Co-Producing Paws on Campus: A Psychoeducational Dog-Facilitated Programme for University Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Increasing Prevalence of University Student Mental Health Problems
1.2. Systematic and Integrated Programme Development
1.3. Facilitating Sustained Implementation: Student and Stakeholder Buy-In
1.4. Co-Producing a University AAI with Students and Stakeholders
1.5. Rationale for Co-Production
1.6. The Current Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Design
2.2. Ethics
2.3. Stage 1: Stakeholder Consultations
2.3.1. Survey of Students AAI Experience and Preferences
2.3.2. Interviews and Consultations with Student Well-Being Staff
2.3.3. Interviews and Consultations with Animal Welfare Professionals
2.4. Stage 2: Student Co-Production of Intervention
2.4.1. Workshop 1: Theory and Goals
2.4.2. Workshop 2: Activities and Themes
2.4.3. Workshop 3: Content, Order and Layout
2.4.4. Workshop 4: Trialling and Outdoor Session
2.5. Stage 3: Prototyping and Student Feedback
3. Results
3.1. Stage 1: Stakeholder Consultations
3.1.1. Student Survey Findings
3.1.2. Student Support Services
3.1.3. Stakeholders for Animal Welfare
3.1.4. Creation of an Advisory Group
3.2. Stage 2: Student Co-Production Workshops
3.2.1. Workshop 1: Theory and Goals
3.2.2. Workshop 2: Activities and Themes
3.2.3. Workshop 3: Session Content, Order, and Layout
3.2.4. Workshop 4: Trialling and Outdoor Session
3.3. Stage 3: Paws on Campus Prototype and Feedback
- Thoughts and Feelings: This session focuses on the connections between human thoughts, feelings, bodily sensations and behaviours, and introduces some basic cognitive behavioural therapy principles [33]. It considers human reactions to different situations, and how our thoughts can link to emotions, sensations, behaviours, and the physiological impact of stress. The session also considers canine stress indicators [34], canine consent and individual differences among the dogs engaged in the session. The activities with the dogs involve reading the dogs’ body language, considering their mental states, engaging in canine consent activities and mindful interactions. This forms a foundation for interacting with the dogs in following sessions.
- Well-being and Welfare: This session introduces students to a range of classic and contemporary models of human needs and domains of human well-being [35]. It then considers theories of animal welfare freedoms and welfare domains [36]. The aim is to understand some of the factors that influence positive well-being/welfare. The activities with the dogs involve interacting with them and discussing with handlers the individual needs of specific dogs, how these needs are met and any challenges they face.
- Care and Compassion: This session invites students to consider how welfare and well-being needs might be met through compassion and care. The session introduces students to theories of compassion and self-compassion [37] and explores how interacting with animals can provide opportunities to give and receive care [38]. The activities with the dogs involve interacting with the dogs to provide care and receive non-judgmental support; we also invite students to engage in non-judgmental listening with their group and the dogs.
- Problem Solving and Help Seeking: This session explores the complexity of student life and the importance of breaking down problems into small steps and reaching out for help when needed [9]. It considers the basics of problem-focused therapy and tools to enable students to avoid feelings of overwhelm [39]. The session includes a discussion of learning in dogs [40] and problem solving as a positive form of enrichment for dogs, engages dogs in puzzle solving and learning novel behaviours [41], and includes clicker training with students.
- Positive Learning and Play (optional outdoor session): This optional session is designed to be run outside in a secure garden setting. The psychoeducational themes are positive learning and play, and nature-connectedness and well-being [42]. The activities include observing dogs in more active play and exploration and engaging with the natural environment. The logic model for Paws on Campus can be found in Figure 6.
