Skip to main content
PMC home page
SAGE - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to SAGE - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2022 Sep 21:00332941221127632. doi: 10.1177/00332941221127632

The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Italy

Sara Carletto 1,†,✉, Giuseppina Lo Moro 2,†, Vittoria Zuccaroli Lavista 3, Giovanna Soro 4, Roberta Siliquini 5, Fabrizio Bert 6, Paolo Leombruni 7
PMCID: PMC9500427  PMID: 36130951

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of the prevalence of anxiety, depression and stress symptoms in Italian medical students and to identify the associated factors.

Design and Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was administered to second-sixth year medical students of the University of Torino, collecting data on the students’ sociodemographics, COVID-19 exposure, anxiety, depression and stress symptoms. Three hierarchical regressions adjusted for age, gender and year of study were executed.

Results: The sample size was 1359. The prevalence of anxiety, depression symptoms, moderate perceived stress and severe perceived stress was 47.8%, 52.1%, 56.2% and 28.4%, respectively. The factors associated with mental health symptoms were: being a woman, a family history of psychiatric disorders, living off-site, competitive/hostile climates and unsatisfying friendships among classmates, poor relationships with cohabitants, negative judgment of medical school choice, fear of COVID-19 infection, feelings of loneliness, distressing existential reflections, and a worsening psychological condition related to the pandemic. Being in the fourth or sixth year constituted a protective factor for depression symptoms.

Conclusions: Mental health in medical students was associated with both COVID-independent and COVID-related factors. Accessibility to effective interventions must be increased to counteract these changes.

Keywords: medical students, COVID-19 pandemic, mental health, anxiety, depression, stress

Introduction

In March 2020, the World Health Organization (World Health Organization, 2020) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, causing unprecedented changes to all aspects of public, economic and social life. Research has highlighted the significant impact of the measures taken to restrict the virus’s spread (lockdowns, quarantines and social distancing) on mental health, with anxiety, depression and stress increased in both the general population (Brooks et al., 2020; Bueno-Notivol et al., 2021; Rossi et al., 2020; Salari et al., 2020; Vindegaard & Benros, 2020; Xiong et al., 2020) and healthcare workers (Cénat et al., 2021; Li et al., 2021; Marvaldi et al., 2021; Pappa et al., 2020). The mental health of medical students has also been impacted by the restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic (Lasheras et al., 2020; Rose, 2020). Medical students are already considered a vulnerable population in terms of psychological well-being due to higher rates of anxiety, depression and stress symptoms compared with age-matched peers as well as the general population (Dyrbye et al., 2006; Maser et al., 2019; Rotenstein et al., 2016).

The COVID-19 pandemic has required university students to face new challenges caused by disruptions to their education, putting them at a heightened risk of mental health issues (Araújo et al., 2020; Komer, 2020; Zhai & Du, 2020). Universities were closed during the first wave of the pandemic, and in the case of medical students clinical rotations were indefinitely suspended and education continued through online lectures only. These actions were taken to prevent the spread of the virus, but were not without their consequences on the students’ psychological wellbeing (Akers et al., 2020; Dedeilia et al., 2020; Harries et al., 2021).

Contemporaneously, students were exposed to other life stressors related to the pandemic, such as grief due to the loss of loved ones, fear about COVID-19 infection for themselves and their family, financial insecurity and uncertainty about their futures (Araújo et al., 2020; Cao et al., 2020; Lyons et al., 2020; Mertens et al., 2020; Mortazavi et al., 2020; O’Byrne et al., 2021). Moreover, the transition to online learning exacerbated social isolation (Akers et al., 2020; Meo et al., 2020; Rose, 2020; Usher et al., 2020), which may have increased anxiety and depression (Brooks et al., 2020; Hossain et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2017).

Review studies investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among medical students are divergent in their findings, probably reflecting the small number of studies involved. One meta-analysis (Lasheras et al., 2020) showed no change in the prevalence of anxiety in medical students, but found symptoms to correlate with several specific COVID-related stressors. The authors suggest that students’ knowledge about the virus, high levels of resilience, a reduction in the academic load and increased perceived support within the family may have played a protective role with respect to anxiety symptoms (Lasheras et al., 2020). Similar findings were found by Magklara and collaborators (Magklara et al., 2021), who report that only a minority of medical students had to deal with stress/anxiety and depression (13% and 26.1%, respectively), although it also revealed that almost 60% of students feared infection, for themselves and their family. On the other hand, the analysis by Mittal and colleagues (Mittal et al., 2021) found an increase in medical students’ anxiety and depression related to disruptions in their education and daily lives.

Few studies have addressed psychological distress in Italian medical students. Studies performed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic showed high rates of depression, anxiety and stress among medical students, but with conflicting results regarding the associated factors (Bert et al., 2020; Bertani et al., 2020; Carletto et al., 2021; Messina et al., 2016; Pighi et al., 2018; Volpe et al., 2019). To the best of our knowledge, the present is the first study to investigate the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of medical students in Italy, which was one of the first European countries severely affected by the pandemic and the first European country to enter a nationwide lockdown in March 2020.

The aims of the present study are: a) to investigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the prevalence and severity of anxiety, depression and stress in medical students within an Italian context; b) to identify the risk and protective factors that impact mental health in medical students the most.

Materials and Methods

Study Design and Participants

All students attending the second through to the sixth year of the School of Medicine at the University of Turin (Italy) (n = 2403) received an email, sent to their institutional email address, inviting them to participate in electronic survey, which was set on the Limesurvey (https://www.limesurvey.org/) platform. Data were collected from December 2020 to February 2021.

Exclusion criteria were: being in the first year of study, or failing to complete any of the questionnaire sections regarding mental health outcomes (i.e., anxiety, depression, perceived stress).

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the University of Turin Bioethics Committee, Italy (Protocol no. 492685, dated December 4th, 2020). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Participation was anonymous, voluntary and without compensation.

Instruments

The online survey was partially based on that developed in the multicentric study entitled “Psychosocial Report in Italian Medical Students (PRIMES)”, which investigated depressive symptoms and perceived stress among medical students prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (Bert et al., 2020; Leombruni et al., 2022). As explained by the authors (Bert et al., 2020; Leombruni et al., 2022), the questionnaire used in PRIMES was developed by the researchers after a detailed study of the literature on depression and stress-related factors in medical students. Overall, the prevalence of depressive symptoms, moderate perceived stress and high perceived stress was 29.5%, 55.2% and 16.9%, respectively. The variables found to be associated with depressive symptoms or stress in PRIMES were age, gender, sexual orientation, relationship status, living condition, being an off-site student, family cohesion, economic status, a family history of psychiatric disorders, judgment about school choice, friendships with classmates and the climate among classmates (Bert et al., 2020; Leombruni et al., 2022). Therefore, these items were considered in the present survey.

In 2020, a patient and public involvement (PPI) framework was then applied to modify and update the survey questions according to the specific context. The process involved a focus group made up of medical students from the University of Turin and the study’s researchers.

The online survey consisted of four parts. The first three sections were developed by the researchers mainly based on a study of the literature and on the outcomes of the focus group. Overall, the items were multiple-choice questions. The fourth section consisted of three validated tools. The first part collected sociodemographic information (gender, age, sexual orientation, nationality, year of study, economic status and living condition before and during lockdown) and data about other factors that might influence their mental health (family and personal history of psychiatric illness, degree of cohesion in the family unit, economic conditions, and the degree of satisfaction with the experience of being a medical student before and after the pandemic). Participants were also asked whether they or their loved ones had tested positive for COVID-19, whether they were afraid of contagion (fear for their own health and the health of loved ones), and whether they or their loved ones had health conditions at a higher risk for COVID-19 consequences. The second section asked about the impact of the pandemic on their lifestyles, (perceived changes in smoking habits, alcohol consumption, eating habits, physical activity, hobbies, sexual activity and sleep), on their economic situation (participants were asked if the pandemic caused economic repercussions) and on their feelings. Specifically, students were asked if they felt more loneliness during the pandemic, if they felt their psychological condition was unvaried/improved/worsened due to the pandemic, and if they had had existential reflections during the pandemic (no reflections, positive and stimulating reflections, or deeply distressing reflections). The third part concerned the impact of the pandemic on the participants’ academic careers. Students were asked to indicate the pros and cons of the changes introduced to the education process due to the pandemic and if these changes were favorable or not (5-item Likert-like scale: from totally disadvantageous to totally advantageous). In particular, their opinions on the following areas were explored: on-line lessons, on-line exams, their study practices, other on-line practices, their thesis, Erasmus project, and on-line communications. The fourth section comprised three validated self-report measures to investigate the psychological health status of the participants; they were: the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7; (Spitzer et al., 2006); the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) (Beck et al., 1996); and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) (Cohen et al., 1983) to assess anxiety, depression and perceived stress symptoms.

