Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Life satisfaction, resilience and coping mechanisms among medical students during COVID-19

  • Sonia Ijaz Haider ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    sonia.i.haider@gmail.com

    Affiliation Centre for Medical Education, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom

  • Farhatulain Ahmed,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation College of Medicine and Dentistry, Fatima Memorial College Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

  • Hassan Pasha,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Bahria University, Karachi, Pakistan

  • Hadia Pasha,

    Roles Conceptualization, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Student Affairs and Services, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan

  • Nudrat Farheen,

    Roles Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Medical College, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan

  • Muhammad Talha Zahid

    Roles Data curation, Project administration, Resources, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation College of Medicine and Dentistry, Fatima Memorial College Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract

Purpose

Life satisfaction influences well-being. Medical students often experience more stress as compared to their counterparts in other disciplines as they are required to meet the demands of both academic workload and clinical responsibilities. However, during the current pandemic, in addition to academic changes, inability to complete clinical placements, loss of peer interaction and social connectedness and, deployment to areas in times of crisis could exacerbate their stress. This would impact their ability to cope with stress and eventually influence their life satisfaction. Students approach these challenges in various ways, either positively, religiously, or by avoiding. This study aimed to explore the association between resilience, coping mechanisms and life satisfaction in medical students during the pandemic.

Methods

A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted from undergraduate medical students from year 1 to year 5. Three instruments were used to measure life satisfaction, resilience, and coping, namely The Brief Resilience Scale, The Satisfaction with Life Scale and the COPE inventory. Mean and standard deviation were calculated for all continuous variables. Robust linear regression model was used for analysis. Hierarchical (forward) stepwise model building technique was used for final model. Alpha cut off was kept at 0.05.

Results

A total of 351 students (out of 500 students) completed the questionnaires. A moderately negative, slightly linear correlation between life satisfaction and avoidant coping was reported. Life satisfaction showed moderately positive, slightly linear correlation with resilience score. Three variables stayed significant in the final model: Resilience, avoidant coping, and religion coping.

Conclusion

Life satisfaction can be improved among medical students by focusing on strategies which enhance resilience. Religion is identified as a significant coping strategy among medical students. Students coping mechanism can vary and more research is needed to assess which types of coping strategies could contribute positively to the quality of their personal and professional lives

Introduction

Life satisfaction has been defined as “a person’s cognitive and affective evaluations of his or her life” [1]. Life satisfaction strongly influences overall wellbeing. Existing evidence indicate that life satisfaction decreases during medical school among medical students [2, 3]. Some of the consistently reported stressors relate to academics, time pressures, heavy workload, poor relationships, poor student guidance/support finances, fear of failure and examination frequency [47]. A recent review described six major themes associated with student distress: adjustment, ethical concerns, exposure to patient death and suffering, student mistreatment, personal life events, and educational debt [8]. Additional evidence indicates that medical students show worse psychological well-being and social relationships than young people in the normative sample [9]. A study which explored stress, resilience and coping in medical students concluded that medical students had higher perceived stress, negative coping, and lower resilience than age and gender-matched peers in the general population [10]. The persistence of previously identified risk factors such as debt burden and clinical phase of school suggests that efforts to curb medical student distress have been inadequate to date [11]. In addition, the medical schools’ environment itself encourages competitiveness rather cooperation among learners. Consequently, it can be inferred that the medical education itself contributes to student distress.

The onset of the pandemic resulted in immediate closure of universities with majority of students forced into an unaccounted learning environment. This became more challenging for medical students as the undergraduate medical curriculum program is structured as preclinical and clinical -where lecture-based teaching was transitioned to an online format, however clinical exposures were not easily replicated [12]. The students were unable to successfully complete clinical placements in a safe and effective manner. Direct patient encounters were replaced with online simulated case scenarios for students. In a recent study, students reported a negative impact of the imposed restrictions on their training, decreased motivation and concentration in an unusual or distraction-prone study environment at home and missing feedback of students and teachers [13]. Moreover, examination restructuring implied that students had to conform to new test format and grading criteria A recent survey of final year medical students in the UK found that over one-third had their objective structured clinical examinations cancelled, with significant effects on self-reported ratings of preparedness to start as doctors [14, 15].