3.3.1. Step 1: Feedback from Student Volunteers
3.3.2. Step 2: Feedback from Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties
3.4. Academic Timetable and Delivery Implications
3.5. Summary of Findings
4. Discussion
4.1. Paws on Campus Programme
4.2. Benefits of Co-Producing an AAI for Mental Health
4.3. Limitations and Future Directions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Auerbach, R.P.; Alonso, J.; Axinn, W.G.; Cuijpers, P.; Ebert, D.D.; Green, J.G.; Hwang, I.; Kessler, R.C.; Liu, H.; Mortier, P.; et al. Mental disorders among college students in the world health organization world mental health surveys. Psychol. Med. 2016, 46, 2955–2970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, J.; Mortier, P.; Auerbach, R.P.; Bruffaerts, R.; Vilagut, G.; Cuijpers, P.; Demyttenaere, K.; Ebert, D.D.; Ennis, E.; Gutiérrez-García, R.A.; et al. Severe role impairment associated with mental disorders: Results of the WHO world mental health surveys international college student project. Depress. Anxiety 2018, 35, 802–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lipson, S.K.; Zhou, S.; Abelson, S.; Heinze, J.; Jirsa, M.; Morigney, J.; Patterson, A.; Singh, M.; Eisenberg, D. Trends in college student mental health and help-seeking by race/ethnicity: Findings from the national healthy minds study, 2013–2021. J. Affect. Disord. 2022, 306, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Office for Students. 2019. Available online: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/mental-health-are-all-students-being-properly-supported/ (accessed on 5 March 2024).
- Higher Education Policy Institute [HEPI]. 2019. Available online: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2019/09/17/what-does-todays-report-from-unite-students-and-hepi-mean-for-policymakers-universities-and-students/ (accessed on 5 March 2024).
- Eisenberg, D.; Golberstein, E.; Hunt, J.B. Mental health and academic success in college. BE J. Econ. Anal. Policy 2009, 9, 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Storrie, K.; Ahern, K.; Tuckett, A.A. Systematic review: Students with mental health problems—A growing problem. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 2010, 16, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Duffy, A.; Saunders, K.E.; Malhi, G.S.; Patten, S.; Cipriani, A.; McNevin, S.H.; MacDonald, E.; Geddes, J. Mental health care for university students: A way forward? Lancet Psychiatry 2019, 6, 885–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broglia, E.; Millings, A.; Barkham, M. Student mental health profiles and barriers to help seeking: When and why students seek help for a mental health concern. Couns. Psychother. Res. 2021, 21, 816–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crossman, M.K.; Kazdin, A.E. Animal visitation programs in colleges and universities: An efficient model for reducing student stress. In Handbook on Animal-Assisted Therapy; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2015; pp. 333–337. [Google Scholar]
- Charles, N.; Wolkowitz, C. Bringing dogs onto campus: Inclusions and exclusions of animal bodies in organizations. Gend. Work. Organ. 2019, 26, 303–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pendry, P.; Carr, A.M.; Roeter, S.M.; Vandagriff, J.L. Experimental trial demonstrates effects of animal-assisted stress prevention program on college students’ positive and negative emotion. Hum. Anim. Interact. Bull. 2018, 6, 81–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pendry, P.; Vandagriff, J.L. Animal visitation program (AVP) reduces cortisol levels of university students: A randomized controlled trial. Aera Open 2019, 5, 2332858419852592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kivlen, C.; Winston, K.; Mills, D.; DiZazzo-Miller, R.; Davenport, R.; Binfet, J.T. Canine-assisted intervention effects on the well-being of health science graduate students: A randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 2022, 76, 7606205120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pendry, P.; Kuzara, S.; Gee, N.R. Evaluation of undergraduate students’ responsiveness to a 4-week university-based animal-assisted stress prevention program. