METHODS: We followed the guidelines suggested by Whetten for constructing a theoretical model for framework development. There were four phases in the model development. In the first phase, different literature review methods were used, and additional students' perspectives were collected through focus group discussions. Then, using the data, we constructed the theoretical model in the second phase. In the third phase, we validated the newly developed model and its related guidelines. Finally, we performed response process validation of the model with a group of medical teachers.
RESULTS: The developed systematic assessment resilience framework (SAR) promotes four constructs: self-control, management, engagement, and growth, through five phases of assessment: assessment experience, assessment direction, assessment preparation, examiner focus, and student reflection. Each phase contains a number of practical guidelines to promote resilience. We rigorously triangulated each approach with its theoretical foundations and evaluated it on the basis of its content and process. The model showed high levels of content and face validity.
CONCLUSIONS: The SAR model offers a novel guideline for fostering resilience through assessment planning and practice. It includes a number of attainable and practical guidelines for enhancing resilience. In addition, it opens a new horizon for HPE students' future use of this framework in the new normal condition (post COVID 19).
METHODS: This study employed a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-testing. It involved the training of course coordinators in implementing the SAR framework and its integration into the daily learning activities. Fourth-year medical students were assessed before and after the intervention using standardized measures of resilience, anxiety, depression, burnout, and academic stress. Data were analyzed using quantitative methods and thematic analysis for qualitative feedback.
RESULTS: Post-intervention, students demonstrated a significant increase in resilience scores (p 0.05). Qualitative feedback of the course coordinators highlighted an improved learning environment, increased coping strategies, and a more supportive academic culture.
CONCLUSION: The SAR framework significantly contributes to enhancing medical students' resilience and reducing psychological distress. Its implementation suggests a promising approach to fostering a supportive educational environment that not only addresses the psychological challenges faced by medical students but also enhances their academic performance and overall well-being. Further research is warranted to explore the long-term impacts of SAR across different medical education contexts.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the psychological impact of COVID-19 on emergency HCWs and to understand how they are dealing with COVID-19 pandemic, their stress coping strategies or protective factors, and challenges while dealing with COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: Using a framework thematic analysis approach, 15 frontline emergency HCWs directly dealing with COVID-19 patients from April 2, 2020 to April 25, 2020. The semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Findings highlighted first major theme of stress coping, including, limiting media exposure, limited sharing of Covid-19 duty details, religious coping, just another emergency approach, altruism, and second major theme of Challenges includes, psychological response and noncompliance of public/denial by religious scholar.
CONCLUSIONS: Participants practiced and recommended various coping strategies to deal with stress and anxiety emerging from COVID-19 pandemic. Media was reported to be a principal source of raising stress and anxiety among the public. Religious coping as well as their passion to serve humanity and country were the commonly employed coping strategies.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among academic health professionals via web-based professional networks from August 2022 to February 2023. Validated tools were used, and descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.
RESULTS: 505 participants were included, predominantly female (63%), with a mean age of 38.15 ± 9.6 years. High burnout was reported by 10.9%, 13.7% experienced exhaustion, and 6.3% were disengaged. Resilience and thriving were moderate at 59.2 and 51.9%, respectively. Age correlated negatively with burnout (r = -0.131, p = 0.003) but positively with resilience (r = 0.178, p
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, after the scale translation, the factorial structural validity was assessed via the confirmatory factor analysis with 70 180 samples. Internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity were assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, maximum reliability, and Average Variance Extracted. The discriminant validity was assessed using Heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations matrix and also, measure invariance was evaluated.
RESULTS: The original five-factor model had good model fit indices but due to low factor loading of item 2 and 20, the model was modified. The Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability for four factors were above 0.7 (except for factor 5). The convergent validity for all five factors were achieved. Between factors 1 with 2 and 4, 2 with 3 and 4 discriminant validity was not established (correlations > 0.9) and the results suggested that there might be a second-order latent construct behind these factors. Therefore, a second-order assessment was performed. The results of the second-order latent construct assessment showed a good goodness-of fit and strong measurement invariance for both men and women.
CONCLUSION: The 23-item version of Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale is a reliable and valid scale to measure resilience as a complex construct in the Iran context.
METHOD: A prospective test-retest design was employed on Malaysian women with early breast cancer (N = 105). Data were analyzed using SPSS version 24.
RESULTS: The results showed overall Cronbach alpha values were .92 and .93 for test-retest, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values ranged between .62 and .75. This study accepted three factors and two factors for test-retest, respectively. Individual factors showed Cronbach alpha average ranged from .71 to .91.
CONCLUSION: The Malay version RS-14 tool was found to be statistically valid, reliable, and reproducible. It was able to measure resilience level in those women under study.