Resilience is the ability to cope mentally or emotionally with a crisis or to return to pre-crisis status quickly [16]. Students can use different coping mechanism for dealing with stressful events. In avoidant coping strategies students change their behavior to avoid about feeling, or doing difficult things [17]. Others can use approach coping by actively focusing on the problematic event or situation [18]. It is not uncommon to use religious coping by using religious beliefs or behaviors to facilitate problem-solving and to prevent or alleviate the negative emotional consequences of stressful life circumstances [19]. Evidence indicates that common positive coping strategies among medical students are respecting one’s limits, setting priorities, avoiding comparisons and participating in leisure activities (cinema, reading, sports, meeting friends and family) [20]. However, during the pandemic, in addition to academic changes, the loss of peer interaction and social connectedness, the possibility of students being deployed to difficult areas in times of crisis, and concerns regarding their personal family well-being were paramount [21]. Considering that under normal circumstances, medical education is challenging for the students, it was expected that the pandemic and the factors resulting from the uncertainty and abrupt changes would exacerbate this issue and affect the overall life satisfaction. Hence, the aim of the study was to explore the relationship and magnitude between resilience, coping orientation and life satisfaction among undergraduate medical students. The study addressed the following research question:

Is there an association between life satisfaction and resilience, and coping orientation among undergraduate medical students during Covid-19?

Materials and methods

Participants and procedure

The study involved undergraduate medical students in a private medical college. All the students from year 1 to year 5 were invited to participate in the study via email. The general aim of the study was explained to all the participants. The students completed an online survey using the Google Form platform. Participation in the study was voluntary and all participants provided written informed consent electronically before commencement of the study. The maximum duration for completion of all the questionnaires was 30 minutes. Confidentiality and anonymity were ensured of all the participants data. Participants were given the right to withdraw from the study at any time. The research protocol was approved by the Ethical Committee of the medical college.

Measures

Demographic characteristics, including age, gender, year of study, marital status, level of education, ethnicity, residence, and previous qualification, was included in the survey. The three measures used in the study were Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE) Inventory.

Brief Resilience Scale (BRS).

The Brief Resilience Scale consists of 6 items focusing on the ability to recover from stress and adversity. It is on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 2 = strongly agree [22]. The resulting score is a sum of all 6 items. It is on a continuous scale and standard score is reported as a fraction of 5. BRS is reported as a valid and reliable (α  = 0.71) measure of resilience [23].

The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS).

The Satisfaction with Life Scale developed by Diener, Emmons, Larsen, and Griffin (1985) is a brief measure of life satisfaction (1). It consists of 5 items using a 7-scale scoring system, with 1 = strongly disagree with the statement and 7 = strongly agree. The resulting score is a sum of all 5 items. It is on a continuous scale. The scale is reported to be a valid and reliable (α  = 0.80) measure of life satisfaction [24].

Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory (COPE): The COPE is designed to measure effective and ineffective ways to cope with a stressful life event. It consists of 28 items to assess 14 coping strategies on 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 2 = strongly agree [25]. The tool has four subthemes i.e., avoidant coping, approach coping, humor coping, and religion coping. The scale is reported to be a valid and reliable (α  = 0.82) measure of coping strategies [26].

To ensure comparability across results and unification of data collection process, the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) and The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) were adapted to 4-point Likert scales ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Decreasing categories of responses did not affect the results because none of the scale items were being excluded or changed. Both the scales report results on continuous data scale, and the same was used for analysis. Therefore, the merging of response categories did not affect the result score variability between students.

