accuracy CGM extracted data from 10 included papers. GL resolved 6 disagreements. We contacted the corresponding authors of two studies via email for greater clarity on the outcome data, but they did not respond and no follow-up emails were sent.
Quality assessment
Study quality was assessed by TS using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (Hong et al., 2018). The MMAT allows quality assessment of quantitative non-randomised study designs including cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies, and of quantitative descriptive studies. Quality was assessed according to sample representativeness, the appropriateness of the exposure and outcome measurements, the completeness of outcome data (we considered outcome data to be sufficiently complete if available for 80% of the sample or more), whether confounders were appropriately accounted for, and whether the exposure occurred as intended.
Data analysis
We conducted a narrative synthesis to describe and summarise the characteristics and results of the included studies. Studies were grouped according to mental health outcomes, categorised as: depression, anxiety, mixed anxiety and depression (including psychosomatic symptoms), mental health service use, NSSH, suicide attempt, suicidal ideation and suicide. Extracted study data from each outcome group was tabulated to aid the synthesis. We did not group by school type as initially planned because we identified no studies with samples solely from primary schools. We reported unadjusted and adjusted effect estimates from each study. We synthesised measures of academic pressure according to the type of scale (specific academic pressure measures, subscales from broader scales, and single items).
Narrative synthesis was led by TS with regular discussion with the research team. We did not conduct a meta-analysis due to the diversity of study designs and measures of academic pressure and mental health outcomes used across studies, limiting the ability to produce meaningful summary estimates of effect (Campbell et al., 2020).
Results
The PRISMA flow diagram is displayed in Figure 1. We identified 13,020 records from our database searches. Following removal of duplicates, we screened 9,898 papers at title and abstract level, and 106 papers at full text. GL resolved 11 disagreements at title and abstract screening, and 5 at full-text screening. After full-text screening of 89 papers, we included 25 articles reporting on 24 original studies. Seventeen full-text articles could not be retrieved or were published in a language other than English. Backwards and forwards citation searching of included studies yielded 19 extra studies. Two studies that did not appear in the database or citation searches were also included by the review team. The update search identified 1,609 studies. Twenty-seven full texts were screened, and eight articles reporting on seven original studies met eligibility criteria. Backwards and forwards citation searching of the included studies from the update search did not yield any further studies.
PRISMA flowchart of included studies.
Characteristics of the 52 included studies are displayed in Table 1. Twenty-six were conducted in Asia, 18 in Europe, five in North America, one in Australia, one across Europe and North America, and one across Europe and Australia. Studies were published between 1991 and 2022; 40 from 2010 onwards, suggesting an increased interest in this area.
Characteristics of included studies.
Most studies were cross-sectional (n=39), with 33 using data from one time-point, and six using repeated cross-sectional surveys at multiple time-points. Two cross-sectional studies used a case-control design (Jayanthi et al., 2015; Masood et al., 2018). We found three prospective cohort studies, which measured academic pressure at baseline and mental health at follow-up (follow-up ranged from one to five years) (Fu et al., 2022; Kaman et al., 2021; Torsheim et al., 2003). A further prospective cohort study investigated how mental health outcomes differed according to proximity to examinations (Locker and Cropley, 2004) We found nine longitudinal studies that used a time series design, where data were collected from mental health services or administrative records, to assess associations between mental health service use or outcomes and timing within the year (Blackburn et al., 2021; Carbone et al., 2019; Hansen and Lang, 2011; Hawton et al., 2003; Lahti et al., 2007; Matsubayashi et al., 2016; McCleary et al., 1991; Slaunwhite et al., 2019; Spiller et al., 2020). Sample sizes were generally large, with 34 studies containing over 1,000 participants. The sample sizes for (a) cross-sectional and repeated cross-sectional, (b) case-control (c) prospective cohort, and (d) time-series designs ranged from 190 to 915,054; 200 to 1,120; 632 to 6,566; and 25 to 922,930 respectively.
Thirty-three studies sampled from secondary schools, three from both primary and secondary schools, and 16 studies did not state the school type. Across studies, the mean age of participants ranged from 11.5 to 16.8. Academic pressure was measured using a scale or sub-scale in 29 studies, and with a single item in 13 studies. Ten studies used timing within the year or proximity to examinations as the exposure.
