Does culture influence learning styles in higher education?

This paper develops a framework for understanding the relationships between approaches to learning adopted by students in the context of higher education and the culture of the country they were brought up in. The paper, after examining the more widely used Kolb's learning styles, opts for another categorisation, namely the so called learning approaches developed by Entwistle and others (for example, Entwistle and Ramsden, 1983; Biggs, 1987; Entwistle, 1992; Tait, Entwistle and McCune, 1998; Biggs, Kember and Leung, 2001). Each of the main categories of learning approaches identified by his school, namely, deep, surface apathetic, and strategic are related to Hofstede's cultural dimensions, namely, power distance, individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, long vs. short time orientation and masculinity vs. femininity and a series of hypotheses developed that could be tested in cross cultural samples. This study would give practical hints on students moving out to study in different cultures (e.g. for higher education) and for teachers dealing with students from multiple cultures

Analysis of solid tumor mutation profiles in liquid biopsy

Abstract Liquid biopsy is increasingly gaining traction as an alternative to invasive solid tumor biopsies for prognosis, treatment decisions, and disease monitoring. Matched tumor‐plasma samples were collected from 180 patients across different cancers with >90% of the samples below Stage IIIB. Tumors were profiled using next‐generation sequencing (NGS) or quantitative PCR (qPCR), and the mutation status was queried in the matched plasma using digital platforms such as droplet digital PCR (ddCPR) or NGS for concordance. Tumor‐plasma concordance of 82% and 32% was observed in advanced (Stage IIB and above) and early (Stage I to Stage IIA) stage samples, respectively. Interestingly, the overall survival outcomes correlated to presurgical/at‐biopsy ctDNA levels. Baseline ctDNA stratified patients into three categories: (a) high ctDNA correlated with poor survival outcome, (b) undetectable ctDNA with good outcome, and (c) low ctDNA whose outcome was ambiguous. ctDNA could be a powerful tool for therapy decisions and patient management in a large number of cancers across a variety of stages