The GAD-7 is a self-report screening tool for assessing the presence and severity of anxiety symptoms: its total score ranges from 0 to 21, and cut-offs of 5, 10 and 15 were used to indicate mild, moderate and severe levels of anxiety, respectively (Spitzer et al., 2006). A score greater than 10, indicating probable clinical generalized anxiety disorder (Kroenke et al., 2007), was used as the binary outcome cut-off. The GAD-7 has been reported to be a reliable (Cronbach alpha of 0.92) and valid tool (Spitzer et al., 2006). In our sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.90 (95% CI 0.90–0.91).

The BDI-II is a 21-item self-report instrument used to measure the presence and severity of depressive symptoms: its total score ranges from 0 to 63, with higher scores indicating higher levels of depression. A score of 0–13 indicates no/minimal depression, 14–19 mild depression, 20–28 moderate depression, and 29–63 severe depression (Beck et al., 1996). A score greater than 13 has been used as the optimal cut-off to identify the presence of depressive symptoms (Rotenstein et al., 2016; Tam et al., 2019), and was applied here to define the second binary outcome. A review concluded the BDI-II to be a reliable (Cronbach alpha around 0.9) and valid instrument (Wang & Gorenstein, 2013). In our sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.92 (95% CI 0.91–0.93).

The PSS-10 is a 10-item self-report questionnaire that measures stress perception: its overall total score ranges from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater perceived stress (Cohen et al., 1983). The PSS score was considered as a continuous outcome since no cut-offs have been reported (Cohen & Williamson, 1988). Scores ranging from 0–13 indicate low stress, 14–26 moderate stress, and 27–40 high perceived stress (State of New Hampshire Employee Assistance Program, 1983). The PSS-10 has been reported to be a reliable (Cronbach alpha of 0.89) and valid tool for the assessment of perceived stress in university students (Roberti et al., 2006). In our sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.87 (95% CI 0.86–0.88).

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive analyses were carried out for all the independent variables and outcomes. Categorical variables were expressed as frequencies and percentages, and continuous variables as medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) since the Shapiro-Wilk test showed non-normal distributions. Chi-squared tests (Mann-Whitney U tests and Kruskal Wallis tests for continuous variables) were performed to assess differences in the distribution of the outcomes across the independent variables. A Spearman’s rho correlation table was calculated for GAD-7, BDI-II and PSS-10 scores.

Multivariable logistic regression models were used for anxiety and depression, and a multivariable linear regression model was used for perceived stress. All models were adjusted for age, gender and year of study. For each outcome, a three-step hierarchical regression approach was applied to add independent variables (Field et al., 2012). In the first model, socio-demographic items and variables that might influence mental health (Bert et al., 2020) were entered related to: family cohesion, relationship status, living condition, sexual orientation, a family history of psychiatric conditions, economic status, climate and friendships among classmates, and opinions on the choice of medical school. In the second model, pandemic-related variables were added, namely: changes in their opinion about the choice of medical school, testing positive for COVID-19, feeling vulnerable toward COVID-19, fear of COVID-19 contagion for oneself and for loved ones, and economic repercussions. In the third model, variables related to psychological aspects (feelings of loneliness during the pandemic, a changed overall psychological condition due to the COVID-19 pandemic, existential reflections related to COVID-19) and the other outcomes were added.

To produce the final models, a backward elimination method was used (a likelihood-ratio statistic greater than 0.10 was set as the main removal criterion). The results are expressed as adjusted odds ratios (adj. OR) in logistic regressions (coefficients in linear regressions) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). The analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics software version 27.0 (IBM Corp., USA), and a two-tailed p-value < .05 was considered significant. Missing values were excluded by pairwise deletion in descriptive analyses and by listwise deletion in regressions.

Results

In total, 1481 questionnaires were collected (response rate: 1481/2403 = 61.6%), of which 152 were excluded as they contained uncompleted GAD-7, BDI-II or PSS-10 sections. Of note, these 152 participants did not differ from the other students with regard to the responses provided for other sections. No missing values were found for GAD-7 and PSS-10, while three students failed to complete the BDI-II. Therefore, the final sample consisted of 1329 questionnaires for GAD-7 and PSS-10 outcomes, and 1326 for the BDI-II results.

The median age was 23 years (IQR = 21–25), and women accounted for 65.4% of the sample. The large majority were of Italian nationality (98.2%), and 57.6% declared to be involved in a relationship. Table 1 reports the general characteristics of the sample, stratified by GAD-7, BDI-II and PSS-10 scores.

Table 1.

Sample Characteristics: Overall and According to GAD-7, BDI-II and PSS scores.