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Binfet, J.T.; Passmore, H.A.; Cebry, A.; Struik, K.; McKay, C. Reducing university students’ stress through a drop-in canine-therapy program. J. Ment. Health 2018, 27, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Parbery-Clark, C.; Lubamba, M.; Tanner, L.; McColl, E. Animal-assisted interventions for the improvement of mental health outcomes in higher education students: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 10768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huber, A.; Klug, S.J.; Abraham, A.; Westenberg, E.; Schmidt, V.; Winkler, A.S. Animal-Assisted Interventions Improve Mental, But Not Cognitive or Physiological Health Outcomes of Higher Education Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2022, 22, 1597–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Totzeck, C.; van der Meer, A.S.; Christiansen, H.; Durlach, F.; Li Sanchez, K.; Schneider, S. Systematic Review: Patient and Public Involvement of Children and Young People in Mental Health Research. Clin. Child Fam. Psychol. Rev. 2024, 27, 257–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Smith, B.; Williams, O.; Bone, L.; the Moving Social Work Co-production Collective. Co-production: A resource to guide co-producing research in the sport, exercise, and health sciences. Qual. Res. Sport Exerc. Health 2023, 15, 159–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawkins, J.; Madden, K.; Fletcher, A.; Midgley, L.; Grant, A.; Cox, G.; Moore, L.; Campbell, R.; Murphy, S.; Bonell, C.; et al. Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reed, H.; Couturiaux, D.; Davis, M.; Edwards, A.; Janes Kim, H.S.; Melendez-Torres, G.J.; Murphy, S.; Rotevatn, T.A.; Smith, J.; Evans, R. Co-production as an emerging methodology for developing school-based health interventions with students aged 11–16: Systematic review of intervention types, theories and processes and thematic synthesis of stakeholders’ experiences. Prev. Sci. 2021, 22, 475–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Steel, J.; Williams, J.M.; McGeown, S. Teacher-researcher collaboration in animal-assisted education: Co-designing a reading to dogs intervention. Educ. Res. 2022, 64, 113–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steel, J. Reading to Dogs in schools: A controlled feasibility study of an online reading to Dogs intervention. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2023, 117, 102117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wight, D.; Wimbush, E.; Jepson, R.; Doi, L. Six steps in quality intervention development (6SQuID). J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2016, 70, 520–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pringle, J.; Doi, L.; Jindal-Snape, D.; Jepson, R.; McAteer, J. Adolescents and health-related behaviour: Using a framework to develop interventions to support positive behaviours. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2018, 4, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pringle, J.; Doi, L.; Jepson, R.; McAteer, J. Developing an evidence and theory based intervention that seeks to promote positive adolescent health and education outcomes. Lancet 2018, 392, S73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thabrew, H.; Fleming, T.; Hetrick, S.; Merry, S. Co-design of eHealth interventions with children and young people. Front. Psychiatry 2018, 9, 481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khoury, B.; Lecomte, T.; Fortin, G.; Masse, M.; Therien, P.; Bouchard, V.; Chapleau, M.-A.; Paquin, K.; Hofmann, S.G. Mindfulness-based therapy: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2013, 33, 763–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taylor-Rodgers, E.; Batterham, P.J. Evaluation of an online psychoeducation intervention to promote mental health help seeking attitudes and intentions among young adults: Randomised controlled trial. J. Affect. Disord. 2014, 168, 65–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hood, B.; Jelbert, S.; Santos, L.R. Benefits of a psychoeducational happiness course on university student mental well-being both before and during a COVID-19 lockdown. Health Psychol. Open 2021, 8, 2055102921999291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richard, J.; Rebinsky, R.; Suresh, R.; Kubic, S.; Carter, A.; Cunningham, J.E.; Ker, A.; Williams, K.; Sorin, M. Scoping review to evaluate the effects of peer support on the mental health of young adults. BMJ Open 2022, 12, e061336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Beck, J.S. Cognitive Behavior Therapy: Basics and Beyond; Guilford Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Townsend, L.; Gee, N.R. Recognizing and mitigating canine stress during animal assisted interventions. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taylor, L.; Seager, M. Maslow revised: How Covid-19 highlights a circle of needs, not a hierarchy. Psychreg J. Psychol. 2021, 5, 115–127. [Google Scholar]
