↓ Skip to main content

Quantifying and predicting depression literacy of undergraduates: a cross sectional study in Sri Lanka

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
175 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantifying and predicting depression literacy of undergraduates: a cross sectional study in Sri Lanka
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0658-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Santushi D. Amarasuriya, Anthony F. Jorm, Nicola J. Reavley

Abstract

The high rates of depression and low rates of related help-seeking among undergraduates are matters for concern. In response to the need to examine their knowledge about depression and its management, and the dearth of such research from non-western developing countries, this study examined the depression literacy of undergraduates in Sri Lanka. A questionnaire was administered among 4671 undergraduates to examine their depression literacy relating to problem-recognition, measured using a vignette of a depressed undergraduate, and their treatment beliefs measured by assessing their perceptions about the helpfulness of various options of help for the presented problem. Responses for the latter aspect were quantified using a scale comprising the options of help endorsed by Sri Lankan mental health professionals. Regression analysis models were used to identify the correlates of these aspects of depression literacy. Females, medical undergraduates and those in higher years of study (compared to first-years) were more likely to recognise the problem as depression. The undergraduates obtained a mean percentage score of 76 % on the constructed Depression Treatment Beliefs Scale. Scores on this scale were higher among females, medical undergraduates, those who got help for the problem after trying to deal with it alone and those who recognised the problem as depression, as well as those who used other mental health-related labels for this purpose. Scores were lower among undergraduates in years 2-4 (compared to first-years), those with family or friends with the problem and those with higher stigma on a Social Distance Scale. However, the effect sizes of these relationships were small. As factors such as gender, discipline, year of study, exposure to depression and stigma are associated with differences in the depression literacy of these undergraduates, concerning their ability to recognise the problem and their related treatment beliefs, these must be considered when designing related educational initiatives. Recognising the problem as depression or the use of other mental health-related labels is associated with better treatment beliefs as per expert consensus, indicating that such labelling could have value for appropriate help-seeking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 171 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 17%
Student > Bachelor 26 15%
Researcher 17 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 37 21%
Unknown 44 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 21%
Psychology 36 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 10%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 52 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,261,929
of 23,299,593 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,049
of 4,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,306
of 285,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#58
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,299,593 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,834 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.