METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 388 undergraduate students from 22 local technology universities in Hubei, China. Data was collected through an online questionnaire measuring academic procrastination, performance, self-efficacy, and satisfaction. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficients were used to analyze the relationship between variables. Structural equation modeling analysis and the bootstrap method were employed to examine the mediating effect of academic self-efficacy on the relationship between academic procrastination, academic performance, and academic satisfaction, respectively.
RESULTS: (a) Academic procrastination was widespread, with 47.6% of respondents exhibiting high levels and 30.2% showing moderate tendencies. (b) Academic procrastination exhibited a negative and statistically significant relationship with academic self-efficacy and satisfaction, respectively. Conversely, academic performance was positively and statistically significantly associated with self-efficacy and satisfaction. Furthermore, academic self-efficacy displayed a positive and statistically significant correlation with academic satisfaction. (c) Academic self-efficacy mediated the relationship between academic procrastination and satisfaction as well as between academic performance and satisfaction.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the mechanism of academic satisfaction of undergraduate students, with a particular emphasis on the mediating role of academic self-efficacy, especially verifying its mediating role between academic performance and satisfaction. The findings hold significant implications for policymakers, university administrators, educators, and undergraduate students, offering insights for enhancing academic satisfaction in undergraduate learning and contributing to expanding the mechanistic understanding of academic satisfaction.
METHODS: This study was a prospective, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned between 23 May 2023, and 26 September 2023. Patients with small peripheral lung nodules (≤2 cm) were recruited.Patients were randomly assigned to either the CT-guided PTLP group or the AR-guided PTLP group, with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary outcome was the accuracy of lung nodule localization measured by localization error. The secondary outcomes included procedure duration, radiation exposure dosage and complications.
RESULTS: A total of 70 patients underwent either CT- or AR-guided lung nodule localization and subsequent surgeries. Localization error was smaller in the AR-guided group than in the CT-guided group (mean ± SD, 3.1 ± 4.0 mm vs. 5.4 ± 4.2 mm, P = 0.026). The mean difference of localization errors was -2.3 mm (95% CI: - 4.2 to -0.3 mm, P < 0.001 for non-inferiority). Compared to the CT-guided group, the AR-guided group demonstrated significantly lower radiation exposure (mean ± SD, 421 ± 168 vs. 694 ± 229 mGy × cm, P < 0.001) and shorter localization procedure duration (mean ± SD, 8.8 ± 2.3 vs. 14.1 ± 1.8 minutes, P < 0.001), with no statistical difference in complications.
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the AR-guided approach is comparable to that of the CT-guided approach in localizing small lung nodules. Furthermore, the utilization of AR technology has been demonstrated to reduce procedural time and minimize radiation exposure for patients.