Data analysis

Descriptive analysis was conducted to present the frequency and percentage of the background characteristics of the undergraduate students, including previous education, gender, residence, ethnicity, family system, grade level and leisure activities. Mean and standard deviation (SD) was used to present resilience, life satisfaction and coping orientation scores. The survey was set as such that all questions were marked as “required” thus there was no missing data.

In the multiple linear regression model, satisfaction with life score was entered as the dependent variable. Age, gender, number of siblings, type of residence, family structure, year of medical college, and choice of leisure activities were taken as predictors along with BRS and COPE. Scatterplots were made between all predictor variables vs. life satisfaction score.

Robust linear regression model was used for analysis because the life satisfaction score variable was not normally distributed and could not be transformed. First, univariate linear regression was run between each independent/predictor variable and life satisfaction score, keeping a cut off alpha level of 0.25. Forward stepwise model building technique was used for final model [27]. The predictor variable with highest significance at univariate level were included one by one. All statistical tests were two-sided, and a p value< 0.05 was defined as the level of significance. Multicollinearity and interactions (alpha 0.1) were checked. Model fit was checked using residual vs. fitted scatter plot and NP plot of residuals. Analysis was done using STATA 16.0 special edition (Stata Corp, College station, Texas, USA).

Results

A total of 351 (70%) students (out of total 500 students) completed the questionnaire. There was no missing data. The mean age was 21.5 years. Average number of siblings reported was 3. There was an almost equal representation of students from all 5 years of MBBS. About 86% students had completed FSC before seeking admission in medical college. Students were predominantly females (70%); living with parents (90%); in nuclear family system (82%); and belonged to Punjabi family (77%). About 92% students reported using media to pass their leisure time during COVID-19 pandemic. Studying and learning new skills (17%) and hobbies/creativity (15%) were also reported as leisure activity among students. Demographic characteristics are given in Table 1.

thumbnail
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the undergraduate medical students.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275319.t001

Table 2 shows the means scores of the life satisfaction, resilience, and coping orientations.

thumbnail
Table 2. Means scores of the life satisfaction, resilience, and coping orientations.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275319.t002

The total scores on the SWLS ranged from 0 to 15, and the mean score was 9.1 (SD = 3.6). The total scores on the BRS ranged from 1 to 18, and the mean score was 9.3 (SD = 3.4). There was a strong correlation between resilience and life satisfaction. The total scores on the COPE scale ranged from 0 to 68, and the mean score was 40.2 (SD = 11.4). Among the subthemes approach mean score was highest 22 (out of 36), followed by avoidant 12 (out of 36) humor 1.6 (out of 6), and religion 4.7 (out of 6).

Table 3 presents the multivariate robust regression result for the relationship between life satisfaction and the predictor variables.

thumbnail
Table 3. Multivariate robust regression model for life satisfaction, resilience, and coping orientations.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275319.t003

All independent variables were added at univariate level and the following were significant: resilience score, avoidant coping, religion coping, approach coping, studying and learning skills, and ethnicity. Overall, the model showed a significant association between the independent variables and life satisfaction. Three variables stayed significant in the final model: resilience, avoidant coping, and religion coping. Medical students’ life satisfaction score was predicted by resilience, religious coping, and avoidant coping.

Life satisfaction was positively correlated with religious coping. Life satisfaction showed moderately positive, slightly linear correlation with resilience score. A moderately negative, slightly linear correlation was found between life satisfaction and avoidant coping.

The multivariate model showed that for every 1 unit increase in religious coping score, the life satisfaction score increased by 59%. (p < 0.001), while for every 1 unit increase in total resilience score, the life satisfaction score increased by 40% (p < 0.001), and for every 1 unit increase in avoidant coping score, the life satisfaction score decreased by 11%. (p < 0.001). Approach coping wasn’t a significant mediator of life satisfaction in the model. The demographics of the students who participated in this study were not found to have any significant effect on any of the variables investigated.