- Mellor, D.J.; Beausoleil, N.J.; Littlewood, K.E.; McLean, A.N.; McGreevy, P.D.; Jones, B.; Wilkins, C. The 2020 five domains model: Including human–animal interactions in assessments of animal welfare. Animals 2020, 10, 1870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Millard, L.A.; Wan, M.W.; Smith, D.M.; Wittkowski, A. The effectiveness of compassion focused therapy with clinical populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 2023, 326, 168–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Janssens, M.; Eshuis, J.; Peeters, S.; Lataster, J.; Reijnders, J.; Enders-Slegers, M.J.; Jacobs, N. The pet-effect in daily life: An experience sampling study on emotional wellbeing in pet owners. Anthrozoös 2020, 33, 579–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michelson, D.; Malik, K.; Parikh, R.; Weiss, H.A.; Doyle, A.M.; Bhat, B.; Sahu, R.; Chilhate, B.; Mathur, S.; Krishna, M.; et al. Effectiveness of a brief lay counsellor-delivered, problem-solving intervention for adolescent mental health problems in urban, low-income schools in India: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 2020, 4, 571–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Radosta, L. Canine behavior and development. Canine Feline Behav. Vet. Tech. Nurses 2023, 19, 34–58. [Google Scholar]
- Littlewood, K.E.; Heslop, M.V.; Cobb, M.L. The agency domain and behavioral interactions: Assessing positive animal welfare using the Five Domains Model. Front. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 1284869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martin, L.; White, M.P.; Hunt, A.; Richardson, M.; Pahl, S.; Burt, J. Nature contact, nature connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 2020, 68, 101389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Binfet, J.T. The effects of group-administered canine therapy on university students’ wellbeing: A randomized controlled trial. Anthrozoös 2017, 30, 397–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grajfoner, D.; Harte, E.; Potter, L.M.; McGuigan, N. The effect of dog-assisted intervention on student well-being, mood, and anxiety. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pendry, P.; Carr, A.M.; VandaGriff, J.L.; Gee, N.R. Incorporating human-animal interaction into academic stress management programs: Effects on typical and at-risk students’ executive function. AERA Open 2021, 7, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pendry, P.; Carr, A.M.; Gee, N.R.; Vandagriff, J.L. Randomized trial examining effects of animal assisted intervention and stress related symptoms on college students’ learning and study skills. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Harden, R.M. What is a spiral curriculum? Med. Teach. 1999, 21, 141–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Miller, S.L.; Serpell, J.A.; Dalton, K.R.; Waite, K.B.; Morris, D.O.; Redding, L.E.; Dreschel, N.A.; Davis, M.F. The importance of evaluating positive welfare characteristics and temperament in working therapy dogs. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 844252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunt, R.L.; Whiteside, H.; Prankel, S. Effects of environmental enrichment on dog behaviour: Pilot study. Animals 2022, 12, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variable | Frequency | % |
---|---|---|
Age | ||
18–21 | 46 | 22.5 |
22–25 | 87 | 42.6 |
26–29 | 36 | 17.6 |
30+ | 35 | 17.2 |
Gender | ||
Female | 179 | 87.7 |
Male | 22 | 10.8 |
Non-binary | 2 | 1.0 |
Prefer not to say | 1 | 0.5 |
University Degree | ||
Undergraduate | 83 | 40.7 |
Post-graduate Taught | 76 | 37.3 |
Post-graduate Research | 45 | 22.1 |
Degree Programme | ||
Arts | 17 | 8.3 |
Humanities | 20 | 9.8 |
Medicine | 5 | 2.5 |
Science | 29 | 14.2 |
Social Sciences | 85 | 41.7 |
Engineering or Mathematics | 10 | 4.9 |
Veterinary Medicine | 17 | 8.3 |
Business | 9 | 4.4 |
Other Healthcare | 6 | 2.9 |
Other | 6 | 2.9 |
Location of University | ||
United Kingdom | 135 | 66.2 |
Canada | 21 | 10.3 |
United States of America | 29 | 14.2 |
Australia | 5 | 2.5 |
Europe | 11 | 5.3 |
Asia | 2 | 1.0 |
Uruguay | 1 | 0.5 |
International Student | ||
No | 142 | 70 |
Yes | 61 | 30 |
Variable | Frequency | % |
---|---|---|
Previously attended an AAI session at university | ||
Yes | 73 | 36.0 |
No | 130 | 64.0 |
Interested in attending an AAI session if offered at university | ||
Yes | 153 | 75.0 |
No | 20 | 9.8 |
Maybe | 31 | 15.2 |
What animals would you want at an AAI session? (multiple answers allowed) | ||
Dogs | 185 | 90.7 |
Cats | 128 | 62.7 |
Rabbits | 97 | 47.5 |
Guinea pigs | 77 | 37.7 |
Miniature horses/Shetland ponies | 103 | 50.5 |
Other | 33 | 16.2 |
How would you prefer the AAI session to be run? (multiple answers allowed) | ||
One-on-one with animal and therapist | 114 | 55.9 |