Risk of bias
The risk of bias varied across different domains of the MMAT (Table S1; appendix pp 14-15). Thirty-two studies were identified as having a sample representative of the target population. Nineteen studies provided insufficient detail on the target population, inclusion criteria and reasons for non-participation to be rated. Thirty-one studies were rated as using appropriate measures. Twenty-one studies were rated low in quality as we were unable to find evidence of the development or validation of the academic pressure measure. Twenty-two studies reported complete outcome data, with 28 providing no details on missing data or attrition. Only two studies reported that outcome data were obtained from fewer than 80% of participants. Twenty-eight studies were judged to sufficiently account for confounders. All studies were rated as academic pressure occurring as expected. Overall, nine included studies were not rated as at risk of bias across all the MMAT domains.
Academic pressure measures
Twenty-seven different single-items or scales were used to measure academic pressure, all self-reported by students (Table S2; appendix pp 16-20). Measures varied in the aspects of academic pressure assessed, but most used items on stress or pressure from school, schoolwork, exams, or parents. Only a few measures assessed other aspects of academic pressure, such as concerns about future prospects following school, school failure, and competitiveness with peers or siblings.
We found 16 scales specifically developed to assess academic pressure, used in 22 studies. We found evidence of sufficient item development, scale development, and validation in independent samples for four scales (Boateng et al., 2018). The Academic Expectations Stress Inventory (AESI) is a 9-item scale that measures academic stress owing to expectations from parents, teachers, and the self (Ang and Huan, 2006b). The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity in samples of adolescents attending secondary schools in Singapore, and was used in two studies (Ang and Huan, 2006a; Huang and Chen, 2015). The most common measure was the Educational Stress Scale for Adolescents (ESSA) (n=5) (Sun et al., 2011). The ESSA uses adapted items from the AESI to assess academic stress across five domains: pressure from study, workload, worry about grades, self-expectation, and despondency. The ESSA was originally tested and developed in a large sample of Chinese adolescents and has demonstrated acceptable reliability and internal consistency. We found two Chinese scales that assessed academic stress through the imbalance of effort and reward in school or learning (Effort-Reward Imbalance for Learning Scale; Effort–Reward Imbalance at School), both showing acceptable validity and reliability (Fukuda et al., 2010; Li et al., 2010).
The High Parental Expectations (HPE) four-item scale, developed in a study of American students at high and middle schools, was used in one study (Ma et al., 2018). The HPE scale assesses perceived parental pressure towards academic achievement and attainment and displayed good internal consistency in the original study (Fuligni, 1997). We found no evidence of scale development or validation.
Other measures of academic pressure included scales developed specifically for the study they were used in (Chyu and Chen, 2022; Deb et al., 2015b; Eriksson and Sellström, 2010; Fu et al., 2022; Haugan et al., 2021; Hodge et al., 1997; Jiang et al., 2021; Li et al., 2022; Lönnfjord and Hagquist, 2021; Sun and Hui, 2007; Torsheim et al., 2003; Torsheim and Wold, 2001). We were unable to identify evidence of development of these measures. In comparison to the validated scales these typically featured fewer items and a narrow focus on single aspects of academic pressure such as schoolwork pressure or examination expectations.
We found five academic pressure subscales within broader measures of adolescent stress, which were used in seven studies. These subscales included “Study Pressure” from the Adolescent Self-Rating Life Events Checklist (n=2) (Liu et al., 1997), “School Performance” from the Norwegian version of the Adolescent Stress Questionnaire (n=2) (Moksnes et al., 2010), “Academic-related stressors” from the Secondary School Stressor Questionnaire (n=1) (Yusoff, 2011) “Academic Pressure stressors” from the Inventory of Parental Influence (n=1)(Campbell, 1994), and “Future Concerns”, “Academic Competition”, and “Stress of Parent Involvement” from the Iranian Adolescents Academic Stress Questionnaire (n=1) (Hosseinkhani et al., 2020b).
We identified seven single item measures used in 13 studies, which assessed level of pressure or stress from exams, parents, schoolwork, teachers, or school.
Narrative synthesis
Depression
Depression was the second-most common outcome, with 19 studies included (Table 2). Depression outcome measures included depressive symptoms (n=15), approximations of clinical diagnoses (n=3), and a latent construct of psychological adjustment comprising depressive symptoms, loneliness, and self-esteem (n=1) (Song et al., 2019) Sixteen cross-sectional studies reported positive associations between academic pressure and depression, with one finding no evidence of an association. In one case-control study, adolescents that met the criteria for depression reported greater levels of academic stress than controls (Jayanthi et al., 2015).
Summary of studies with depressive symptoms as the outcome.
