Determinant Factors of Depression: A Survey Among University Students

Last reviewed: March 2026

Background and Context

Depression has become a growing public health concern among young adults globally, and university students represent a particularly vulnerable population. The transition to university life involves significant academic pressures, social adjustment challenges, financial concerns, and — for many Malaysian students — the experience of living independently for the first time. These stressors can contribute to the onset or exacerbation of depressive symptoms.

In Malaysia, the National Health and Morbidity Survey has documented rising rates of mental health problems among young adults. The prevalence of depression among clinical groups in Malaysia has been estimated to range from 3% to 46%, depending on the population studied and the assessment tool used. Among university students specifically, several Malaysian studies have reported depression prevalence rates ranging from 20% to over 50%, depending on the screening instrument and severity thresholds applied.

Despite growing awareness, mental health remains stigmatised in Malaysian society, with cultural factors — including collectivist values, concerns about family reputation, and limited mental health literacy — contributing to low rates of help-seeking among students who experience depressive symptoms. Understanding the determinant factors of depression is therefore essential for developing targeted prevention and early intervention programmes within university settings.

Study Design and Methodology

The study employed a cross-sectional survey design among students at a Malaysian university. A total of 240 students participated, recruited from three faculties: Pharmacy, Health Sciences, and Education. The sample included students from different years of study, enabling examination of whether depression varied by academic seniority.

Depression was assessed using the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), a well-validated 20-item self-report instrument that asks respondents to rate how often they have experienced depressive symptoms during the past week. The CES-D yields a total score from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater depressive symptomatology. A score of 16 or above is commonly used as the threshold for clinically significant depressive symptoms.

The mean age of participants was 21.8 years (SD ± 1.5). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare depression scores across faculties, while chi-square tests examined associations between depression and demographic factors including gender and year of study. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 21.

Key Results

The study found that the majority of participating students had adequate mental health, with CES-D scores below the clinical threshold. However, a noteworthy minority did exhibit clinically significant depressive symptoms.

One-way ANOVA revealed no significant difference in depression scores across the three faculties (F(2, 237) = 0.158, MSE = 3.97, p = 0.854, η² = 0.03). This finding suggests that depressive symptoms are distributed relatively uniformly across academic disciplines, rather than being concentrated in programmes traditionally considered more stressful such as pharmacy or health sciences.

Chi-square analysis found no statistically significant association between year of study and depression (p ≥ 0.05). Both junior and senior students reported similar levels of depressive symptomatology, challenging the hypothesis that accumulating academic demands over successive years lead to progressively worsening mental health.

Similarly, no significant gender difference in depression was observed in this sample. While some international studies have reported higher depression rates among female university students, this finding aligns with other Malaysian research suggesting that gender differences in depression may be less pronounced in certain cultural contexts.

Implications for University Mental Health Services

The absence of significant associations between depression and the studied demographic factors has important practical implications. It suggests that depression screening and mental health support services should be offered universally across university campuses, rather than being targeted only at specific faculties, year groups, or genders. All students — regardless of their programme or stage of study — should have access to mental health resources.

University counselling centres in Malaysia should consider implementing routine mental health screening during registration or health check-ups, using validated instruments such as the CES-D or the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Early identification can facilitate timely referral to appropriate support services, potentially preventing the escalation of subclinical symptoms to clinical depression.

The study also highlights the need for interventions that address the common risk factors for depression among students, including academic stress management, social skills development, financial stress support, and strategies for building resilience and healthy coping mechanisms.

Limitations

The study has several limitations. The sample was drawn from a single university, limiting generalisability to other institutions or regions of Malaysia. The relatively small sample size (n = 240) may have limited statistical power to detect small but meaningful differences between groups. The cross-sectional design cannot establish temporal relationships between determinant factors and depression. Self-reported data may be subject to response bias, and the study did not assess factors such as family history of mental illness, financial status, relationship difficulties, or substance use, which may be important predictors of depression among university students.