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.
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: Higher education students from China, Ireland, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the United States were enrolled in a cross-sectional study from April to May 2020, which was during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic for most participants. An online survey, using validated tools, was distributed to assess perceived stress, dietary behaviors, alcohol misuse, sleep quality and duration, and resilience.
RESULTS: 2254 students completed the study. Results indicated that sleep quality mediated the relationship between perceived stress and dietary behaviors as well as the relationship between perceived stress and alcohol misuse. Further, increased resilience reduced the strength of the relationship between perceived stress and dietary behaviors but not alcohol misuse.
CONCLUSION: Based on these results, higher education students are likely to benefit from sleep education and resilience training, especially during stressful events.
METHODS: A total of 351 participants (Mage = 19.75, SDage = 3.29) were recruited in the study using purposive sampling. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the factorial structure of the Family Resilience Scale-Malay (FRS-Malay) and measurement invariance between adolescents and young adults. Then, the scale's reliability was investigated using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega coefficients, and composite reliability index. Finally, we examined the discriminant validity of the FRS-Malay by correlating its score with individual resilience score and examined the incremental validity of the scale using hierarchical multiple regression analysis to test if family resilience can explain individual well-being levels beyond and above individual resilience.
RESULTS: The findings of the confirmatory factor analysis suggest that a single-factor model is supported for both age groups. Furthermore, the scale exhibited scalar invariance between adolescents and young adults. The scale also exhibited good reliability, as the value of Cronbach's alpha, McDonald omega coefficients, and composite reliability index were above 0.80. Additionally, the Pearson correlation analysis showed a positive correlation between the FRS-Malay and individual resilience scores, which supports the discriminant validity of the scale. Similarly, the incremental validity of the scale is also supported. Specifically, family resilience had a positive correlation with well-being, even after controlling for individual resilience in the regression analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: The FRS-Malay has demonstrated good reliability and validity. The scale measures the same construct of family resilience across adolescents and young adults, making it suitable for comparisons. Therefore, this unidimensional tool is appropriate for self-reporting their perceived level of family resilience. It is also useful for studying the development and fluctuation of family resilience in the Malaysian context.
DATA DESCRIPTION: Data were collected from 1583 (Mage = 32.22, SD = 12.90, Range = 19-82) respondents from Japan, China, the United States, and Malaysia between October to November 2020. We collected data across age and sex, marital status, number of children, and occupations. We also accounted for stay-at-home measures, change in income, COVID-19 infection status, place of residence, and subjective social status in the study. Our variables included mental health-related and resilience constructs, namely (i) fear of COVID-19, (ii) depression, anxiety, and stress; (iii) present, past, and future life satisfaction, (iv) sense of control, (v) positive emotions, (vi) ego-resilience, (vii) grit, (viii) self-compassion, (ix) passion, and (x) relational mobility. All questionnaires were assessed for their suitability across the four countries with the necessary translation checks. Results from this study can be instrumental in examining the impact of multiple resilience factors and their interaction with demographic variables in shaping mental health outcomes.
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.
METHODS: We collected data from 1583 citizens from four countries via an online survey between October 14 and November 2, 2020. We gathered demographic data and measured mental distress (depression, anxiety, and stress) and fear of COVID-19. Data on sense of control, ego-resilience, grit, self-compassion, and resilience indicators were also collected.
RESULTS: Sense of control was negatively associated with mental distress in all four countries. Self-compassion was negatively associated with mental distress in the samples from Japan, China, and the U.S. We also found an interaction effect for sense of control: the lower the sense of control, the stronger the deterioration of mental distress when the fear of COVID-19 was high.
LIMITATIONS: This study's cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences. Further, lack of data from people who were actually infected with the virus limits comparisons of people who were and were not infected. Finally, as this study only compared data from four countries, comparisons with more countries are needed.
CONCLUSIONS: A sense of control and self-compassion may help buffer against mental health deterioration during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sense of control was consistently associated with mental health across cultures.