Of the three prospective cohort studies, two found evidence of an association between academic pressure and depressive symptoms at follow-up after adjusting for depressive symptoms at baseline (Fu et al., 2022; Kaman et al., 2021). In a study of 632 German adolescents, academic pressure was positively associated with depressive symptoms at the 5-year follow-up among boys but not girls (Kaman et al., 2021). An analysis of the first two waves of the China Education Panel survey found that academic stress at baseline was positively associated with depressive symptoms at follow-up one year later (Fu et al., 2022). In a study of 520 English adolescents, there was no evidence that depressive symptoms increased as examinations approached (6 to 8 weeks before examinations compared to one week before) (Locker and Cropley, 2004).
Anxiety
Five cross-sectional studies reported anxiety outcomes (Table 3). In all cross-sectional studies, academic pressure was found to be positively associated with anxiety symptoms. In the single prospective cohort study, there was no evidence that students’ level of anxiety symptoms were associated with proximity to examinations (Locker and Cropley, 2004).
Summary of anxiety symptom outcomes.
Mixed depressive and anxiety symptoms
Mixed anxiety and depressive symptoms was the most commonly assessed outcome, with 20 studies included (Table 4). Eight cross-sectional studies reported a positive association between academic pressure and psychosomatic symptoms. In a repeated cross-sectional survey of secondary school students in Sweden, the magnitude of the association between academic pressure and psychosomatic symptoms had increased in recent years (Högberg et al., 2020) Compared with adolescents in 1993, school-related stress had a stronger positive association with psychosomatic symptoms among adolescents in 2017. In the single longitudinal study (of 767 Norwegian adolescents), school-related stress at baseline was found to be positively associated with psychosomatic symptoms at 6- and 12-month follow-ups (Torsheim et al., 2003).
Summary of mixed anxiety and depressive symptoms outcomes.
A further 10 studies reported a positive association between academic pressure and mixed anxiety and depressive symptoms, measured as mental or psychological distress (n=3), psychological health complaints (n=2), emotional problems (n=2), mental health symptoms (n=2), and depressive and anxiety symptoms (n=1). One study found no association between stress from examination expectations and psychological distress (Hodge et al., 1997).
Service use
In a study of Canadian adolescents, mental health-related hospital admissions were found to be highest from January to April, and in October and November and lowest during periods of school closure in July, August and December (Slaunwhite et al., 2019). In a study of stress-related emergency hospital admissions in England, admissions were highest for adolescents during term-time and lowest during school holidays (Blackburn et al., 2021).
Non-suicidal self-harm
We found only one single study that measured NSSH (Table 5). In the time-series study of 1,583 adolescents there was evidence that presentations to hospitals in Oxford (UK) for NSSH varied across the year (Hawton et al., 2003). Presentations were lowest during summer and winter school closures (July to September and December). These findings suggest a possible role for school-based stressors although academic pressure cannot be distinguished from other stressors such as bullying. We found no studies that directly assessed the association between academic pressure and non-suicidal self-injury.
Summary of service use, NSSH, suicide attempts, suicidal ideation and suicide outcomes.
Suicidal ideation
We found five cross-sectional studies that measured suicidal ideation, all finding an association between academic pressure and suicidal ideation (Table 5). Three studies assessed current suicidal ideation. In a study of 200 adolescents from Pakistan, suicidal ideation was positively associated with adolescents’ worries about grades, but there was no evidence of an association with study-related pressure, despondency, self-expectation or level of workload (Masood et al., 2018). Two studies assessed suicidal ideation over the past 6-or 12-months, both finding that academic pressure was associated with suicidal ideation (Shang et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2019).
Suicide attempts
Suicide attempts in adolescents were rarer during non-school months of June, July, and August in two US studies assessing the rate of hospital admissions for suicide attempt across the year (Carbone et al., 2019; Spiller et al., 2020).
Suicide
Four studies assessed suicide according to timing within the year. Two studies in the US found adolescent suicide rates were lowest in periods of school closure in the summer and winter (Hansen and Lang, 2011; McCleary et al., 1991) In Japan, suicides also followed a trend where rates were lowest during school closures, and highest at the start of each academic term (Matsubayashi et al., 2016). In a Finnish study of suicides by shooting, a peak was observed in Autumn and there was no clear reduction in suicides during school holidays or examination periods (Lahti et al., 2007).
Discussion
We found 52 studies investigating the association between academic pressure, or timing within the school year, and mental health outcomes. These studies were from a range of countries, suggesting international concern about the potential mental health consequences of academic pressure. Generally, we found evidence of a positive association between academic pressure and adolescent mental health problems. Of the 52 studies included, 48 found evidence of a positive association with at least one mental health outcome. Most studies assessed mixed anxiety and depression as the outcome, with 19 of the 20 studies finding evidence of a positive association. Positive associations between measures of academic pressure and the mental health outcome of interest were found in 17 of the 19 studies investigating depressive symptoms, five of the six studies investigating anxiety symptoms, and in four of the five studies assessing suicidal ideation. All but one of the nine studies investigating timing with the school year found that suicides, suicide attempts, mental health-related hospital presentations, and non-suicidal self-injury were lowest during periods of school closure, suggesting a potential association with academic pressure within term time.
