Objective: This review aims to provide an overview of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies analyzing stress reactivity during daily life in terms of direct and moderated influence of acute stress on physiological responses.Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was performed on November 29, 2021 using Web of Science, MEDLINE and PsycINFO to identify prospective EMA studies targeting acute stressors or stress under naturalistic conditions, without restrictions of publication date or population. Study quality was assessed for multiple EMA-specific sources of bias.Results: Out of 4285 non-duplicate records, 107 publications involving 104 unique studies were included. The majority of studies assessed acute physiological stress responses primarily through salivary cortisol (n = 59) and cardiovascular outcomes (n = 32). Most studies performed at least three measurements per day (n = 59), and had a moderate risk of recall bias (n = 68) and confounding (n = 85). Fifty-four studies reported a compliance of ≥80%. Direct, non-moderated positive associations were observed between acute stress exposure and concurrent cortisol levels (44%, n = 11/25), systolic (44%, 8/18) and diastolic blood pressure (53%, 8/15) and heart rate (53%, 9/17). Several inter- and intra-individual moderators were identified, such as age, gender, health status, chronic stress, work-related resources, physical activity and stress coping indicators.Conclusions: About half of the reviewed EMA studies demonstrated direct associations between everyday acute stress exposure and physiological responses, including increased cortisol levels, blood pressure and heart rate. Results further suggested various moderator variables that could help develop tailored prevention strategies and identify groups at higher risk for dysfunctional stress responses.Registration: PROSPERO—Reg.-No.: PROSPERO 2020CRD42020163178.

Prior evidence suggests that medical students’ mental health is poor and deteriorates during the course of academic studies. This qualitative study therefore aims to improve our understanding of medical students’ perceptions of i) stressors related to their academic studies, ii) resources that may facilitate coping with those stressors and iii) suggestions to potentially reduce stress. Eight focus groups were conducted with medical students enrolled at a medical school in Germany until thematic saturation was reached. A topic guide was used to facilitate the discussion. Subsequently, focus group discussions were transcribed and content-analyzed using MaxQDA. Organizational factors especially related to inadequate information flow as well as exams (e.g. repeat exams, scheduling, perceived unfair grading), poor theoretical and practical teaching quality, time and performance pressure, social interactions and individual characteristics (e.g. self-expectations, fear of failure) emerged as major contributors to stress. Resources perceived to facilitate coping with those stressors pertained to some other organizational aspects (e.g. flexibility, availability of contact persons), career prospects, practical training, social support, personal characteristics (e.g. knowledge base, past experience) and leisure time. Suggestions for improvement related primarily to organizational measures rather than individual-level measures. Besides well-known stressors (e.g. exams and high performance pressure), some new aspects emerged from our study including stress related to organizational factors and repeat exams. Accordingly, students’ wishes for organizational-level interventions, including better information systems and better interweaving of practical and theoretical education, could be first target areas for improvement.

The mental health of medical students remains to be a matter of concern. Numerous setting-based and individual-based interventions for student mental health have been proposed in the literature. However, the student perspective on those interventions has been largely neglected. This study aims to explore how medical students perceive different interventions and if they desire any additional changes with regard to their studies. Eight focus groups with 71 participants were conducted at a large German medical school. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and content-analyzed using MAXQDA 18. We found that medical students prefer setting-based interventions. Most proposed interventions were on a setting-based level. For instance, students asked for more information on the university’s psychosocial counseling services and for better information management regarding contact persons. Interventions proposed in the literature received mixed reactions: Several participants did not favour a pass/fail grading system. Students considered a peer-to-peer mentoring program for freshmen very helpful. Students had diverse attitudes towards Balint groups. They approved of several self-management courses, most of them being related to time or stress management. Interestingly, the most urgently wanted interventions appear to be rather easy to implement (e.g. a mentoring program). This study explored the medical student perspective on student mental health interventions. Additionally, our study illustrates the benefit and feasibility of involving students early on in the conception of interventions. Further research with a representative sample is needed to obtain broader information on the acceptance of the suggested interventions.