Purpose
This study aims to confirm the degree of stress perceived by medical students in Korea and to study the difference between the methods used to relieve stress. In addition, this study evaluates the stress relief methods medical students believe are effective.
Methods
The subjects of the study were 147 students of a medical school in Korea who voluntarily participated in an online survey. The degree of stress perceived by medical students in Korea was confirmed, and the differences between the methods used to relieve stress were analyzed, along with the effective stress relief methods considered by the students themselves.
Results
There was no difference found in the degree of stress experienced by medical students based on their year in school and gender. The most commonly reported method to relieve stress was sleep, and it was found that this method provided the highest degree of stress relief.
Conclusion
As stress has been consistently reported as an issue among medical students, tackling stress among medical students should not be handled solely at the individual level.

Purpose
This study aims to verify whether the Reflective Practice Questionnaire (RPQ) developed by Priddis and Rogers is valid in the Korean context to identify the level of reflection of medical students in clinical practice.
Methods
A total of 202 third- and fourth-year medical students from seven universities participated in the study. After receiving approval for use from the authors, a survey was conducted on the students through an adaptation process. The original scale consists of 10 factors with 40 items. The Self-efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale (SECP), Korean Self-reflection and Insight Scale (K-SRIS), and Reflection-in-Learning Scale (RinLS) were used to validate the scale. Exploratory factor, confirmatory factor, correlation, and reliability analyses were used for data analysis.
Results
As a result of exploratory factor analysis, 10 subfactors were extracted (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin=0.856, Bartlett’s test: χ 2 =5,044.337, degrees of freedom=780, p<0.001). Among the 40 items, one that showed a high overlapping load for other factors was excluded. As a result of confirmatory factor analysis, the 10-factor structure model was found suitable (χ 2 =1.980, comparative fit index=0.859, Tucker-Lewis index=0.841, root mean square error of approximation=0.070). As a result of the criterion validity test, most of the subfactors of the Korean version of the RPQ (K-RPQ) showed a positive correlation with K-SRIS, RinLS, and SECP. The reliability of 10 subfactors was satisfactory, ranging from 0.666 to 0.919.
Conclusion
The K-RPQ was confirmed to be a reliable and valid tool to evaluate the level of reflection among Korean medical students in clinical clerkship. This scale can be used as a tool to provide feedback on each student’s level of reflection in clinical clerkship.