One-on-one with animal only | 120 | 58.8 |
In small groups with animal and other students | 130 | 63.7 |
In large groups with animal and other students | 10 | 4.9 |
How often would you attend an AAI at your university? | ||
Never/unlikely to attend | 11 | 5.4 |
One time only | 28 | 13.7 |
Monthly | 88 | 43.1 |
Weekly, if offered | 77 | 37.7 |
What time of day would you be most like to attend an AAI? (multiple answers allowed) | ||
Mornings | 70 | 34.3 |
Afternoons | 157 | 77.0 |
Evenings | 95 | 46.6 |
Weekends only | 37 | 18.1 |
What Are Student-Focused Problems? | How Can Campus Dog Programmes Help? |
---|---|
Mental Health Stress Depression Anxiety Coping mechanisms Social Issues Loneliness Communication Balancing academic and social life Self-care Navigating adulthood Work–life balance Taking time for mindfulness | Mental Health Stress reduction Mood improvement Short-term anxiety reduction They provide a safe space Social Issues Promote connections (human–human and human–dog) Promote social engagement Self-care Grounding techniques Knowledge and skills Chance to practice mindfulness Animal Welfare Chance to learn about dog welfare Learning about dog communication |
Activity | Student Enjoyment (Mean) | Dog Enjoyment (Mean) | Additional Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Dog tricks | 9.5 | 9 | Have suggested tricks to do with dogs, especially as a starting point |
Mindful petting | 10 | 10 | Letting the dog guide the interaction was important and helpful |
Problem solving | 9.5 | 9 | Fun, but can be tricky to get the difficulty of the problem just right (not too hard, not too easy!) |
Dog eye gaze | 8 | 7 | Eye gaze felt a bit stressful for the dogs if prolonged—short gazes worked well |
Thoughts and Feelings | Well-Being and Welfare | Compassion and Care | Communication and Body Language | Learning and Play | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
I enjoyed the session | 88.2% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
I enjoyed interacting with the dog | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
I found the session helpful | 64% | 100% | 100% | 80% | 60% |
I found interacting with the dog helpful | 88.2% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 80% |
Meeting in a group was a positive experience | 47% | 100% | 85.7% | 80% | 60% |
I would recommend POC to others | 94.1% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
I would like to do more POC sessions | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
The POC venue was good | 64% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
POC is good for students | 88.2% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Activity | Objectives | Summary Results |
---|---|---|
Stage 1: Stakeholder Consultation | ||
Student survey | Identify student AAI preferences and expectations |
|
Well-being Advisor consultations | Identify student referral route and embed within university student support systems |
|
Consultations with animal welfare professionals | Establish best animal welfare practice for university AAI |
|
Stage 2: Co-production Workshops | ||
Four workshops with students | Agree on the core components of the intervention to enhance student well-being through AAI |
|
Stage 3: Prototyping | ||
Prototype | Create manualised intervention with all implementation materials including referral process and evaluation tools |
|
Ethical review of all materials by human and animal health experts | Identify ethical issues with intervention and feedback materials |
|
Student volunteer sessions | Initial feedback on sessions |
|
Referred vulnerable student feedback | Test implementation processes and gain feedback from target group |
|
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Williams, J.M.; Bradfield, J.; Gardiner, A.; Pendry, P.; Wauthier, L. Co-Producing Paws on Campus: A Psychoeducational Dog-Facilitated Programme for University Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2024, 21, 1066. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081066
Williams JM, Bradfield J, Gardiner A, Pendry P, Wauthier L. Co-Producing Paws on Campus: A Psychoeducational Dog-Facilitated Programme for University Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2024; 21(8):1066. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081066
Chicago/Turabian StyleWilliams, Joanne M., Jillian Bradfield, Andrew Gardiner, Patricia Pendry, and Laura Wauthier. 2024. "Co-Producing Paws on Campus: A Psychoeducational Dog-Facilitated Programme for University Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 21, no. 8: 1066. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21081066