Overall GAD-7 <10 GAD-7≥ 10 p BDI-II <14 BDI ≥14 p PSS pa
N = 1329 n = 694 n = 635 n = 634b n = 692b n = 1329
Age (median, IQR) 23 (21–25) 23 (4) 23 (4) .437 23 (3) 23 (4) .393 —
N(%) N(%) N(%) N(%) N(%) Median (IQR)
Gender <.001 <.001 <.001
 Women 869 (65.4) 413 (59.5) 456 (71.8) 370 (58.4) 496 (71.7) 24 (18–28)
 Men 455 (34.2) 280 (40.3) 175 (27.6) 263 (41.5) 192 (27.7) 19 (14–24)
 Non-binary 5 (0.4) 1 (0.1) 4 (0.6) 1 (0.2) 4 (0.6) 26 (23–29)
Year of course .582 .010 .632
 Second 270 (20.3) 137 (19.7) 133 (20.9) 123 (19.4) 146 (21.1) 22 (16–27)
 Third 217 (16.3) 105 (15.1) 112 (17.6) 100 (15.8) 117 (16.9) 23 (17–29)
 Fourth 201 (15.1) 106 (15.3) 95 (15.0) 108 (17.0) 93 (13.4) 23 (17–27)
 Fifth 197 (14.8) 113 (16.3) 84 (13.2) 101 (15.9) 96 (13.9) 22 (17–26)
 Sixth 221 (16.6) 114 (16.4) 107 (16.9) 117 (18.5) 103 (14.9) 22 (16–27)
 Over sixth 223 (16.8) 119 (17.1) 104 (16.4) 85 (13.4) 137 (19.8) 23 (17–27)
Nationality .544 .037 .062
 Italian 1305 (98.2) 683 (98.4) 622 (98.0) 628 (99.1) 674 (97.4) 22 (16–27)
 Other 24 (1.8) 11 (1.6) 13 (2.0) 6 (0.9) 18 (2.6) 25 (21.5–28.5)
Relationship status .506 .404 .841
 Single 563 (42.4) 300 (43.2) 263 (41.4) 261 (41.2) 301 (43.5) 23 (17–27)
 Involved 766 (57.6) 394 (56.8) 372 (58.6) 373 (58.8) 391 (56.5) 22 (16–27)
Sexual orientation .042 <.001 <.001
 Heterosexual 958 (72.1) 518 (74.7) 440 (69.6) 489 (77.1) 467 (67.9) 22 (16–27)
 LGBA 367 (27.6) 175 (25.3) 192 (30.4) 145 (22.9) 221 (32.1) 24 (18–29)
Living condition .520 .458 .563
 Alone 58 (4.4) 33 (4.8) 25 (3.9) 26 (4.1) 32 (4.6) 22.5 (17–31)
 With parents/relatives 1046 (78.7) 538 (77.5) 508 (80.0) 508 (80.1) 535 (77.3) 22 (16–27)
 With partner/housemates 225 (16.9) 123 (17.7) 102 (16.1) 100 (15.8) 125 (18.1) 23 (17–27)
Off-site studentc .699 .507 .118
 Yes 742 (55.8) 391 (56.3) 351 (55.3) 348 (54.9) 393 (56.8) 23 (17–28)
Family cohesion <.001 <.001 <.001
 Very poor/poor/excessive 208 (15.7) 84 (12.1) 124 (19.5) 64 (10.1) 143 (20.7) 25 (20–31)
 Good 547 (41.2) 267 (38.5) 280 (44.1) 249 (39.3) 298 (43.1) 23 (18–28)
 Excellent 574 (43.2) 343 (49.4) 231 (36.4) 321 (50.6) 251 (36.3) 20 (14–26)
Availability of common spaces in the housec 1253 (94.3) 665 (95.8) 588 (92.6) .013 605 (95.4) 645 (93.2) .097 22 (16–27) .005
Availability of common spaces in the house during lockdownc 1233 (92.8) 657 (94.7) 576 (90.7) .006 602 (95.0) 628 (90.8) .004 22 (16–27) <.001
Quality of relations with house cohabitants <.001 <.001 <.001
 Very poor/poor 131 (9.9) 38 (5.5) 93 (14.6) 34 (5.4) 96 (13.9) 28 (21–32)
 Good/excellent 1198 (90.1) 656 (94.5) 542 (85.4) 600 (94.6) 596 (86.1) 22 (16–27)
Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown <.001 <.001 <.001
 Very poor/poor 153 (11.5) 43 (6.2) 110 (17.3) 33 (5.2) 119 (17.2) 27 (22–31)
 Good/excellent 1176 (88.5) 651 (93.8) 525 (82.7) 601 (94.8) 573 (82.8) 22 (16–27)
First/second degree relatives with psychiatric disorderc 319 (24) 148 (21.3) 171 (26.9) .017 118 (18.6) 199 (28.8) <.001 24 (18–29) .002
Economic status .010 <.001 <.001
 Good status 1250 (94.1) 664 (95.7) 586 (92.3) 615 (97.0) 632 (91.3) 22 (16–27)
 Poor status 79 (5.9) 30 (4.3) 49 (7.7) 19 (3.0) 60 (8.7) 25 (22–30)
Working status .806 .668 .285
 Not working 962 (72.4) 500 (72.0) 462 (72.8) 455 (71.8) 504 (72.8) 23 (17–27)
 Working 367 (27.6) 194 (28.0) 173 (27.3) 179 (28.2) 188 (26.2) 22 (16–27)
Judging the choice of medical school <.001 <.001 <.001
 Positively 898 (67.6) 541 (78.0) 357 (56.2) 533 (84.1) 363 (52.5) 20 (15–25)
 Negatively/no opinion 431 (32.4) 153 (22.0) 278 (43.8) 101 (15.9) 329 (47.5) 26 (21–30)
Change of opinion about the choice of medical school after COVID-19 <.001 <.001 <.001
 No change 860 (64.7) 502 (72.3) 358 (56.4) 461 (72.7) 397 (57.4) 21 (15.25–26)
 Yes, opinion improved 175 (13.2) 98 (14.1) 77 (12.1) 107 (16.9) 67 (9.7) 20 (15–25)
 Yes, opinion worsened 294 (22.1) 94 (13.5) 200 (31.5) 66 (10.4) 228 (32.9) 26 (22–30.25)
Satisfying friendships with classmates .049 <.001 <.001
 Yes/not yet 1142 (85.9) 606 (89.8) 536 (86.2) 577 (93.4) 562 (83.1) 22 (16–27)
 No 155 (11.7) 69 (10.2) 86 (13.8) 41 (6.6) 114 (16.9) 25 (19–30)
 Missing 32 (2.4)
Climate among classmates .001 <.001 <.001
 Friendly/competitive but stimulating/no opinion 1057 (79.5) 576 (83.0) 481 (75.7) 547 (86.3) 508 (73.4) 22 (16–27)
 Competitive and hostile 272 (20.5) 118 (17.0) 154 (24.3) 87 (13.7) 184 (26.6) 25 (19–30)
Positive COVID-19 swabc 135 (10.2) 64 (9.2) 71 (11.2) .239 59 (9.3) 75 (10.8) .363 24 (16–29) .029
Positive COVID-19 swab in relative/loved onesc 767 (57.7) 405 (52.8) 362 (57.0) .657 373 (58.8) 393 (56.8) .470 23 (17–27) .393
Being vulnerable/at risk for COVID-19c 49 (3.7) 23 (3.3) 26 (4.1) .470 21 (3.3) 28 (4.0) .561 22 (16–29) .925
Relative/loved ones vulnerable/at risk for COVID-19c 1056 (79.5) 548 (79.0) 508 (80.0) .683 488 (77.0) 566 (81.8) .035 23 (17–27) .138
Fear of COVID-19 contagion for oneselfc 356 (26.8) 166 (24.0) 190 (29.9) .016 166 (26.2) 189 (27.3) .664 22 (17–27) .401
Fear of COVID-19 contagion for relative/loved onesc 1079 (81.2) 549 (72.9) 530 (83.5) .049 506 (79.9) 571 (82.5) .232 23 (17–27) .010
Economic repercussions due to COVID-19c 292 (22.0) 134 (19.3) 158 (24.9) .017 100 (15.8) 192 (27.7) <.001 24 (18–29) <.001
Feelings of loneliness during pandemic <.001 <.001 <.001
 No 370 (27.8) 272 (39.2) 98 (15.4) 266 (42.0) 104 (15.0) 17 (13–23)
 Yes, more than usual 790 (59.4) 347 (50.0) 443 (69.8) 319 (50.3) 469 (67.8) 24 (18–29)
 Yes, but no more than usual 169 (12.7) 75 (10.8) 94 (14.8) 49 (7.7) 119 (17.2) 25 (20–30)
Overall psychological condition changed due to COVID-19 <.001 <.001 <.001
 No 445 (33.5) 331 (47.7) 114 (18.0) 316 (49.8) 127 (18.4) 18 (12–23)
 Yes, improved 87 (6.5) 65 (9.4) 22 (3.5) 58 (9.1) 29 (4.2) 18 (13–23)
 Yes, worsened 797 (60.0) 298 (42.9) 499 (78.6) 260 (41) 536 (77.5) 25 (20–29)
Existential reflections related to COVID-19 <.001 <.001 <.001
 No 323 (24.3) 204 (29.4) 119 (18.7) 185 (29.2) 137 (19.8) 19 (14–25)
 Yes, positively stimulating 501 (37.7) 352 (50.7) 149 (23.5) 330 (52.1) 169 (24.4) 19 (14–24)
 Yes, deeply distressing 505 (38.0) 138 (19.9) 367 (57.8) 119 (18.8) 386 (55.8) 26 (22–31)
Open in a new tab

Note. GAD-7 denotes Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, BDI-II Beck Depression Inventory-II.

aLevel of significance related to the difference between categories of the variable.

bTotal sample for BDI-II is 1326.

cPossible options: “No” and “Yes”. “Yes” reported in table.

The median GAD-7 score was 9 (IQR = 5–14). The prevalence of anxiety symptoms was 47.8% (n = 635): 34% (n = 452) of the students reported mild symptoms, 24.5% (n = 326) moderate levels, and 23.3% (n = 309) severe symptoms. The median BDI-II score was 14 (IQR = 8–22). Symptoms of depression were present in 52.1% (n = 692), with 21.9% (n = 291) showing mild symptoms, 16.4% (n = 218) moderate symptoms, and 13.8% (n = 183) severe depression levels. The median PSS-10 score was 22 (IQR = 16–27). Perceived stress was reported as moderate in 56.2% (n = 747) of the students, and 28.4% (n = 378) reported severe levels of stress. Supplementary Table S1 shows the correlations between the GAD-7, BDI-II and PSS-10 scores. Overall, Spearman’s rho was above 0.700 (p < .001) in each relationship studied.

