METHODS: This study employed a qualitative instrumental case study design intended to compare two groups of students-high-achieving students (n = 14) and low-achieving students (n = 5), enrolled in pre-clinical medical studies at the Universiti Malaya, Malaysia. Data were collected through reflective journals and semi-structured interviews. Regarding journaling, participants were required to recall their learning experiences of the previous academic year. Two analysts coded the data and then compared the codes of high- and low-achieving students. The third analyst reviewed the codes. Themes were identified iteratively, working towards comparing the learning processes of high- and low-achieving students.
RESULTS: Data analysis revealed four themes-motivation and expectation, study methods, self-management, and flexibility of mindset. First, high-achieving students were more motivated and had higher academic expectations than low-achieving students. Second, high-achieving students adopted study planning and deep learning approaches, whereas low-achieving students adopted superficial learning approaches. Third, in contrast to low-achieving students, high-achieving students exhibited better time management and studied consistently. Finally, high-achieving students proactively sought external support and made changes to overcome challenges. In contrast, low-achieving students were less resilient and tended to avoid challenges.
CONCLUSION: Based on the theory of action, high-achieving students utilize positive governing variables, whereas low-achieving students are driven by negative governing variables. Hence, governing variable-based remediation is needed to help low-achieving students interrogate the motives behind their actions and realign positive governing variables, actions, and intended outcomes.Key MessagesThis study found four themes describing the differences between high- and low-achieving pre-clinical medical students: motivation and expectation, study methods, self-management, and flexibility of mindset.Based on the theory of action approach, high-achieving pre-clinical medical students are fundamentally different from their low-achieving peers in terms of their governing variables, with the positive governing variables likely to have guided them to act in a manner beneficial to and facilitating desirable academic performance.Governing variable-based remediation may help students interrogate the motives of their actions.
METHODS: This study uses a mixed methods design. It focuses primarily on qualitative data to understand processes and strategies and to identify specific areas that can be improved through stakeholder engagement in the screening program. Quantitative data play a dual role in supporting the selection of participants for the qualitative study based on program monitoring data and assessing inequalities in screening and program implementation in healthcare facilities in Malaysia. Meanwhile, literature review identifies existing strategies to improve colorectal cancer screening. Additionally, the knowledge-to-action framework is integrated to ensure that the research findings lead to practical improvements to the colorectal cancer screening program.
DISCUSSION: Through this complex mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, this study will explore the complex interplay of population- and systems-level factors that influence screening rates. It involves identifying barriers to effective colorectal cancer screening in Malaysia, comparing current strategies with international best practices, and providing evidence-based recommendations to improve the local screening program.
OBJECTIVE: To identify and synthesize qualitative evidence of peer learning experiences of undergraduate nursing students so as to understand their perceptions on peer learning experiences.
DESIGN: A qualitative systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement.
DATA SOURCES: Database searching was conducted on electronic databases such as Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Science Direct, and MEDLINE that published from 2007 to 2017.
REVIEW METHODS: Qualitative studies were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data using line by line coding, organising coding into descriptive themes, and interpreting further to generate new insights.
RESULTS: Six studies were included in this review. The most common themes identified were integrated into two new insights including personal development and professional development.
CONCLUSION: This review has revealed that peer learning experiences contribute to the learning process of undergraduate nursing students in preparing them to become professional nurses through personal development and professional development.
Objective: This study aims to analyze management of the tuberculosis program at PHCs in Surabaya.
Methods: The research method used is qualitative research. Data collection was done by interviewing tuberculosis officers about TB program and carrying out observations at the PHCs.
Results: The study showed that case finding in the Perak Timur PHC and the Sawahan PHC was passive-active. The Perak Timur PHC has facilities for rapid molecular testing, while the Sawahan PHC have to go to a center for Health Laboratory if rapid molecular testing is needed. In terms of treatment, patients at the Perak Timur PHC would come according to an agreement with TB officer, while at the Sawahan PHC, patients have to come every Monday. Officer at the Perak Timur PHC tended to accommodate the needs of TB patients compared to officer at the Sawahan PHC. The level of adherence to taking medication in two PHCs is good but there are a number of patients who have not really understood the frequency of taking medication.
Conclusion: Generally, both PHCs have good TB program management but the Perak Timur PHC tends to be more flexible towards patients while the Sawahan PHC tends to be stricter towards patients.
DESIGN: A systematic review of primary qualitative studies. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 2019. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of full-articles selected for inclusion were performed independently by two authors. A framework synthesis was applied to extracted data based on the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). The TFA includes seven domains relating to sense-making, emotions, opportunity costs, burden, perceived effectiveness, ethicality and self-efficacy. Confidence in synthesis findings was assessed.
SETTING: Any developed country healthcare setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients, healthcare professionals, managers, payers and academics.
INTERVENTION: Experiences and views of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates.
RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included, mostly describing perceptions of oral bisphosphonates. We identified, with high confidence, how patients and healthcare professionals make sense (coherence) of bisphosphonates by balancing perceptions of need against concerns, how uncertainty prevails about bisphosphonate perceived effectiveness and a number of individual and service factors that have potential to increase self-efficacy in recommending and adhering to bisphosphonates. We identified, with moderate confidence, that bisphosphonate taking induces concern, but has the potential to engender reassurance, and that both side effects and special instructions for taking oral bisphosphonates can result in treatment burden. Finally, we identified with low confidence that multimorbidity plays a role in people's perception of bisphosphonate acceptability.
CONCLUSION: By using the lens of acceptability, our findings demonstrate with high confidence that a theoretically informed, whole-system approach is necessary to both understand and improve adherence. Clinicians and patients need supporting to understand the need for bisphosphonates, and clinicians need to clarify to patients what constitutes bisphosphonate treatment success. Further research is needed to explore perspectives of male patients and those with multimorbidity receiving bisphosphonates, and patients receiving intravenous treatment.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019143526.