Discussion

The aim of the study was to explore the relationship between life satisfaction, resilience, and coping mechanism among medical students during the pandemic. The findings of the study indicate that there is a difference in the relationship and magnitude between resilience, coping mechanisms and life satisfaction among undergraduate medical students during.

One of the major findings of the present study were that there was a significant correlation between total resilience and life satisfaction, whereby with every one unit increase in resilience, the life satisfaction score increased by 40 percent. A prior research on students in high school reflected similar results whereby life satisfaction was positively related to resilience and positive stress [28]. Multiple studies have reported the favorable effect of resilience on the ability of medical students to deal with stress and to maintain a better quality of life [29] and concluded that resilience among medical students demonstrated a buffering effect on the negative relationship between physical demands and professional quality of life during clerkships. In addition, it was reported that increased resilient behaviours can minimize burnout, as well as cultivate skills needed for promotion of physician resilience and personal fulfillment, and for enhancement of professionalism and patient care [30]. A cross sectional research conducted on Chinese medical students showed that resilience increased life satisfaction whereas perceived stress decreased it [31]. A recent study reported that resilience and life satisfaction play a mediating role in the association between stress and disengagement burnout with resilience exerting greater influence, while in another study, the majority of medical students presented low levels of resilience and high burnout at the time of pandemic. Evidence indicates both internal factors such as optimism, problem, solving, self-regulation, etc. and external factors such as parenting style, family structure, teacher, and peer relations etc. act as buffers or protectors against life stressors [32]. Furthermore, higher resilience in workplace environment is associated with better mental health, reduced stress, and greater well-being [33]. Lack of resilience in students thwarts their emotional and personal development and interferes with their academic progress [34].

Among the various coping approaches investigated in this study, religious coping came out as the most significant predictor of life satisfaction. For every 1 unit increase in religious coping score, the life satisfaction score increased by 59%. These results indicate the value of maintaining faith on a divine entity during uncertain and mostly uncontrollable circumstances. Handling uncertain situations from a religious perspective requires meaningful interpretations of life events and helps develop acceptance for what may come. This is consistent with a recent study [35] which reported lower scores in anxiety and depression due to higher levels of religious coping approach. Similarly in another study, the most effective coping strategy to deal with severe stress was religious activities” as practiced by the majority of the “severely stressed” students [36]. Multiple studies indicate that religiousness encompasses a framework for assigning meaning which is related to reduced stress and the pursuit of mental well-being and life satisfaction [3739]. Female university students have shown that higher levels of extrinsic religious orientation inversely correlate with depression, anxiety, and stress [40]. Another study conducted to measure the effects of religious coping on hope and wellbeing reported that even when hope is low, wellbeing is found to be high if religious coping is also high [41].

In the present study, avoidant coping showed a modest negative effect on perceived quality of life. For every 1 unit increase in avoidant coping score, the life satisfaction score decreased by 11%. It is reported that students with a high level of stress have a higher preference for avoidance coping strategies [42]. Avoidant coping can have a negative impact on mental health and life satisfaction. It is commonly associated with higher risk of anxiety, and depression over a period of time [43]. Other studies have also demonstrated that avoidant coping leads to higher levels of stress and affects wellbeing in a negative way [44, 45]. A research conducted on adolescent students concluded that avoidant coping led to higher levels of distress and that although other methods of coping do not necessarily predict life satisfaction, avoidant coping always inversely predicts life satisfaction [46]. Lower levels of wellbeing and quality of life have been reported in medical students. In another study exploring perceptions of medical students regarding their quality of life reported scarcity of time for studying, leisure activities, relationships, frustrations with the program and insecurity regarding their professional future as potential inhibitors, whereas factors that increased quality of life were good teachers, classes with good didactic approaches, active learning methodologies, contact with patients, efficient time management and meaningful relationships with family members, friends and teachers [47]. Similarly the perceived quality of life of the Italian medical students was found to be lower than general population and it was suggested to develop resilience among students for improving their quality of life [48]. Yet another comparison of the quality of life between medical students and students of the humanities at the Sarajevo university indicated less satisfaction with overall medical learning experience [49].