Factors Associated With Anxiety

Table 2 reports the summary of hierarchical regressions showing the factors and adjusted ORs associated with anxiety symptoms. In the final model, BDI-II and PSS-10 scores were significantly associated with risk of anxiety symptoms (adj. OR: 1.94, 95% CI [1.1.359–2.782] and adj. OR: 1.23, 95% CI [1.192–1.277], respectively). Similarly, distressing existential reflections and a worsening overall psychological condition related to the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with an increased risk of anxiety symptoms (adj. OR: 1.56, 95% CI [1.035–2.361] and adj. OR: 1.16, 95% CI [1.163–2.386], respectively). Moreover, fear of COVID-19 infection for oneself was a risk factor for anxiety (adj. OR: 1.49, 95% CI [1.052–2.119]). Lastly, an improved opinion about choice of medical school since the onset of the pandemic was associated with an increased risk of anxiety (adj. OR: 1.61, 95% CI [1.031–2.524]).

Table 2.

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions for Variables Associated With Medical Students’ Anxiety Symptoms (GAD-7≥10).

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Variable Adj.OR 95%CI p Adj. OR 95% CI p Adj. OR 95% CI p
Gender 1.819 1.422; 2.328 <.001 1.768 1.375; 2.273 <.001 0.805 0.579; 1.120 .198
Age 0.993 0.930; 1.060 .825 0.990 0.928; 1.057 .772 1.041 0.938; 1.155 .447
Year of course
 Second Ref Ref Ref
 Third 0.972 0.659; 1.433 .887 1.010 0.681; 1.498 .960 1.059 0.631; 1.775 .829
 Fourth 0.833 0.550; 1.261 .388 0.769 0.503; 1.176 .225 0.751 0.427; 1.322 .321
 Fifth 0.634 0.405; 0.993 .046 0.651 0.413; 1.026 .064 0.636 0.346; 1.168 .145
 Sixth 0.762 0.478; 1.212 .251 0.769 0.480; 1.230 .273 0.905 0.470; 1.743 .766
 Over sixth 0.637 0.353; 1.149 .134 0.671 0.370; 1.215 .188 0.607 0.257; 1.434 .255
Judgement of choice of medical school 2.995 2.307; 3.886 <.001 2.415 1.813; 3.216 <.001 0.986 0.680; 1.429 .940
1st/2nd degree relatives with psychiatric disorder 1.309 0.997; 1.719 .053 1.266 0.959; 1.670 .096 1.032 0.724; 1.473 .860
Availability of common spaces in the house 0.621 0.369; 1.044 .072 0.630 0.371; 1.070 .087 0.773 0.398; 1.502 .448
Quality of relations with house cohabitants 2.846 1.866; 4.343 <.001 1.468 0.746; 2.889 .267 1.175 0.538; 2.565 .686
Change of opinion about the choice of medical school after COVID-19
 No change Ref Ref
 Yes, opinion improved 1.228 0.868; 1.737 .246 1.614 1.031; 2.524 .036
 Yes, opinion worsened 2.059 1.492; 2.842 <.001 1.142 0.761; 1.714 .520
Fear of COVID-19 infection for oneself 1.308 0.996; 1.718 .053 1.493 1.052; 2.119 .025
Fear of COVID-19 contagion for relative/loved ones 1.330 0.966; 1.831 .080 1.044 0.691; 1.579 .837
Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown 2.192 1.163; 4.132 .015 1.131 0.549; 2.330 .738
Overall psychological condition changed due to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, improved 0.802 0.399; 1.613 .535
 Yes, worsened 1.163 1.163; 2.386 .005
Existential reflections related to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, positively stimulating 0.841 0.563; 1.259 .401
 Yes, deeply distressing 1.563 1.035; 2.361 .034
BDI-II≥14 1.944 1.359; 2.782 <.001
PSS-10 score 1.234 1.192; 1.277 <.001
Open in a new tab

Note. Gender: 0 = man, 1 = woman; Judging the choice of medical school: 0 = positively, 1 = negatively/no opinion; first/second degree relatives with psychiatric disorder: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Availability of common spaces in the house: 0 = no; 1 = yes; Quality of relations with house cohabitants: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; Fear of COVID-19 infection for oneself: 0 = no; 1 = yes; Fear of COVID-19 infection for relative/loved ones: 0 = no; 1 = yes; Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; BDI-II: Beck Depression Inventory-II; PSS-10: Perceived Stress Scale.

Factors Associated With Depression

Table 3 presents the variables with relative adjusted ORs associated with the presence of depressive symptoms. The final model shows being in the fourth or sixth year of medical school to be a protective factor (adj. OR: 0.34, 95% CI [0.182–0.643] and adj. OR: 0.38, 95% CI [0.179–0.806], respectively), whereas a negative judgment of medical school choice constituted a risk factor (adj. OR: 1.98, 95% CI [1.308–3.012]), as was having first- or second-degree relatives with a psychiatric disorder (adj. OR: 1.99, 95% CI [1.316–3.001]). Unsatisfactory relationships with classmates more than doubled the risk of depressive symptoms (adj. OR: 2.48, 95% CI [1.395–4.419]).

Table 3.

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions for Variables Associated with Medical Students’ Depressive Symptoms (BDI-II≥14).

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Variable Adj. OR 95% CI p Adj. OR 95% CI p Adj. OR 95% CI p
Gender 1.961 1.508; 2.550 <.001 1.998 1.527; 2.613 <.001 0.905 0.625; 1.312 .599
Age 0.970 0.897; 1.048 .441 0.971 0.895; 1.054 .483 0.998 0.881; 1.130 .976
Year of course
 Second Ref Ref Ref
 Third 0.804 0.533; 1.211 .296 0.794 0.521; 1.209 .282 0.723 0.404; 1.294 .275
 Fourth 0.600 0.385; 0.933 .023 0.496 0.313; 0.787 .003 0.342 0.182; 0.643 .001
 Fifth 0.662 0.408; 1.076 .096 0.648 0.393; 1.068 .089 0.628 0.317; 1.244 .182
 Sixth 0.491 0.293; 0.820 .007 0.473 0.278; 0.804 .006 0.380 0.179; 0.806 .012
 Over sixth 0.780 0.401; 1.521 .466 0.789 0.395; 1.575 .501 1.092 0.404; 2.948 .862
Judgement of choice of medical school 4.877 3.634; 6.546 <.001 3.595 2.618; 4.936 <.001 1.985 1.308; 3.012 .001
First/second degree relatives with psychiatric disorder 1.685 1.252; 2.268 .001 1.621 1.196; 2.198 .002 1.987 1.316; 3.001 .001
Family cohesion
 Very poor/poor/excessive Ref Ref Ref
 Good 0.701 0.465; 1.059 .091 0.764 0.499; 1.172 .218 0.757 0.427; 1.342 .341
 Excellent 0.589 0.386; 0.897 .014 0.670 0.432; 1.039 .074 0.890 0.490; 1.617 .702
Sexual orientation 1.272 0.958; 1.688 .096 1.224 0.915; 1.637 .173 1.092 0.743; 1.605 .655
Economic status 2.413 1.345; 4.329 .003 2.177 1.194; 3.969 .011 1.791 0.830; 3.861 .137
Satisfying friendships with classmates 1.813 1.188; 2.768 .006 1.949 1.264; 3.006 .003 2.482 1.395; 4.419 .002
Climate among classmates 1.648 1.179; 2.303 .003 1.510 1.072; 2.128 .018 1.331 0.853; 2.078 .208
Quality of relations with house cohabitants 1.947 1.165; 3.252 .011 0.818 0.370; 1.808 .619 0.517 0.185; 1.443 .208
Change of opinion about the choice of medical school after COVID-19
 No change Ref Ref
 Yes, opinion improved 0.882 0.609; 1.276 .505 0.697 0.426; 1.141 0.151
 Yes, opinion worsened 2.489 1.732; 3.577 <.001 1.336 0.828; 2.156 .235
Relative/loved one vulnerable/at risk for COVID-19 1.336 0.969; 1.841 .077 1.355 0.877; 2.095 .172
Economic repercussions due to COVID-19 1.700 1.232; 2.347 .001 1.534 0.992; 2.371 .054
Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown 3.093 1.462; 6.543 .003 1.730 0.671; 4.461 .256
Feelings of loneliness during pandemic
 No Ref
 Yes, more than usual 1.219 0.797; 1.866 .362
 Yes, as usual 2.441 1.344; 4.430 .003
Overall psychological condition changed due to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, improved 1.791 0.868; 3.695 .115
 Yes, worsened 2.138 1.409; 3.243 <.001
Existential reflections related to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, positively stimulating 0.794 0.510; 1.236 .307
 Yes, deeply distressing 1.425 0.886; 2.293 .145
GAD-7≥10 2.369 1.644; 3.413 <.001
PSS-10 score 1.273 1.224; 1.324 <.001
Open in a new tab

