ABSTRACT
Purpose of Review: Several studies have found that medical students have a significant prevalence of sleep issues, such as poor sleep quality, excessive daytime sleepiness, and inadequate sleep duration. The purpose of this review is to carefully evaluate the current research on sleep problems among medical students and, as a result, estimate the prevalence of these disturbances. The EMBASE, PsychINFO, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science and retrieved article reference lists were rigorously searched and rated for quality. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to compute estimates. Recent Findings: The current meta-analysis revealed an alarming estimated pooled prevalence of poor sleep quality (K = 95, N = 54894) of 55.64% [95%CI 51.45%; 59.74%]. A total of 33.32% [95%CI 26.52%; 40.91%] of the students (K = 28, N = 10122) experienced excessive sleepiness during the day. The average sleep duration for medical students (K = 35, N = 18052) is only 6.5 h per night [95%CI 6.24; 6.64], which suggests that at least 30% of them get less sleep than the recommended 7-9 h per night. Summary: Sleep issues are common among medical students, making them a genuine problem. Future research should focus on prevention and intervention initiatives aimed at these groups. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40675-023-00258-5.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic points to the need for scientists to pool their efforts in order to understand this disease and respond to the ensuing crisis. Other global challenges also require such scientific cooperation. Yet in academic institutions, reward structures and incentives are based on systems that primarily fuel the competition between (groups of) scientific researchers. Competition between individual researchers, research groups, research approaches, and scientific disciplines is seen as an important selection mechanism and driver of academic excellence. These expected benefits of competition have come to define the organizational culture in academia. There are clear indications that the overreliance on competitive models undermines cooperative exchanges that might lead to higher quality insights. This damages the well-being and productivity of individual researchers and impedes efforts towards collaborative knowledge generation. Insights from social and organizational psychology on the side effects of relying on performance targets, prioritizing the achievement of success over the avoidance of failure, and emphasizing self-interest and efficiency, clarify implicit mechanisms that may spoil valid attempts at transformation. The analysis presented here elucidates that a broader change in the academic culture is needed to truly benefit from current attempts to create more open and collaborative practices for cumulative knowledge generation.