This study describes a novel questionnaire that assesses the interests and attractions of different aspects of medical practice in a varied range of medical scenarios, and relates them to demographic, academic, personality and learning style measures in a large group of individuals considering applying to medical school.
Demographic, academic, and career-interest data were used to develop a profile of each participant and were analyzed by comparing the level of interest in academia based on objective performance measures, such as time to degree, number of publications, and training institution.
Our aim was to identify the mental health status of university students and its correlation with socio-demographic, academic performance, and menstrual features.
Moreover, the evidence identified strong links between these symptoms and specific socio-demographic, academic and health behavior characteristics.
Socio-demographic, academic, professional and institutional information regarding the sample was collected by means of a data sheet comprising 20 questions.
An exploratory analysis was performed to describe the socio-demographic, academic and experience characteristics of the participants and of the variables related to diagnostic interpretive performance, measured by sensitivity, specificity, false positive rate, the AUC and the likelihood ratio of a positive test (LR+).
The data gathered were used to explore the relationship between self-report and ability EI and between EI and student demographics, academic performance and change over time.
Frequency and percentage was calculated to characterize the study subjects based on their socio-demographics, academic rank and their respective departments.
Our current analyses did not include data on provider variables (e.g. demographics, academic affiliation, training background), but this is a clear direction for future research.
We undertook a univariate ordinal regression analysis, considering the degree of agreement with fairness in journal peer review as the ordinal dependent variable while considering demographics, academic background, personal experiences and views to peer review as independent (explanatory) variables as listed in Table 6.
However, the basic reviewer demographics (academic rank and degree) remained fairly similar across all 4 years, regardless of review setting with the face-to-face panel consisting of 25.4% of reviewers at an assistant professor (or equivalent), 27.2% at an associate professor (or equivalent), and 47.4% at a professor or dean level (or equivalent).