Note. Gender: 0 = man, 1 = woman; Judging the choice of medical school: 0 = positively, 1 = negatively/no opinion; first/second degree relatives with psychiatric disorder: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Sexual orientation: 0 = heterosexual, 1 = LGBA; Economic status: 0 = adequate/excellent, 1 =insufficient/poor; Satisfying friendships with classmates: 0 = yes; 1 = no; Climate among classmates: 0 = friendly and stimulating; 1 = competitive and hostile; Quality of relations with house cohabitants: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; Relative/loved one vulnerable/at risk for COVID-19: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Economic repercussions due to COVID-19: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; GAD-7: Generalized Anxiety Scale; PSS: Perceived Stress Scale.

Feelings of loneliness experienced during the pandemic, but which were not any worse than those felt before the pandemic, were associated with an increased risk of depression (adj. OR: 2.44, 95% CI [1.344–4.430]). A worsening of the overall psychological condition due to the pandemic increased the occurrence of depressive syndromes by more than twofold (adj. OR: 2.14, 95% CI [1.409–3.243]). Finally, the risk of depressive symptoms was significantly associated with GAD-7 and PSS-10 scores (adj. OR: 2.37, 95% CI [1.644–3.413] and adj. OR: 1.27, 95% CI [1.224–1.324], respectively).

Factors Associated With Stress

Table 4 reports the summary of hierarchical regressions showing the variables associated with stress symptoms. The final model showed that being a woman and judging the choice of medical school negatively were associated with stress symptoms (B: 1.81, 95% CI [1.232–2.385] and B: 1.58, 95% CI [0.901–2.264], respectively). A competitive and hostile relational climate with classmates (B: 0.74, 95% CI [0.054–1.427]), being an off-site student (B: 0.70, 95% CI [0.166–1.238]) and a poor quality of relationships with cohabitants (B: 1.85, 95% CI [0.377–3.316]) were also associated with higher levels of stress. Feelings of loneliness experienced during the pandemic similar to or exceeding those felt before the pandemic were also associated with stress levels (B: 1.24, 95% CI [0.548–1.933] and B: 1.79, 95% CI [0.838–2.738], respectively).

Table 4.

Summary of Hierarchical Regressions for Variables Associated with Medical Students’ Perceived Stress Symptoms.

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Variable B 95% CI p B 95% CI p B 95% CI p
Gender 3.627 2.853; 4.401 <.001 3.471 2.708; 4.235 <.001 1.808 1.232; 2.385 <.001
Age −0.237 −0.419; 1.443 .011 −0.254 −0.433; −0.075 .006 −0.113 −0.247; 0.020 .095
Year of course
 Second Ref Ref Ref
 Third 0.291 −0.948; 1.531 .645 0.396 −0.822; 1.613 .524 0.585 −0.315; 1.486 .202
 Fourth 0.142 −1.158; 1.443 .830 −0.178 −1.459; 1.103 .785 0.518 −0.433; 1.470 .285
 Fifth −0.277 −1.659; 1.105 .694 −0.172 −1.534; 1.189 .804 0.451 −0.558; 1.461 .381
 Sixth −0.575 −1.993; 0.843 .427 −0.487 −1.880; 0.907 .493 0.333 −0.700; 1.366 .527
 Over sixth −0.205 −1.961; 1.551 .819 0.109 −1.621; 1.839 .902 0.505 −0.774; 1.784 .438
Judgement of choice of medical school 5.218 4.394; 6.043 <.001 4.194 3.305; 5.084 <.001 1.583 0.901; 2.264 <.001
Family cohesion
 Very poor/poor/excessive Ref Ref Ref
 Good −0.599 −1.808; 0.610 .331 −0.601 −1.802; 0.599 .326 −0.162 −1.052; 0.727 .720
 Excellent −1.797 −3.043; −0.551 .005 −1.682 −2.926; −0.438 .008 −0.540 −1.465; 0.385 .252
Sexual orientation 0.7178 −0.114; 1.550 .091 0.592 −0.225; 1.409 .155 0.287 −0.320; 0.895 .353
Economic status 2.398 0.831; 3.966 .003 1.790 0.222; 3.359 .025 0.488 −0.678; 1.653 .412
Climate among classmates 1.823 0.885; 2.761 <.001 1.557 0.633; 2.482 .001 0.740 0.054; 1.427 .035
Off-site student 0.795 0.057; 1.534 .035 0.827 0.103; 1.552 .025 0.702 0.166; 1.238 .010
Quality of relations with house cohabitants 3.372 1.958; 4.786 <.001 1.783 −0.202; 3.768 .078 1.847 0.377; 3.316 .014
Change of opinion about the choice of medical school after COVID-19
 No change Ref Ref
 Yes, opinion improved −0.202 −1.295; 0.890 .716 −0.311 −1.127; 0.505 .455
 Yes, opinion worsened 2.490 1.511; 3.470 <.001 0.345 −0.397; 1.087 .362
Economic repercussions due to COVID-19 (yes) 1.255 0.361; 2.149 .006 0.349 −0.315; 1.014 .303
Fear of COVID-19 contagion for relative/loved ones 1.458 0.526; 2.389 .002 0.626 −0.071; 1.323 .078
Availability of common spaces in the house during lockdown −1.832 −3.253; −0.412 .011 −0.972 −2.022; 0.079 .070
Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown 1.809 −0.046; 3.664 .056 −0.299 −1.675; 1.077 .670
Feelings of loneliness during pandemic
 No Ref
 Yes, more than usual 1.241 0.548; 1.933 <.001
 Yes, but no more than usual 1.788 0.838; 2.738 <.001
Overall psychological condition changed due to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, improved 0.050 −1.105; 1.206 .932
 Yes, worsened 0.809 0.107; 1.511 .024
Existential reflections related to COVID-19
 No Ref
 Yes, positively stimulating −0.068 −0.784; 0.649 .853
 Yes, deeply distressing 1.210 0.433; 1.986 .002
GAD-7≥10 4.710 4.054; 5.366 <.001
BDI-II≥14 5.336 4.642; 6.030 <.001
Open in a new tab

Note. Gender: 0 = man, 1 = woman; Judging the choice of medical school: 0 = positively, 1 = negatively/no opinion; Sexual orientation: 0 = heterosexual, 1 = LGBA; Economic status: 0 = adequate/excellent, 1 = insufficient/poor; Climate among classmates: 0 = friendly and stimulating; 1 = competitive and hostile; Off-site student: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Quality of relations with house cohabitants: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; Economic repercussions due to COVID-19: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Fear of COVID-19 infection for relative/loved ones: 0 = no; 1 = yes; Availability of common spaces in the house during lockdown: 0 = no, 1 = yes; Quality of relations with house cohabitants during lockdown: 0 = good/very good; 1 = poor/very poor; BDI-II: Beck Depression Scale; PSS: Perceived Stress Scale.

Of the COVID-19-related variables, a worsening of the overall psychological condition and distressing existential reflections about the pandemic were significantly associated with stress levels (B: 0.81, 95% CI [0.107–1.511] and B: 1.21, 95% CI [0.433–1.986], respectively).

Finally, stress symptoms were significantly associated with GAD-7 and BDI-II scores (B: 4.71, 95% CI [4.054–5.366] and B: 5.34, 95% CI [4.642–6.030], respectively).

