METHODS: The research datasets were acquired from the Scopus database. The search terms used were 'reward' AND 'human' AND 'diffusion imaging' OR 'diffusion tensor imaging' OR 'diffusion MRI' OR 'diffusion-weighted imaging' OR 'tractography' in the abstract, article title and keywords. A total of 336 publications were analysed using Harzing's Publish or Perish and VOSviewer software.
RESULTS: The results revealed an upward trend in the number of publications with the highest number of articles in 2020 and 2022. Most publications were limited to countries, authors, and institutions in the USA, China and Europe. Bracht, Coenen, Wiest, Federspiel and Feng were among the top authors from Switzerland, Germany and the UK. Neuroimage, Neuroimage Clinical, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Human Brain Mapping, and the Journal of Neuroscience were the top journals. Among the top articles, six were reviews and four were original articles, while the top keywords in human reward research were 'diffusion MRI', 'adolescence', 'depression' and 'reward-related brain areas'.
CONCLUSION: These findings may serve as researchers' references to find collaborative authors, relevant journals, cooperative countries/institutions, and hot topics related to dMRI and reward research.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using cluster sampling was conducted in a state in Malaysia. Each respondent completed BFI-10 and BFI-13 using an online survey with a 1-month interval between each response. Reliability testing was evaluated using internal consistency and a 2-week interval test-retest. The model fit of these two BFI questionnaires was evaluated via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
RESULTS: A total of 124 firefighters participated in the study, with a zero-dropout rate. The Malay version of BFI-13 exhibited higher reliability by displaying good internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha of 0.919, 0.838, 0.871 and 0.896 for the domains conscientiousness, neuroticism, agreeableness and extraversion, respectively, and acceptable test-retest reliability with moderate to good intraclass correlation (0.588-0.806). The CFA model also indicated that BFI-13 has a better model fit (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.993; Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.991; standardised root mean squared residual [SRMR] = 0.029; root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.035).
CONCLUSION: The Malay version of BFI-13 is reliable and applicable enough to be supplementarily used in surveys among Malaysian firefighters. By using a brief personality assessment, it will reduce the cognitive and emotional burden on respondents.
METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional study in which we used purposive sampling and a self-administered questionnaire. Based on the literature review, experts' input and in-depth interviews, new items were generated for SS-Bloat scale. Content validity was assessed by experts and pre-tested with 30 individuals with AB. Construct validity was determined based on exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was determined based on Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR).
RESULTS: During the development stage, eight items were generated for SS-Bloat scale and remained the same after content validity and pre-testing. A total of 152 participants with a mean age of 31.27 years old (68.3% female, 32.7% male) completed the questionnaire. Based on the EFA, three problematic items were removed. The total variance explained was 35.6% with acceptable reliability (α = 0.66). The model was then tested using CFA. The initial model did not fit the data well. After several model re-specifications, the final measurement model of SS-Bloat scale fit the data well with acceptable fit indices (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.994 and Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.984). The CR was satisfactory with value of 0.84.
CONCLUSION: SS-Bloat scale was deemed valid and reliable for assessing the level of social support among AB patients. The questionnaire can be useful for both research studies and clinical purposes, as it is easy to use.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2020 to May 2023 at Rumah Sakit Akademik, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Clinical pharmacists reviewed electronic health data to examine DRPs. The Fisher's exact test evaluated the association between DRPs and LoS.
RESULTS: A total of 60.7% (n = 17) of the participants were females, with the majority falling into the age group ≥ 65 years old (n = 11, 29.7%). A significant portion experienced LoS > 7 days (n = 17, 60.7%). Antidiabetic monotherapy was predominant, and the categories of DRPs included adverse drug reaction (n = 15, 40.5%), dosage too high (n = 6, 16.2%), wrong drug (n = 6, 16.2%), non-adherence (n = 4, 10.8%), need for additional therapy (n = 4, 10.8%) and dosage too low (n = 2, 5.4%). A significant association was observed between non-adherence and LoS (P = 0.016). The possibility of experiencing LoS of 1-7 days increased by 3.43 times with improved non-adherence (OR = 3.43; 95% CI: 1.83, 6.39). In this context, non-adherence refers to DRPs associated with the non-compliance of patients with the prescribed treatment plan.
CONCLUSION: This study concludes that non-adherence was significantly associated with hospital LoS.