highly stressful environment to doctors. This article described findings on stress, stressors and coping strategies among house officers in a Malaysian hospital. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on house officers in a Malaysian hospital. The 12 items General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), General Stressors Questionnaire (GSQ) and Brief COPE inventory were administered to measure perceived stress, sources of stress and coping strategies among house officers respectively. Data was analysed using SPSS version 12. Results: Forty two house officers participated in this study. This study found that approximately 31% of the house officers were in distress. The top five stressors were fears of making mistakes that can lead to serious consequences, work overload, working with uncooperative colleagues, doing work that mentally straining and feeling of being underpaid. The most frequent coping strategies used by house officers were religion, acceptance and self-distraction. Conclusion: This study found that there was a high percentage of distressed house officers. It also found that major stressors were related to performance pressure. The main coping strategy used by house officer was emotion-focused copin

Background: Medical training is often regarded as a stressful period. Studies have previously found that 21.6%–50% of medical students experience significant psychological distress. The present study compared the prevalence and levels of psychological distress between 2 cohorts of first-year medical students that underwent different admission selection processes. Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted by comparing 2 cohorts of first-year medical students; 1 group (cohort 1) was selected based purely on academic merit (2008/2009 cohort) and the other group (cohort 2) was selected based on academic merit, psychometric assessment, and interview performance (2009/2010 cohort). Their distress levels were measured by the General Health Questionnaire, and scores higher than 3 were considered indicative of significant psychological distress. Results: The prevalence (P = 0.003) and levels (P = 0.001) of psychological distress were significantly different between the 2 cohorts. Cohort 1 had 1.2–3.3 times higher risk of developing psychological distress compared to cohort 2 (P = 0.007). Conclusion: Cohort 2 had better psychological health than cohort 1 and was less likely to develop psychological distress. This study provided evidence of a potential benefit of multimodal student selection based on academic merit, psychometric assessment, and interview performance. This selection process might identify medical students who will maintain better psychological health.