Another relevant coping subtheme explored in this study was approach coping. Approach coping wasn’t a significant mediator of life satisfaction in our model. This may be due to the relatively low level of personal control and unpredictability of the situation during COVID-19, whereby a problem-solving approach may not bring satisfactory solutions to stressful life circumstances and in many instances may not even be possible. For example, students who thrive in outdoor activities or social groups would mostly not be able to benefit from approach coping style as they would not have the option to engage in leisure activities that they prefer, thus causing a higher level of frustration and a lower perceived quality of life. Mechanisms for coping with stress and burnout differ among individuals. Mostly these are combination of problem-focused and emotion-focused strategies [50]. In addition, other coping strategies used by students include respecting one’s limits, setting priorities, avoiding comparisons and participating in leisure activities such as cinema, reading, sports, meeting friends and family (20). Time management and self-understanding of learning style are also recommended to minimize the effects of stress among medical students [51].

Several studies emphasize on the importance of undertaking assessment of coping strategies at the beginning of medical education to diagnose a specific trend in physicians’ career development [52, 53]. Evidence indicates that coping strategies of students can change over time with decreased use of active coping strategies and increased use of emotional coping strategies, although emotional strategies were associated with poorer clinical academic performance [54]. This implies that students coping mechanism can vary and it is imperative that students should be orientated to different coping strategies which can enable them to identify those that contribute positively to the quality of their personal and professional lives.

The demographics of the students who participated in this study were not found to have any significant effect on any of the variables investigated. Although there was a greater inclination to use social media as leisure activity, as well as learning new skills and reading, these were unable reach significance level as predictors of quality of life. This finding is consistent with a recent study in which time spent on social media for >4 h increased from 1.1% to 47.72% during lockdown [55], while socializing virtually was reported as 89% and engaging in social media as (85%) [56].

The study had some limitations. The sample in this research comprised of medical students at a single medical college, which prevents conclusions about pattern of coping across the years. The students in the present study were predominantly female (70%), which can impact the generalizability of our findings on general population. Nevertheless, prior research suggests that gender is not a significant correlate of coping styles [57]. All data were obtained through self-reported questionnaires, which could introduce response bias. The participants might have underestimated or overestimated the relationship between the study variables. Although the present study was conducted in a private medical college, there is a likelihood of generalizability of the results to the students in the public medical colleges, considering that religion is a dominant factor within the culture and most sought coping mechanism during stressful times [58].

Conclusion

This study contributes to a growing body of research on stress and coping among medical students. Results of the present study suggests that life satisfaction can be improved among medical students by focusing on strategies which enhance resilience. Religion has been identified as a significant coping strategy among medical students, hence future studies could focus on interventions to determine its efficacy as a coping mechanism. The presents study adds an important perspective to the debate on how medical students cope with stress in medical school. More research is needed to assess which types of coping strategies could contribute positively to the quality of their personal and professional lives. Future studies could focus on exploring the pattern and impact of different coping strategies on resilience and life satisfaction.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge all the students who participated in the study.

