Orygen Youth Health Research Centre, Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2012 May;46(5):457-67. doi: 10.1177/0004867411435290. Epub 2012 Jan 16.
To examine differences between university students, vocational education and training (VET) students, tertiary students combined and non-students in the prevalence of psychological distress and the socio-demographic and economic characteristics associated with psychological distress.
The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale was used to estimate the prevalence of moderate (16-21) and high (22-50) distress with data from three national surveys: the 2007 Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey, the 2007-08 National Health Survey (NHS), and the 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing (NSMHWB). Multinomial logistic regression models were also estimated using the HILDA survey to examine any differences in the characteristics associated with moderate and high distress between the groups.
There was evidence of a higher prevalence of moderate distress in tertiary students than non-students in the HILDA survey (27.1% vs. 21.2%, p < 0.05) and the NSMHWB (27.4% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.05), but not the NHS (26.1% vs. 22.5%, p > 0.05). However, standardized rates for age and gender attenuated the difference in moderate distress in the HILDA survey and the NSMHWB. The prevalence of high distress was similar between the groups in all three surveys. The multinomial regression analyses using the HILDA survey showed the following subgroups of students to be at a greater risk of high distress relative to those with low distress: younger university students, and university and VET students with financial problems. Compared to VET students and non-students, younger university students and those who worked 1-39 hours per week in paid employment were at a greater risk of high distress.
There is evidence that tertiary students have a greater prevalence of moderate, but not high distress than non-students. Financial factors increase the risk of high distress and are likely to take on more importance as the participation rate of socio-economically disadvantaged students increases.
考察大学生、职业教育与培训（VET）学生、综合高等教育学生与非学生群体在心理困扰发生率方面的差异，以及与心理困扰相关的社会人口学与经济特征。
采用 Kessler 心理困扰量表，以三项全国性调查的数据为基础进行分析，这三项调查分别是：2007 年澳大利亚家庭、收入与劳动力动态调查（HILDA）、2007-2008 年全国健康调查（NHS）以及 2007 年全国心理健康与幸福感调查（NSMHWB）。利用 HILDA 调查数据，还对与中、高度困扰相关的特征在各组之间的差异进行了多变量逻辑回归模型估计。
HILDA 调查与 NSMHWB 调查均显示，大学生群体出现中度困扰的比例高于非学生群体（HILDA 调查：27.1%比 21.2%，p＜0.05；NSMHWB 调查：27.4%比 19.5%，p＜0.05），但 NHS 调查（26.1%比 22.5%，p＞0.05）并非如此。然而，HILDA 调查与 NSMHWB 调查中，经年龄和性别标准化后，中度困扰差异有所减弱。三项调查中，各群体出现高度困扰的比例相似。HILDA 调查的多变量回归分析显示，以下学生亚组发生高度困扰的风险高于低度困扰：较年轻的大学生、有经济问题的大学生与 VET 学生。与 VET 学生和非学生相比，年轻的大学生以及每周工作 1-39 小时的大学生，发生高度困扰的风险更高。
有证据表明，大学生群体出现中度困扰的比例高于非学生群体，但出现高度困扰的比例并不高于非学生群体。经济因素会增加发生高度困扰的风险，且随着社会经济处境不利学生的入学率提高，这些因素可能会变得更加重要。
