title: Can the 12-item General Health Questionnaire be used to identify medical students who might 'struggle' on the medical course? A prospective study on two cohorts.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Students who fail to thrive on the Nottingham undergraduate medical course frequently suffer from anxiety, depression or other mental health problems. These difficulties may be the cause, or the result of, academic struggling. Early detection of vulnerable students might direct pastoral care and remedial support to where it is needed. We investigated the use of the short-form General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) as a possible screening tool.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two consecutive cohorts (2006 and 2007) were invited to complete the GHQ-12. The questionnaire was administered online, during the second semester (after semester 1 exams) for the 2006 cohort and during the first semester for the 2007 cohort. All data were held securely and confidentially. At the end of the course, GHQ scores were examined in relation to course progress.
  
  
  RESULTS
  251 students entered the course in 2006 and 254 in 2007; 164 (65%) and 160 (63%), respectively, completed the GHQ-12. In both cohorts, the study and non-study groups were very similar in terms of pre-admission socio-demographic characteristics and overall course marks. In the 2006 study group, the GHQ Likert score obtained part-way through the first year was negatively correlated with exam marks during Years 1 and 2, but the average exam mark in semester 1 was the sole independent predictor of marks in semester 2 and Year 2. No correlations were found for the 2007 study group but the GHQ score was a weak positive predictor of marks in semester 2, with semester 1 average exam mark again being the strongest predictor. A post-hoc moderated-mediation analysis suggested that significant negative associations of GHQ scores with semester 1 and 2 exams applied only to those who completed the GHQ after their semester 1 exams. Students who were identified as GHQ 'cases' in the 2006 group were statistically less likely to complete the course on time (OR=4.74, p 0.002). There was a non-significant trend in the same direction in the 2007 group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Results from two cohorts provide insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of the GHQ-12 as a screening tool. The timing of administration could have a critical influence on the results, and the theoretical and practical implications of this finding are discussed. Low marks in semester 1 examinations seem be the best single indicator of students at risk for subsequent poor performance.
authors.affiliation: Medical Education Unit, B94 Medical School, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: James
authors.forename: Janet
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Yates
authors.forename: Eamonn
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Ferguson
mesh_terms: D004501:Education, Medical / Q000592:standards; D004522:Educational Status; D005260:Female; D006304:Health Status; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013337:Students, Medical / Q000523:psychology; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Psychol Methods. 2007 Mar;12(1):1-22
references.pmid: 17402809
references.citation: Med Educ. 2004 May;38(5):482-91
references.pmid: 15107082
references.citation: J R Soc Med. 1998 May;91(5):237-43
references.pmid: 9764076
references.citation: BMC Med Educ. 2011 Nov 18;11:95
references.pmid: 22098629
references.citation: Transfusion. 2002 Jun;42(6):679-83
references.pmid: 12147018
references.citation: Psychol Med. 1997 Jan;27(1):191-7
references.pmid: 9122299
references.citation: Med Educ. 1997 May;31(3):163-8
references.pmid: 9231132
references.citation: BMJ. 2006 Apr 29;332(7548):1009-13
references.pmid: 16543299
references.citation: BMC Med Educ. 2012 Jun 20;12:43
references.pmid: 22716903
references.citation: J Pers. 2008 Dec;76(6):1523-44
references.pmid: 19012657
references.citation: Med Educ. 2005 Jun;39(6):594-604
references.pmid: 15910436
references.citation: Med Teach. 2008;30(3):319-21
references.pmid: 18484461
references.citation: Med Educ. 2004 May;38(5):463-4
references.pmid: 15107079
references.citation: BMC Med Educ. 2010 Jul 28;10:55
references.pmid: 20667093
references.citation: Med Educ. 2006 Jun;40(6):584-9
references.pmid: 16700775
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2009 Oct 7;29(40):12617-24
references.pmid: 19812336
references.citation: Am Psychol. 2006 Sep;61(6):622-31
references.pmid: 16953749
references.citation: Trends Ecol Evol. 2010 Feb;25(2):81-9
references.pmid: 19748700
references.citation: Health Psychol Rev. 2013 May;7(Suppl 1):S32-S70
references.pmid: 23772230
references.citation: BMJ. 2010 Feb 16;340:c478
references.pmid: 20160316
references.citation: BMC Med Educ. 2011 Nov 07;11:92
references.pmid: 22059598
references.citation: Med Educ. 2011 Feb;45(2):132-40
references.pmid: 21208259