References

  1. 1. Diener E, Lucas R, Oishi S. Subjective Well-Being: The Science of Happiness and Life Satisfaction. Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology. 2002.
  2. 2. Wang Q, Sun W, Wu H. Associations between academic burnout, resilience and life satisfaction among medical students: a three-wave longitudinal study. BMC Medical Education. 2022;22(1):248. pmid:35382810
  3. 3. Kjeldstadli K, Tyssen R, Finset A, Hem E, Gude T, Gronvold NT, et al. Life satisfaction and resilience in medical school–a six-year longitudinal, nationwide and comparative study. BMC Medical Education. 2006;6(1):48. pmid:16984638
  4. 4. Abdulghani HM, AlKanhal AA, Mahmoud ES, Ponnamperuma GG, Alfaris EA. Stress and its effects on medical students: a cross-sectional study at a college of medicine in Saudi Arabia. J Health Popul Nutr. 2011;29(5):516–22. pmid:22106758
  5. 5. Dyrbye LN, Harper W, Durning SJ, Moutier C, Thomas MR, Massie FS, et al. Patterns of distress in US medical students. Medical Teacher. 2011;33(10):834–9. pmid:21942482
  6. 6. Dyrbye LN, West CP, Satele D, Boone S, Tan L, Sloan J, et al. Burnout among U.S. medical students, residents, and early career physicians relative to the general U.S. population. Acad Med. 2014;89(3):443–51. pmid:24448053
  7. 7. Abreu Alves S, Sinval J, Lucas Neto L, Marôco J, Gonçalves Ferreira A, Oliveira P. Burnout and dropout intention in medical students: the protective role of academic engagement. BMC Medical Education. 2022;22(1):83. pmid:35130892
  8. 8. Hill MR, Goicochea S, Merlo LJ. In their own words: stressors facing medical students in the millennial generation. Med Educ Online. 2018;23(1):1530558–. pmid:30286698
  9. 9. Pagnin D, de Queiroz V. Comparison of quality of life between medical students and young general populations. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2015;28(3):209–12. pmid:26996647
  10. 10. Rahimi B, Baetz M, Bowen R, Balbuena L. Resilience, stress, and coping among Canadian medical students. Can Med Educ J. 2014;5(1):e5–e12. pmid:26451221
  11. 11. Rajapuram N, Langness S, Marshall MR, Sammann A. Medical students in distress: The impact of gender, race, debt, and disability. PLoS One. 2020;15(12):e0243250. pmid:33270759
  12. 12. Mikhail D, Margolin EJ, Sfakianos J, Clifton M, Sorenson M, Thavaseelan S, et al. Changing the Status Quo: Developing a Virtual Sub-Internship in the Era of COVID-19. J Surg Educ. 2021;78(5):1544–55. pmid:33896734
  13. 13. Guse J, Weegen AS, Heinen I, Bergelt C. Mental burden and perception of the study situation among undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study and comparison of dental and medical students. BMJ Open. 2021;11(12):e054728. pmid:34853110
  14. 14. Choi B, Jegatheeswaran L, Minocha A, Alhilani M, Nakhoul M, Mutengesa E. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on final year medical students in the United Kingdom: a national survey. BMC Medical Education. 2020;20(1):206. pmid:32600460
  15. 15. Wanigasooriya K, Beedham W, Laloo R, Karri RS, Darr A, Layton GR, et al. The perceived impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on medical student education and training–an international survey. BMC Medical Education. 2021;21(1):566. pmid:34753477
  16. 16. Windle G. What is resilience? A review and concept analysis. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2011;21(2):152–69.
  17. 17. Life context, coping processes, and depression [press release]. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press 1995.
  18. 18. Roth S, Cohen LJ. Approach, avoidance, and coping with stress. American Psychologist. 1986;41(7):813–9. pmid:3740641
  19. 19. Koenig HG, Pargament KI, Nielsen J. Religious coping and health status in medically ill hospitalized older adults. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1998;186(9):513–21. pmid:9741556
  20. 20. Soliman M. Perception of stress and coping strategies by medical students at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences. 2014;9(1):30–5.
  21. 21. Byrne L, Gavin B, Adamis D, Lim YX, McNicholas F. Levels of stress in medical students due to COVID-19. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2021;47(6):383.
  22. 22. Sinclair VG, Wallston KA. The development and psychometric evaluation of the Brief Resilient Coping Scale. Assessment. 2004;11(1):94–101. pmid:14994958
  23. 23. Fung SF. Validity of the Brief Resilience Scale and Brief Resilient Coping Scale in a Chinese Sample. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(4).
  24. 24. Pavot W, Diener E. The Satisfaction With Life Scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2008;3(2):137–52.
  25. 25. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267–83. pmid:2926629
  26. 26. Cosway R, Endler NS, Sadler AJ, Deary IJ. The Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations: Factorial Structure and Associations With Personality Traits and Psychological Health1. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research. 2000;5(2):121–43.
  27. 27. Dwivedi A, Rastogi R. Proactive Coping, Time Perspective and Life Satisfaction: A Study on Emerging Adulthood. Journal of Health Management. 2017;19(2):264–74.
  28. 28. Abolghasemi A, Taklavi Varaniyab S. Resilience and Perceived Stress: Predictors of Life Satisfaction in Students of Success and Failure. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2010;5:748–52.
  29. 29. Lin YK, Lin C-D, Lin BY-J, Chen D-Y. Medical students’ resilience: a protective role on stress and quality of life in clerkship. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19(1):473. pmid:31881997
  30. 30. Dunn LB, Iglewicz A, Moutier C. A conceptual model of medical student well-being: promoting resilience and preventing burnout. Acad Psychiatry. 2008;32(1):44–53. pmid:18270280
  31. 31. Shi M, Wang X, Bian Y, Wang L. The mediating role of resilience in the relationship between stress and life satisfaction among Chinese medical students: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:16. pmid:25890167
  32. 32. Artuch-Garde R, Gonzalez-Torres MDC, de la Fuente J, Vera MM, Fernandez-Cabezas M, Lopez-Garcia M. Relationship between Resilience and Self-regulation: A Study of Spanish Youth at Risk of Social Exclusion. Front Psychol. 2017;8:612. pmid:28473792
  33. 33. Kermott CA, Johnson RE, Sood R, Jenkins SM, Sood A. Is higher resilience predictive of lower stress and better mental health among corporate executives? PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0218092. pmid:31185049
  34. 34. Houpy JC, Lee WW, Woodruff JN, Pincavage AT. Medical student resilience and stressful clinical events during clinical training. Med Educ Online. 2017;22(1):1320187. pmid:28460570
  35. 35. Chow SK, Francis B, Ng YH, Naim N, Beh HC, Ariffin MAA, et al. Religious Coping, Depression and Anxiety among Healthcare Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Malaysian Perspective. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(1). pmid:33467744
  36. 36. Abdulghani HM, Sattar K, Ahmad T, Akram A. Association of COVID-19 Pandemic with undergraduate Medical Students’ Perceived Stress and Coping. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2020;13:871–81. pmid:33154682
  37. 37. Dobrakowski PP, Skalski S, Surzykiewicz J, Muszyńska J, Konaszewski K. Religious Coping and Life Satisfaction during the COVID-19 Pandemic among Polish Catholics. The Mediating Effect of Coronavirus Anxiety. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021;10(21):4865. pmid:34768383
  38. 38. DeRossett T, LaVoie D, Brooks D. Religious Coping in the United States Amidst a Pandemic: Impact on COVID-19 Related Anxiety. Journal of Religion and Health. 2021;60.
  39. 39. Sen HE, Colucci L, Browne DT. Keeping the Faith: Religion, Positive Coping, and Mental Health of Caregivers During COVID-19. Front Psychol. 2021;12:805019. pmid:35126256
  40. 40. Buzdar MA, Ali A, Nadeem M, Nadeem M. Relationship Between Religiosity and Psychological Symptoms in Female University Students. J Relig Health. 2015;54(6):2155–63. pmid:25216967
  41. 41. Counted V, Pargament KI, Bechara AO, Joynt S, Cowden RG. Hope and well-being in vulnerable contexts during the COVID-19 pandemic: does religious coping matter? The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2020:1–12.
  42. 42. Thai TT, Le PTV, Huynh QHN, Pham PTT, Bui HTH. Perceived Stress and Coping Strategies During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Public Health and Preventive Medicine Students in Vietnam. Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2021;14:795–804. pmid:34177277
  43. 43. Seiffge-Krenke I, Klessinger N. Long-term effects of avoidant coping on adolescents’ depressive symptoms. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2000;26(6):617–30.
  44. 44. Chao RCL. Managing stress and maintaining well-being: Social support, problem-focused coping, and avoidant coping. Journal of Counseling & Development. 2011;89:338–48.
  45. 45. Shaikh A, Peprah E, Mohamed RH, Asghar A, Andharia NV, Lajot NA, et al. COVID-19 and mental health: a multi-country study—the effects of lockdown on the mental health of young adults. Middle East Current Psychiatry. 2021;28(1):51.
  46. 46. Frydenberg E, Lewis R. Relations among well-being, avoidant coping, and active coping in a large sample of Australian adolescents. Psychol Rep. 2009;104(3):745–58. pmid:19708401
  47. 47. Tempski P, Bellodi PL, Paro HBMS, Enns SC, Martins MA, Schraiber LB. What do medical students think about their quality of life? A qualitative study. BMC Medical Education. 2012;12(1):106. pmid:23126332
  48. 48. Messina G, Quercioli C, Troiano G, Russo C, Barbini E, Nisticò F, et al. Medical students’ quality of life: Gianmarco Troiano. European Journal of Public Health. 2016;26(suppl_1).
  49. 49. Dzubur Kulenovic A, Abdulah Kucukalic AK, Alma Bravo-Mehmedbasic ABM, Nermin Ismic NI. Comparison of the Quality of Life Between Medical Students and Students of the Humanities at the Sarajevo University. European Psychiatry. 2015;30:1891.
  50. 50. Fares J, Al Tabosh H, Saadeddin Z, El Mouhayyar C, Aridi H. Stress, Burnout and Coping Strategies in Preclinical Medical Students. N Am J Med Sci. 2016;8(2):75–81. pmid:27042604
  51. 51. Shoda MA, Titiloye MY. Perceived Stress and Coping Mechanism Among Medical Students. Acta Scientific Nutritional Health 2019;3(9):128–34.
  52. 52. Tartas M, Walkiewicz M, Budziński W, Majkowicz M, Wójcikiewicz K, Zdun-Ryżewska A. The coping strategies during medical education predict style of success in medical career: a 10-year longitudinal study. BMC medical education. 2016;16:186–. pmid:27444777
  53. 53. Voltmer E, Köslich-Strumann S, Voltmer J-B, Kötter T. Stress and behavior patterns throughout medical education–a six year longitudinal study. BMC Medical Education. 2021;21(1):454. pmid:34454487
  54. 54. Schiller JH, Stansfield RB, Belmonte DC, Purkiss JA, Reddy RM, House JB, et al. Medical Students’ Use of Different Coping Strategies and Relationship With Academic Performance in Preclinical and Clinical Years. Teach Learn Med. 2018;30(1):15–21. pmid:28753049
  55. 55. Chakladar J, Diomino A, Li WT, Tsai JC, Krishnan AR, Zou AE, et al. Medical student’s perception of the COVID-19 pandemic effect on their education and well-being: a cross-sectional survey in the United States. BMC Medical Education. 2022;22(1):149. pmid:35248030
  56. 56. Finnerty R, Marshall SA, Imbault C, Trainor LJ. Extra-Curricular Activities and Well-Being: Results From a Survey of Undergraduate University Students During COVID-19 Lockdown Restrictions. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021;12. pmid:34262502
  57. 57. Palupi R, Findyartini A. The relationship between gender and coping mechanisms with burnout events in first-year medical students. Korean J Med Educ. 2019;31(4):331–42. pmid:31813199
  58. 58. Mahmood QK, Jafree SR, Sohail MM, Akram MB. A Cross-Sectional Survey of Pakistani Muslims Coping with Health Anxiety through Religiosity during the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Relig Health. 2021;60(3):1462–74. pmid:33709338