Discussion

The aims of this study were to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of the prevalence of anxiety, depression and stress symptoms in medical students, and to identify the associated factors. We found a high prevalence of anxiety (47.8%), depression (52.1%) and moderate perceived stress (56.2%), all of which were higher compared with those reported by meta-analyses performed prior to COVID-19: 21–33.8% for anxiety (Quek et al., 2019; Zeng et al., 2019); 27–29% for depression (Puthran et al., 2016; Rotenstein et al., 2016; Tam et al., 2019; Zeng et al., 2019); and 12.2–96.7% for stress (Hope & Henderson, 2014). These values were also greater than those found in previous observational studies conducted in Italy before the onset of COVID-19 (Bert et al., 2020; Bertani et al., 2020; Volpe et al., 2019). While our findings are consistent with those from a recent review looking at the mental health consequences of COVID-19 on medical students worldwide (Mittal et al., 2021), other COVID-related reviews (Lasheras et al., 2020; Magklara et al., 2021) have reported lower rates of overall psychological distress. Differences in prevalence rates between studies may be due to the high heterogeneity of the studies considered in terms of: the instruments used to assess psychological distress, sociocultural backgrounds, and the extent of the pandemic’s impact in different countries. Therefore, the present study provides an additional contribution to the existing literature on the impact of COVID-19 in medical students, which should be considered in future meta-analyses.

The second objective of this study was to identify the factors associated with the presence of symptoms of anxiety, depression and stress in our sample. This permits us to identify potential risk and protective factors, and to plan and implement strategies and interventions that promote good mental health.

The factors associated with anxiety symptoms were primarily COVID-19-related. Fear of contracting the virus was associated with anxiety. Magklara and colleagues, in their recent review, showed that almost 60% of medical students are afraid of contracting the virus (Magklara et al., 2021). This may be related to the fear of being exposed to the virus without adequate personal protection equipment, the availability of which was insufficient during the first wave of the pandemic, even among health workers.

The presence of depressive symptoms in our sample was significantly associated with a family history of mental health problems and unsatisfactory relationships with classmates, confirming the results of similar studies conducted prior to COVID-19 (Bert et al., 2020; Meng et al., 2017). Being a fourth- or sixth-year student was revealed to be a protective factor against depressive symptoms – in line with the results of Puthran and colleagues (Puthran et al., 2016), who showed a negative trend in depressive symptoms according to the number of years of medical school training.

With regard to perceived stress, being a woman and living off-site were found to be significantly associated with higher stress levels, in line with a study demonstrating similar stress levels in medical students due to COVID-19 (O’Byrne et al., 2021). In our sample, we also found a poor relational climate among classmates and poor relations with cohabitants to be associated with higher levels of stress, highlighting the role of meaningful and enriching social relationships in promoting the mental health of students, particularly during periods of imposed social isolation as a means to restricting the virus’s spread.

As expected, a worsened overall psychological condition involved all three mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression and perceived stress), whereas deeply distressing existential reflections related to COVID-19 were associated with anxiety and stress only. The pandemic and its numerous high-impact consequences were completely unexpected, and may have generated a “sense of alertness” responsible for increasing anxiety and stress levels. The long-term effects of these existential reflections should be investigated further. Also, the association between anxiety and stress levels and distressing existential reflections may be due to the students’ need for more reliable information about the virus and/or the extent to which they feel they can trust the medical school and government’s management of the pandemic. In fact, O’Byrne and colleagues found that students who were less confident in the management of the crisis by the medical school and their government and who considered the information about the current crisis to be insufficient reported higher levels of stress (O’Byrne et al., 2021).

Experiencing feelings of loneliness during the pandemic was associated with symptoms of depression and stress. In particular, experiencing such feelings, but not to any greater degree than before the pandemic, was associated with depressive symptoms, suggesting that depressive tendencies were probably already present in these individuals before the pandemic. In contrast, higher levels of stress were associated with feelings of loneliness that had increased due to the pandemic and its imposed restrictions.

Moreover, in line with the observations made by Bert et al. (2020), published prior to COVID-19, medical students with a negative judgement of their choice of medical school had a higher risk of depression and stress independently of the pandemic’s impact on their education. This result highlights the relationship between medical students’ judgments and expectations about a career in medicine and the presence of psychological distress, one that deserves further investigation in future studies.

Interestingly, students who reported an improved opinion about choice of medical school were more prone to anxiety. One possible explanation may be that the pandemic had reinforced the students’ decision about becoming doctors, but they may be feeling anxious about becoming adequately prepared to handle complex clinical situations such as those related to COVID-19 infection (O’Byrne et al., 2020). Future studies could investigate this possibility.

Lastly, symptoms of anxiety, depression and stress were strongly associated with each other, in line with previous clinical literature (Jacobson & Newman, 2017; Kalin, 2020; Lamers et al., 2011; Sartorius et al., 1996). Their combined presence is often associated with more severe functional impairment (Jacobson & Newman, 2017; Kessler et al., 2003; Lamers et al., 2011), indicating the need for transdiagnostic approaches to treatment, with the aim of targeting the common underlying psychological mechanism(s) of anxiety, depression and stress (Spijker et al., 2020).

These results have important clinical and pedagogical implications as they demonstrate, once again, the importance of developing counselling services for medical students in universities. These services must be easily accessible and capable of ameliorating the effects of the stressors students are exposed to (Jacob et al., 2020). They must also address the specific needs related to unforeseen and highly stressful situations such as those occurring during the pandemic, which in many cases add to the previous ones. Furthermore, it is important to consider specific risk factors, such as gender, in order to tailor counselling services and psychological interventions. Moreover, these data show the importance of faculty staff fostering a relational climate that is not highly competitive but instead characterized by mutual support and which enhances student engagement and motivational aspects related to medical school choice (Peters et al., 2019). In this sense, introducing seminars aimed at fostering soft skills and promoting both formal and informal peer support practices may prove to be crucial.

Strengths and Limitations

The major strength of this work is that it is the first to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of medical students in Italy – one of the countries most affected by the COVID-19 emergency. The study’s high response rate is also an important strength.

The main limitations are the use of convenience sampling and its cross-sectional design, which restricts causal interpretations. The study’s lack of pre-pandemic information regarding the students’ mental health statuses limits the possibility to know whether the individual participants had improved or worsened since COVID-19 in terms of mental health. Therefore, the survey data could only be compared against previously published data. Another limitation concerns the fact that the questions in section 2 and 3 of the survey and the specific questions on COVID-19 were developed by the researchers for the purpose of this study without specific reference to previously validated questionnaires. Moreover, no data were collected about the students who refused to participate. The use of self-reported measures of mental health outcomes rather than structured interviews and clinical diagnoses constitutes a study weakness. That said, all the tools used are validated and commonly used to screen for psychological distress. Lastly, as the study was conducted in a single university, the sample should not be considered representative of the Italian medical student population.

Conclusion

Medical students are considered a vulnerable population due to the high levels of psychological distress previously detected in these individuals. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and its restrictions appears to have had a negative impact on their mental health. Psychological distress was associated with both COVID-independent and COVID-related factors. Medical schools should plan and provide counselling and mental health services, both at preventive and at intervention levels, to help students manage the difficulties inherent to their medical training, especially at times of increased stress such as those related to the COVID-19 pandemic-imposed restrictions. Future studies should focus on identifying characteristics that maximize the use of such services by reducing the fear of stigma.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Italy
Click here for additional data file. (89.6KB, pdf)

Supplementary Material for The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Italy by Sara Carletto, Giuseppina Lo Moro, Vittoria Zuccaroli Lavista, Giovanna Soro, Roberta Siliquini, Fabrizio Bert, and Paolo Leombruni in Psychological Reports.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Angelica Clivio, Annaberta Berardi, Camilla Iacobone, Davide Ferri, Eugenio Di Manso, Mattia Manfroglio, Giulia Rovescala, and Ilaria Turone for their collaboration in the survey’s construction, and all the students for their participation. They also wish to thank Stephanie Parsley for the proofreading of the manuscript.

Author Biographies

Sara Carletto is a Post-doc Research Fellow in Clinical Psychology at the University of Turin. Her research interests include trauma-focused interventions for post-traumatic stress and depressive disorders, and patient-doctor communication.