Most studies used representative samples, and most were relatively large (35 studies had a sample of over 1,000 participants). However, most studies were cross-sectional. This precludes conclusions about the direction of associations as academic pressure may have followed mental health problems. Adolescents with pre-existing mental health problems may be more prone to negative beliefs about school and failure and report higher levels of academic pressure. Many studies insufficiently accounted for variables that might confound associations between academic pressure and mental health. Measures of academic pressure varied in the items they were assessing, and in some cases, measures were single items or unvalidated. We found no studies with samples exclusively from primary schools. This is probably because academic pressure and the risk of mental health problems is higher in older age groups (Solmi et al., 2021; Wuthrich et al., 2020). There were also few studies from low- and lower-middle-income countries. No studies investigated demographic or contextual factors which might modify associations, such as socioeconomic status, area-level deprivation, or the fee-paying status of the school.
Longitudinal studies are needed, to investigate whether academic pressure precedes mental health problems and is a potentially causal hence targetable risk factor. We found three prospective cohort studies that investigated associations between academic pressure and future mental health, after adjusting for baseline mental health (Fu et al., 2022; Kaman et al., 2021; Torsheim et al., 2003). Each found evidence of an association between academic pressure and mental health at follow-up, suggesting potential causal associations. However, these studies had limitations. Adjustment for potential confounders was limited and associations could be explained by unmeasured variables, such as educational attainment or family history of mental health problems. Two of the samples were relatively small compared with other studies in the review (Kaman et al., 2021; Torsheim et al., 2003). Neither study used measures of academic pressure which had evidence of scale development and testing, so measures may not be valid.
Longitudinal studies of timing within the school year focused on suicide, presentations to hospital emergency departments and admissions to mental health hospitals, and tended to consistently show that mental health problems were lowest during school holidays. This suggests that cases of severe adolescent mental health problems are fewer during periods when academic pressure is likely to be lower. However, we cannot rule out other school-related stressors which might explain this association, such as bullying. These were also likely to have included a small number of adolescents not attending school. We did not find any studies reporting the association between timing within the school year with more common adolescent mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, or with primary care service use where the vast majority of young people present to.
Measures varied in terms of the aspects of academic pressure assessed, whether they were scales or single items. Only a few studies used a measure which had undergone any previous validation. Despite the significant interest in academic pressure, it often remains poorly measured and there appears to be little consensus regarding which are the key contributing constructs. However, findings were generally consistent across measures, indicating that different aspects of academic pressure are associated with adolescent mental health outcomes. Future studies should use scales that measure a broad range of academic pressure domains, but existing scales may need to be adapted to specific countries, cultures, and schooling systems.
Our systematic review has several limitations. The term academic pressure is often used inconsistently across studies (Kaynak et al., 2021). We searched four major databases, carried out forwards and backwards citation searching, and included a broad range of search terms to improve our search strategy. However, it is possible that we missed studies. Due to the diversity of study design and measurement, we were unable to conduct a meta-analysis.
There are concerns about potentially rising levels of academic pressure and the potential impact this may have on adolescent mental health problems. Academic pressure is potentially common and could be modified using whole-school interventions or through longer-term changes to policy. Our findings suggest that academic pressure is a promising potential candidate among modifiable risk factors for adolescent mental health problems. Large-scale longitudinal studies of this topic therefore seem warranted. These studies should adjust for a broad range of confounders and/or use advanced methods of causal inference. If this association is causal, modifying academic pressure through interventions at an individual, school or policy-level could reduce the rising incidence of adolescent mental health problems.
Declaration of Interest
None.
Funding
Research funded by UCL Health of the Public small grants scheme and the Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund (ISSF).
Author Contribution
GL, AS & TS designed the study. TS did the search, data extraction, quality assessment, and wrote the paper. GL & CGM contributed to the search and data extraction. TS led the narrative synthesis with input from GL, CGM & AS. All authors contributed to consecutive drafts and approved the final manuscript.
Data Availability
All data within this systematic review was extracted from published studies and does not include any individual participant data.
Acknowledgments
We thank Wenqianglong Li (Ayden Lee) and Jane Hahn for their translation of academic pressure scales.
References
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos