A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Priorities for research on improving health behaviours for optimal mental health of Australian university students: A twin-panel Delphi study. | LitMetric

Priorities for research on improving health behaviours for optimal mental health of Australian university students: A twin-panel Delphi study.

Health Promot J Austr

Centre for Mental Health Research, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

Published: January 2025

Issue Addressed: University students are at risk of poor health behaviours which negatively affect mental health and wellbeing. Informing the implementation of appropriate strategies to support Australian university students' health and wellbeing, requires quality evidence. This study aimed to identify research priorities for improving health behaviours to optimise mental health of Australian university students.

Methods: A twin-panel Delphi method comprising 32 experts across two panels (Panel 1: n = 24, Panel 2; n = 8), with three rounds of data collection, was utilised. In round one panellists identified up to five research priorities. Identified priorities were grouped into themes and in Round 2 panellists ranked their panels priorities using a 4-point Likert scale (1 irrelevant, 2 peripheral, 3 important, 4 essential), and in Round 3 they ranked the importance of the priorities identified by the other panel.

Results: Panel 1 identified 35 research priorities in Round 1, and Panel 2 identified 11. Priorities were ranked based on the mean score, with strong, between-panel agreement in the rankings for Panel 1's priorities. (r = .68, p < .001) but not Panel 2 (r = .32, p = .34). A list of 25 priorities was retained.

Conclusions: Priorities were derived from experts and provided a further call to action for research targeting suicide prevention, social determinants, co-design, behaviour change, and the effectiveness and accessibility of services. SO WHAT?: With further input from students, universities and other stakeholders, these research priorities can guide research to optimise health behaviours and mental health of Australian university students.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hpja.948DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

identified priorities
16
health behaviours
12
mental health
12
australian university
12
priorities
9
priorities improving
8
improving health
8
health australian
8
university students
8
twin-panel delphi
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!