Giuseppina Lo Moro is a Research Fellow in Public Health at the University of Turin. Her main research interests are public mental health, vaccine hesitancy, and digital health.

Vittoria Zuccaroli Lavista has obtained her degree in Medicine and Surgery at the University of Turin with a dissertation regarding the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on medical students’ mental health.

Giovanna Soro is a MD resident in Psychiatry at the University of Turin. Her clinical and research activity is focused on psychotherapy and psychological support in medical students and fibromyalgia.

Roberta Siliquini is a Full Professor of Public Health at the University of Turin. Her main research activities are vaccine hesitancy, health communication and digital health, healthcare organization and evaluation.

Fabrizio Bert is an Associate Professor of Public Health at the University of Turin. His main research focuses are on digital health, mental health, vaccinology, and healthcare organization.

Paolo Leombruni is a Full Professor in Clinical Psychology at the University of Turin. His main research activity is related to patient-doctor communication, psychosomatic disorders, and psycho-oncology.

Author Contributions: SC, and PL conceived the study idea. All authors contributed to the study design. GLM and GS implemented the online survey. GLM performed the statistical analyses, with the supervision of FB and RS. SC, GLM, and VZL drafted the first version of the manuscript. All authors have discussed the results and revised this manuscript critically for important intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final version.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [SC], upon reasonable request.

Supplemental Material: Supplemental material for this article is available online.

ORCID iDs

Sara Carletto https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4951-7479

Giuseppina Lo Moro https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9472-3263

