RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Medical students are exposed to stresses which have irreversible consequences, such as suicidal ideation. The present study aimed to investigate the level of occupational stress in medical students and its relationship with the prevalence of suicidal ideation and attention among them and then provide mental health promotion approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional descriptive study was performed on 325 undergraduate medical students residing at the dormitory of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. The sample size was determined by the census method. Osipow and Suicide Behaviors Questionnaires were used to measure job stress and suicidal ideation, respectively. The condition of entry into the study was living in the dormitory and spent at least one semester. Linear regression and logistic regression were used to examine the relationship between variables. RESULTS: The mean score of occupational stress among students with a mean age of 21 (±2.18) years was 158.84 (±27.07) and 60% (n = 180) of students had high levels of stress. There was a significant relationship between age and educational level with stress level and suicidal ideation (P < 0.05). They had the highest effect on stress (P = 0.031) and suicidal ideation (P = 0.001), respectively, among students. High level of stress was 11.829 times more likely to have suicidal thoughts than low-stress level (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Stress and suicidal ideation are much higher in students of lower semesters and lower ages than students with higher semesters. Students should learn how and with what approach to control and manage exposure to stressors. Measures such as holding stress management training courses as well as managing stressful situations are among the effective measures in improving mental health and reducing stress levels and its effects.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Health policymakers use a variety of policy tools. These policies are either based on external factors or are based on paternal considerations; people may need to have help in the selection of items that may be regretted about them in the future. However, recent research on behavioral economics shows that major decision-making mistakes are not only limited to vulnerable groups but also are ubiquitous and systematic. The purpose of this study was on health policy making with a behavioral economics approach in health promotion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The eligible studies were obtained from Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, and Scopus databases. The search strategy uses a combination of keywords in the titles. The keywords of behavioral economics along with the keyword of health have been used to find related articles. RESULTS: After deleting duplicate articles, a total of 38 articles were identified. After reviewing the title and abstract, 13 studies were omitted because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Ten articles were removed from the found articles due to the unavailability of the full text and four articles were excluded because their method was quantitative. Finally, a total of 11 articles were eligible for including this review study. CONCLUSION: Recent research on behavioral economics shows that decision-making errors are not limited to vulnerable groups but are ubiquitous and systematic. Forgotten income or negligible income is very high and is reasonably explained by transaction costs. Educational interventions often have little effect and do not benefit from basic cost-benefit tests. In addition, the seemingly insignificant aspects of choice-frameworks and assumptions-often have a profound effect on behavior.