METHODS: This cross-sectional study employed a validated, self-administered questionnaire which was administered to 543 first-year pharmacy students from nine different private universities. Factor analysis was utilised to extract key factors from the responses. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse the data.
KEY FINDINGS: Eight factors motivating students' decision to study pharmacy emerged from the responses, accounting for 63.8% of the variance observed. Students were primarily motivated by intrinsic interests, with work conditions and profession attributes also exerting significant influence. In terms of choice of private university, nine factors were identified, accounting for 73.8% of the variance observed. The image of the school and university were most influential factors in this context, followed by university safety, programme attributes and financial factors.
CONCLUSIONS: First-year pharmacy students in the private higher education sector are motivated by intrinsic interest when choosing to study pharmacy over other courses, while their choice of private university is influenced primarily by the image of the school and university.
Methods: One hundred participants (50 good sleepers; 50 poor sleepers) were asked to choose between 2 written scenarios to answer 1 of 2 questions: "Which describes a better (or worse) night of sleep?". Each scenario described a self-reported experience of sleep, stringing together 17 possible determinants of sleep quality that occur at different times of the day (day before, pre-sleep, during sleep, upon waking, day after). Each participant answered 48 questions. Logistic regression models were fit to their choice data.
Results: Eleven of the 17 sleep quality parameters had a significant impact on the participants' choices. The top 3 determinants of sleep quality were: Total sleep time, feeling refreshed (upon waking), and mood (day after). Sleep quality judgments were most influenced by factors that occur during sleep, followed by feelings and activities upon waking and the day after. There was a significant interaction between wake after sleep onset and feeling refreshed (upon waking) and between feeling refreshed (upon waking) and question type (better or worse night of sleep). Type of sleeper (good vs poor sleepers) did not significantly influence the judgments.
Conclusions: Sleep quality judgments appear to be determined by not only what happened during sleep, but also what happened after the sleep period. Interventions that improve mood and functioning during the day may inadvertently also improve people's self-reported evaluation of sleep quality.