References

  1. Akers A., Blough C., Iyer M. S. (2020). COVID-19 implications on clinical clerkships and the residency application process for medical students. Cureus, 12(4), Article e7800. 10.7759/cureus.7800 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Araújo F. J. de O., de Lima L. S. A., Cidade P. I. M., Nobre C. B., Neto M. L. R. (2020). Impact of sars-cov-2 and its reverberation in global higher education and mental health. Psychiatry Research, 288, 112977. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112977 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beck A., Steer R., Brown G. (1996). Manual for the Beck depression inventory-II. Psychological Corporation. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bert F., Lo Moro G., Corradi A., Acampora A., Agodi A., Brunelli L., Chironna M., Cocchio S., Cofini V., D’Errico M. M., Marzuillo C., Pasquarella C., Pavia M., Restivo V., Gualano M. R., Leombruni P., Siliquini R., Group C. (2020). Prevalence of depressive symptoms among Italian medical students: The multicentre cross-sectional “PRIMES” study. Plos One, 15(4), Article e0231845. 10.1371/journal.pone.0231845 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bertani D. E., Mattei G., Ferrari S., Pingani L., Galeazzi G. M. (2020). Anxiety, depression and personality traits in Italian medical students. Rivista Di Psichiatria, 55(6), 342–348. 10.1708/3503.34892 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brooks S. K., Webster R. K., Smith L. E., Woodland L., Wessely S., Greenberg N., Rubin G. J. (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. Lancet, 395(10227), 912–920. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bueno-Notivol J., Gracia-García P., Olaya B., Lasheras I., López-Antón R., Santabárbara J. (2021). Prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 outbreak: A meta-analysis of community-based studies. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 21(1), 100196. 10.1016/j.ijchp.2020.07.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cao W., Fang Z., Hou G., Han M., Xu X., Dong J., Zheng J. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Research, 287, 112934. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Carletto S., Miniotti M., Persico A., Leombruni P. (2021). Emotional distress and psychiatric drug use among students in an Italian medical school: Assessing the role of gender and year of study. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 10, 451. 10.4103/jehp.jehp_612_21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cénat J. M., Blais-Rochette C., Kokou-Kpolou C. K., Noorishad P. G., Mukunzi J. N., McIntee S. E., Dalexis R. D., Goulet M. A., Labelle R. P. (2021). Prevalence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder, and psychological distress among populations affected by the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 295, 113599. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113599 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen S., Kamarck T., Mermelstein R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396. 10.2307/2136404 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cohen S., Williamson G. (1988). Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States. In Spacapan S., Oskamp S. (Eds.), The social psychology of health claremont symposium on applied social psychology (pp. 31–67). Sage. [Google Scholar]
  13. Dedeilia A., Sotiropoulos M. G., Hanrahan J. G., Janga D., Dedeilias P., Sideris M. (2020). Medical and surgical education challenges and innovations in the COVID-19 era: A systematic review. In Vivo, 34(3 Suppl), 1603–1611. 10.21873/invivo.11950 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dyrbye L. N., Thomas M. R., Shanafelt T. D. (2006). Systematic review of depression, anxiety, and other indicators of psychological distress among U.S. and Canadian medical students. Academic Medicine, 81(4), 354–373. 10.1097/00001888-200604000-00009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Field A., Miles J., Field Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar]
  16. Harries A. J., Lee C., Jones L., Rodriguez R. M., Davis J. A., Boysen-Osborn M., Kashima K. J., Krane N. K., Rae G., Kman N., Langsfeld J. M., Juarez M. (2021). Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students: A multicenter quantitative study. BMC Medical Education, 21(1), 14. 10.1186/s12909-020-02462-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hope V., Henderson M. (2014). Medical student depression, anxiety and distress outside north America: A systematic review. Medical Education, 48(10), 963–979. 10.1111/medu.12512 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Hossain M. M., Sultana A., Purohit N. (2020). Mental health outcomes of quarantine and isolation for infection prevention: A systematic umbrella review of the global evidence. Epidemiology and Health, 42(■■■), Article e2020038. 10.4178/epih.e2020038 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Jacob R., Li T. Y., Martin Z., Burren A., Watson P., Kant R., Davies R., Wood D. F. (2020). Taking care of our future doctors: A service evaluation of a medical student mental health service. BMC Medical Education, 20(1), 172. 10.1186/s12909-020-02075-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Jacobson N. C., Newman M. G. (2017). Anxiety and depression as bidirectional risk factors for one another: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 143(11), 1155–1200. 10.1037/bul0000111 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kalin N. H. (2020). The critical relationship between anxiety and depression. American Journal of Psychiatry, 177(5), 365–367. 10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.20030305 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kessler R. C., Berglund P., Demler O., Jin R., Koretz D., Merikangas K. R., Rush A. J., Walters E. E., Wang P. S. (2003). The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication (NCS-R). Journal of the American Medical Association, 289(23), 3095–3105. 10.1001/jama.289.23.3095 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Komer L. (2020). COVID-19 amongst the pandemic of medical student mental health. International Journal of Medical Students, 8(1), 56–57. 10.5195/ijms.2020.501 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kroenke K., Spitzer R. L., Williams J. B. W., Monahan P. O., Löwe B. (2007). Anxiety disorders in primary care: Prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146(5), 317–325. 10.7326/0003-4819-146-5-200703060-00004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lamers F., Van Oppen P., Comijs H. C., Smit J. H., Spinhoven P., Van Balkom A. J. L. M., Nolen W. A., Zitman F. G., Beekman A. T. F., Penninx B. W. J. H. (2011). Comorbidity patterns of anxiety and depressive disorders in a large cohort study: The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA). Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 72(3), 342–348. 10.4088/JCP.10m06176blu [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lasheras I., Gracia-García P., Lipnicki D., Bueno-Notivol J., López-Antón R., de la Cámara C., Lobo A., Santabárbara J. (2020). Prevalence of anxiety in medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid systematic review with meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6603. 10.3390/ijerph17186603 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Leombruni P., Corradi A., Lo Moro G., Acampora A., Agodi A., Celotto D., Chironna M., Cocchio S., Cofini V., D’errico M. M., Marzuillo C., Pavia M., Restivo V., Veronesi L., Gualano M. R., Bert F., Siliquini R. (2022). Stress in medical students: PRIMES, an Italian, multicenter cross-sectional study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(9), 5010. 10.3390/ijerph19095010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Li Y., Scherer N., Felix L., Kuper H. (2021). Prevalence of depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder in health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Plos One, 16(3), Article e0246454. 10.1371/journal.pone.0246454 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Lyons Z., Wilcox H., Leung L., Dearsley O. (2020). COVID-19 and the mental well-being of Australian medical students: Impact, concerns and coping strategies used. Australasian Psychiatry, 28(6), 649–652. 10.1177/1039856220947945 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Magklara E., Angelis S., Solia E., Katsimantas A., Kourlaba G., Kostakis G., Tsakotos G., Zaoutis T., Filippou D. (2021). The role of medical students during COVID-19 era. A review. Acta Biomedica, 92(1), Article e2021032. 10.23750/abm.v92i1.10873 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Marvaldi M., Mallet J., Dubertret C., Moro M. R., Guessoum S. B. (2021). Anxiety, depression, trauma-related, and sleep disorders among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 126, 252–264. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.03.024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Maser B., Danilewitz M., Guérin E., Findlay L., Frank E. (2019). Medical student psychological distress and mental illness relative to the general population: A Canadian cross-sectional survey. Academic Medicine : Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 94(11), 1781–1791. 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002958 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Meng X., Brunet A., Turecki G., Liu A., D’Arcy C., Caron J. (2017). Risk factor modifications and depression incidence: A 4-year longitudinal Canadian cohort of the montreal catchment area study. BMJ Open, 7(6), Article e015156. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015156 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Meo S. A., Abukhalaf A. A., Alomar A. A., Sattar K., Klonoff D. C. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic: Impact of quarantine on medical students’ mental wellbeing and learning behaviors. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 36(COVID19-S4), S43–S48. 10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2809 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Mertens G., Gerritsen L., Duijndam S., Salemink E., Engelhard I. M. (2020). Fear of the coronavirus (COVID-19): Predictors in an online study conducted in March 2020. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 74, 102258. 10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102258 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Messina G., Quercioli C., Troiano G., Russo C., Barbini E., Nisticò F., Nante N. (2016). Italian medical students quality of life: Years 2005-2015. Annali Di Igiene Medicina Preventiva e Di Comunita, 28(4), 245–251. 10.7416/ai.2016.2103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Mittal R., Su L., Jain R. (2021). COVID-19 mental health consequences on medical students worldwide. Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives, 11(3), 296–298. 10.1080/20009666.2021.1918475 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Mortazavi S. S., Assari S., Alimohamadi A., Rafiee M., Shati M. (2020). Fear, loss, social isolation, and incomplete grief due to COVID-19: A recipe for a psychiatric pandemic. Basic and Clinical Neuroscience, 11(2), 225–232. 10.32598/bcn.11.covid19.2549.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. O’Byrne L., Gavin B., Adamis D., Lim Y. X., McNicholas F. (2021). Levels of stress in medical students due to COVID-19. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(6), 383–388. 10.1136/medethics-2020-107155 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. O’Byrne L., Gavin B., McNicholas F. (2020). Medical students and COVID-19: The need for pandemic preparedness. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(9), 623–626. 10.1136/medethics-2020-106353 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Pappa S., Ntella V., Giannakas T., Giannakoulis V. G., Papoutsi E., Katsaounou P. (2020). Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 88, 901–907. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.026 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Peters H., Zdravkovic M., João Costa M., Celenza A., Ghias K., Klamen D., Mossop L., Rieder M., Devi Nadarajah V., Wangsaturaka D., Wohlin M., Weggemans M. (2019). Twelve tips for enhancing student engagement. Medical Teacher, 41(6), 632–637. 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1459530 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Pighi M., Pontoni G., Sinisi A., Ferrari S., Mattei G., Pingani L., Simoni E., Galeazzi G. M. (2018). Use and propensity to use substances as cognitive enhancers in Italian medical students. Brain Sciences, 8(11), 197. 10.3390/brainsci8110197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Puthran R., Zhang M. W. B., Tam W. W., Ho R. C. (2016). Prevalence of depression amongst medical students: A meta-analysis. Medical Education, 50(4), 456–468. 10.1111/medu.12962 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Quek T. T. C., Tam W. W. S., Tran B. X., Zhang M., Zhang Z., Ho C. S. H., Ho R. C. M. (2019). The global prevalence of anxiety among medical students: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(15), 2735. 10.3390/ijerph16152735 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Roberti J. W., Harrington L. N., Storch E. A. (2006). Further psychometric support for the 10-item version of the perceived stress scale. Journal of College Counseling, 9(2), 135–147. 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2006.tb00100.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Rose S. (2020). Medical student education in the time of COVID-19. JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association, 323(21), 2131–2132. 10.1001/jama.2020.5227 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Rossi R., Socci V., Talevi D., Mensi S., Niolu C., Pacitti F., Di Marco A., Rossi A., Siracusano A., Di Lorenzo G. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures impact on mental health among the general population in Italy. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, 790. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00790 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Rotenstein L. S., Ramos M. A., Torre M., Bradley Segal J., Peluso M. J., Guille C., Sen S., Mata D. A. (2016). Prevalence of depression, depressive symptoms, and suicidal ideation among medical students a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association, 316(21), 2214–2236. 10.1001/jama.2016.17324 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Salari N., Hosseinian-Far A., Jalali R., Vaisi-Raygani A., Rasoulpoor S., Mohammadi M., Rasoulpoor S., Khaledi-Paveh B. (2020). Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Globalization and Health, 16(1), 57. 10.1186/s12992-020-00589-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Sartorius N., Üstün T. B., Lecrubier Y., Wittchen H. U. (1996). Depression comorbid with anxiety: Results from the WHO study on psychological disorders in primary health care. British Journal of Psychiatry, 168(S30), 38–43. 10.1192/s0007125000298395 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Spijker J., Muntingh A., Batelaan N. (2020). Advice for clinicians on how to treat comorbid anxiety and depression. JAMA Psychiatry, 77(6), 645–646. 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.0601 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Spitzer R. L., Kroenke K., Williams J. B. W., Löwe B. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. State of New Hampshire Employee Assistance Program . (1983). Perceived stress scale score cut off. https://das.nh.gov/wellness/docs/percieved-stress-scale.pdf
  55. Tam W., Lo K., Pacheco J. (2019). Prevalence of depressive symptoms among medical students: Overview of systematic reviews. Medical Education, 53(4), 345–354. 10.1111/medu.13770 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Usher K., Bhullar N., Jackson D. (2020). Life in the pandemic: Social isolation and mental health. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 29(15–16), 2756–2757. 10.1111/jocn.15290 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Vindegaard N., Benros M. E. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 89, 531–542. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.048 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Volpe U., Ventriglio A., Bellomo A., Kadhum M., Lewis T., Molodynski A., Sampogna G., Fiorillo A. (2019). Mental health and wellbeing among Italian medical students: A descriptive study. International Review of Psychiatry, 31(7–8), 569–573. 10.1080/09540261.2019.1654718 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Wang J., Lloyd-Evans B., Giacco D., Forsyth R., Nebo C., Mann F., Johnson S. (2017). Social isolation in mental health: A conceptual and methodological review. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 52(12), 1451–1461. 10.1007/s00127-017-1446-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Wang Y. P., Gorenstein C. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Beck depression inventory-II: A comprehensive review. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 35(4), 416–431. 10.1590/1516-4446-2012-1048 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. World Health Organization . (2020). WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 11 March 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 [Google Scholar]
  62. Xiong J., Lipsitz O., Nasri F., Lui L. M. W., Gill H., Phan L., Chen-Li D., Iacobucci M., Ho R., Majeed A., McIntyre R. S. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the general population: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 277(1), 55–64. 10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Zeng W., Chen R., Wang X., Zhang Q., Deng W. (2019). Prevalence of mental health problems among medical students in China: A meta-analysis. Medicine (United States), 98(18), Article e15337. 10.1097/MD.0000000000015337 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Zhai Y., Du X. (2020). Addressing collegiate mental health amid COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Research, 288, 113003. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Material - The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Italy
Click here for additional data file. (89.6KB, pdf)

Supplementary Material for The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental Health in Medical Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Italy by Sara Carletto, Giuseppina Lo Moro, Vittoria Zuccaroli Lavista, Giovanna Soro, Roberta Siliquini, Fabrizio Bert, and Paolo Leombruni in Psychological Reports.

Articles from Psychological Reports are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES