Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among elderly patients that seeking treatment in a primary care clinic in Malaysia from September to November 2018 using a set of researcher-assisted and validated questionnaire on their consent.
Findings: A total of 182 elderly patients were included in this study. A majority of participants (n = 87, 47.8%) admitted experiencing practical problems with their medication use. There are varieties of choice of management strategy employed by elderly patients to overcome the problems. For the willingness to deprescribing, there were positive correlation for patients' age (rs (182) =0.183, P < 0.05) and number of medications (rs (182) =0.271, P < 0.01) with the burden factor. There were also a negative correlation of age (rs (182) = -0.174, P < 0.05) and number of medication (rs (182) = -0.176, P < 0.04) with appropriateness of medications.
Conclusion: A majority of Malaysian elderly experience practical problems with their medication use. Elderly patients' belief and attitudes toward deprescribing were influenced by age and number of medications.
DATA SOURCES: Twelve electronic bibliographic databases.
REVIEW METHODS: Evidence was extracted from original studies, and integrated in a narrative synthesis guided by the PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews. Personal domains were clustered into themes using a modified Delphi technique.
RESULTS: A total of 584 articles were screened. 65 unique studies (80 articles) matched our inclusion criteria of which seven were conducted within nursing/midwifery faculties. Six in 10 studies featured applicants to medical school. Across selection processes, we identified 32 personal domains assessed by MMIs, the most frequent being: communication skills (84%), teamwork/collaboration (70%), and ethical/moral judgement (65%). Domains capturing ability to cope with stressful situations (14%), make decisions (14%), and resolve conflict in the workplace (13%) featured in fewer than ten studies overall. Intra- and inter-disciplinary inconsistencies in domain profiles were noted, as well as differences by entry level. MMIs deployed in nursing and midwifery assessed compassion and decision-making more frequently than in all other disciplines. Own programme philosophy and professional body guidance were most frequently cited (~50%) as sources for personal domains; a blueprinting process was reported in only 8% of studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Nursing, midwifery and allied healthcare professionals should develop their theoretical frameworks for MMIs to ensure they are evidence-based and fit-for-purpose. We suggest a re-evaluation of domain priorities to ensure that students who are selected, not only have the capacity to offer the highest standards of care provision, but are able to maintain these standards when facing clinical practice and organisational pressures.
METHOD: The study was carried out by collecting data from field observation and questionnaire distribution on the street among the public. The data were statistically analyzed by applying multiple linear regression models and a series of chi-square tests.
RESULTS: The study found that the most influential factor cited by pedestrians in decision making regarding using a footbridge is the existence of an escalator. Being in a hurry and the fear of heights were significantly associated with choosing not to use a footbridge. Zebra crossing was chosen as the most favorable type of crossing facility by the majority of respondents. In addition, installation of a fence and barriers was proposed as an effective procedure to prevent jaywalking. To construct new and efficient footbridges in the future, the study suggests consideration of traffic volume, posted speed limit, and the number of lanes, because these are the most influential factors to predict the usage rate.
CONCLUSIONS: The study encourages decision makers and stakeholders to consider providing escalators for new footbridges to enhance the safety of pedestrians.
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.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MCQ items in papers taken from Year II Parts A, B and C examinations for Sessions 2001/02, and Part B examinations for 2002/03 and 2003/04, were analysed to obtain their difficulty indices and discrimination indices. Each paper consisted of 250 true/false items (50 questions of 5 items each) on topics drawn from different disciplines. The questions were first constructed and vetted by the individual departments before being submitted to a central committee, where the final selection of the MCQs was made, based purely on the academic judgement of the committee.
RESULTS: There was a wide distribution of item difficulty indices in all the MCQ papers analysed. Furthermore, the relationship between the difficulty index (P) and discrimination index (D) of the MCQ items in a paper was not linear, but more dome-shaped. Maximal discrimination (D = 51% to 71%) occurred with moderately easy/difficult items (P = 40% to 74%). On average, about 38% of the MCQ items in each paper were "very easy" (P > or =75%), while about 9% were "very difficult" (P <25%). About two-thirds of these very easy/difficult items had "very poor" or even negative discrimination (D < or =20%).
CONCLUSIONS: MCQ items that demonstrate good discriminating potential tend to be moderately difficult items, and the moderately-to-very difficult items are more likely to show negative discrimination. There is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of our MCQ items.