METHODS: We followed the guidelines suggested by Whetten for constructing a theoretical model for framework development. There were four phases in the model development. In the first phase, different literature review methods were used, and additional students' perspectives were collected through focus group discussions. Then, using the data, we constructed the theoretical model in the second phase. In the third phase, we validated the newly developed model and its related guidelines. Finally, we performed response process validation of the model with a group of medical teachers.
RESULTS: The developed systematic assessment resilience framework (SAR) promotes four constructs: self-control, management, engagement, and growth, through five phases of assessment: assessment experience, assessment direction, assessment preparation, examiner focus, and student reflection. Each phase contains a number of practical guidelines to promote resilience. We rigorously triangulated each approach with its theoretical foundations and evaluated it on the basis of its content and process. The model showed high levels of content and face validity.
CONCLUSIONS: The SAR model offers a novel guideline for fostering resilience through assessment planning and practice. It includes a number of attainable and practical guidelines for enhancing resilience. In addition, it opens a new horizon for HPE students' future use of this framework in the new normal condition (post COVID 19).
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among academic health professionals via web-based professional networks from August 2022 to February 2023. Validated tools were used, and descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.
RESULTS: 505 participants were included, predominantly female (63%), with a mean age of 38.15 ± 9.6 years. High burnout was reported by 10.9%, 13.7% experienced exhaustion, and 6.3% were disengaged. Resilience and thriving were moderate at 59.2 and 51.9%, respectively. Age correlated negatively with burnout (r = -0.131, p = 0.003) but positively with resilience (r = 0.178, p
DATA DESCRIPTION: Data were collected from 1583 (Mage = 32.22, SD = 12.90, Range = 19-82) respondents from Japan, China, the United States, and Malaysia between October to November 2020. We collected data across age and sex, marital status, number of children, and occupations. We also accounted for stay-at-home measures, change in income, COVID-19 infection status, place of residence, and subjective social status in the study. Our variables included mental health-related and resilience constructs, namely (i) fear of COVID-19, (ii) depression, anxiety, and stress; (iii) present, past, and future life satisfaction, (iv) sense of control, (v) positive emotions, (vi) ego-resilience, (vii) grit, (viii) self-compassion, (ix) passion, and (x) relational mobility. All questionnaires were assessed for their suitability across the four countries with the necessary translation checks. Results from this study can be instrumental in examining the impact of multiple resilience factors and their interaction with demographic variables in shaping mental health outcomes.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, after the scale translation, the factorial structural validity was assessed via the confirmatory factor analysis with 70 180 samples. Internal consistency, composite reliability, convergent validity were assessed by calculating Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, maximum reliability, and Average Variance Extracted. The discriminant validity was assessed using Heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations matrix and also, measure invariance was evaluated.
RESULTS: The original five-factor model had good model fit indices but due to low factor loading of item 2 and 20, the model was modified. The Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability for four factors were above 0.7 (except for factor 5). The convergent validity for all five factors were achieved. Between factors 1 with 2 and 4, 2 with 3 and 4 discriminant validity was not established (correlations > 0.9) and the results suggested that there might be a second-order latent construct behind these factors. Therefore, a second-order assessment was performed. The results of the second-order latent construct assessment showed a good goodness-of fit and strong measurement invariance for both men and women.
CONCLUSION: The 23-item version of Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale is a reliable and valid scale to measure resilience as a complex construct in the Iran context.
METHODS: A total of 351 participants (Mage = 19.75, SDage = 3.29) were recruited in the study using purposive sampling. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the factorial structure of the Family Resilience Scale-Malay (FRS-Malay) and measurement invariance between adolescents and young adults. Then, the scale's reliability was investigated using Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega coefficients, and composite reliability index. Finally, we examined the discriminant validity of the FRS-Malay by correlating its score with individual resilience score and examined the incremental validity of the scale using hierarchical multiple regression analysis to test if family resilience can explain individual well-being levels beyond and above individual resilience.
RESULTS: The findings of the confirmatory factor analysis suggest that a single-factor model is supported for both age groups. Furthermore, the scale exhibited scalar invariance between adolescents and young adults. The scale also exhibited good reliability, as the value of Cronbach's alpha, McDonald omega coefficients, and composite reliability index were above 0.80. Additionally, the Pearson correlation analysis showed a positive correlation between the FRS-Malay and individual resilience scores, which supports the discriminant validity of the scale. Similarly, the incremental validity of the scale is also supported. Specifically, family resilience had a positive correlation with well-being, even after controlling for individual resilience in the regression analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: The FRS-Malay has demonstrated good reliability and validity. The scale measures the same construct of family resilience across adolescents and young adults, making it suitable for comparisons. Therefore, this unidimensional tool is appropriate for self-reporting their perceived level of family resilience. It is also useful for studying the development and fluctuation of family resilience in the Malaysian context.