Pelajar Introvert di Sekolah

Jenis personaliti remaja dapat dibincangkan melalui penampilan bentuk perlakuan sama ada cenderung kepada ekstrovert, introvert ataupun ambivert. Kajian ini mengkaji tentang pelajar introvert. Teori personaliti yang mempunyai kaitan dengan kajian ini adalah Teori Tiga Faktor (TTF) dan Teori Psikososial. Salah satu aspek perbezaan individu yang ketara antara seseorang pelajar dengan pelajar lain ialah aspek personaliti. Pelajar yang mempunyai personaliti introvert ialah individu yang yang pendiam, pasif, terlampau banyak berfikir dan kurang bertindak serta tindak tanduknya kurang mahu mengambil risiko. Hasil kajian juga menunjukkan pelbagai faktor yang membawa kepada seseorang pelajar tersebut menjadi introvert iaitu faktor keluarga, persekitaran kelas, sejarah lampau dan sifat semula jadi. Personaliti introvert dalam diri pelajar ini memberi kesan kepada mereka dari aspek akademik, kokurikulum dan sosial. Walau bagaimanapun, terdapat beberapa pendekatan yang boleh dilakukan untuk membantu pelajar introvert ini misalnya melalui peranan pihak sekolah. Cadangan yang lain yang dikemukakan oleh responden ialah penggunaan alat bantu mengajar yang menarik serta sesuai dengan pembelajaran abad ke-21. Introvert Students in a School Abstract: The type of personality of adolescents can be discussed through the appearance of a form of treatment that either tends to be an extrovert, an introvert or an ambiver. This study examines introvert students. The theory of personality associated with this study is the Three Factors Theory (TTF) and the Psychosocial Theory. One aspect of the individual differences that is significant between one student and another is the personality aspect. Students with introverted personalities are individuals who are quiet, passive, over-thinking and under-performing and whose behaviors are less likely to take risks. The findings also show the various factors that lead a student to become an introvert - family factors, classroom environment, past history and nature. The introverted personality in these students affects them academically, co-curriculum and social. However, there are several approaches that can be taken to help these introverted students, for example through the role of the school. Another suggestion made by the respondents was the use of attractive teaching aids and 21st Century learning. Keywords: Introvert, Personality, Student

Fast Track Algorithm: How To Differentiate A “Scleroderma Pattern” From A “Non-Scleroderma Pattern”

Objectives: This study was designed to propose a simple “Fast Track algorithm” for capillaroscopists of any level of experience to differentiate “scleroderma patterns” from “non-scleroderma patterns” on capillaroscopy and to assess its inter-rater reliability. Methods: Based on existing definitions to categorise capillaroscopic images as “scleroderma patterns” and taking into account the real life variability of capillaroscopic images described standardly according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Study Group on Microcirculation in Rheumatic Diseases, a fast track decision tree, the “Fast Track algorithm” was created by the principal expert (VS) to facilitate swift categorisation of an image as “non-scleroderma pattern (category 1)” or “scleroderma pattern (category 2)”. Mean inter-rater reliability between all raters (experts/attendees) of the 8th EULAR course on capillaroscopy in Rheumatic Diseases (Genoa, 2018) and, as external validation, of the 8th European Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR) course on systemic sclerosis (SSc) (Nijmegen, 2019) versus the principal expert, as well as reliability between the rater pairs themselves was assessed by mean Cohen's and Light's kappa coefficients. Results: Mean Cohen's kappa was 1/0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.98) for the 6 experts/135 attendees of the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course and 1/0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96) for the 3 experts/85 attendees of the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. Light's kappa was 1/0.92 at the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course, and 1/0.87 at the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. C Conclusion: For the first time, a clinical expert based fast track decision algorithm has been developed to differentiate a “non-scleroderma” from a “scleroderma pattern” on capillaroscopic images, demonstrating excellent reliability when applied by capillaroscopists with varying levels of expertise versus the principal expert and corroborated with external validation.Wo

Critical care admission following elective surgery was not associated with survival benefit: prospective analysis of data from 27 countries

This was an investigator initiated study funded by Nestle Health Sciences through an unrestricted research grant, and by a National Institute for Health Research (UK) Professorship held by RP. The study was sponsored by Queen Mary University of London

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Empagliflozin in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Background The effects of empagliflozin in patients with chronic kidney disease who are at risk for disease progression are not well understood. The EMPA-KIDNEY trial was designed to assess the effects of treatment with empagliflozin in a broad range of such patients. Methods We enrolled patients with chronic kidney disease who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of at least 20 but less than 45 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area, or who had an eGFR of at least 45 but less than 90 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) with a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of at least 200. Patients were randomly assigned to receive empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or matching placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of progression of kidney disease (defined as end-stage kidney disease, a sustained decrease in eGFR to < 10 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2), a sustained decrease in eGFR of & GE;40% from baseline, or death from renal causes) or death from cardiovascular causes. Results A total of 6609 patients underwent randomization. During a median of 2.0 years of follow-up, progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 432 of 3304 patients (13.1%) in the empagliflozin group and in 558 of 3305 patients (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.82; P < 0.001). Results were consistent among patients with or without diabetes and across subgroups defined according to eGFR ranges. The rate of hospitalization from any cause was lower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.95; P=0.003), but there were no significant between-group differences with respect to the composite outcome of hospitalization for heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes (which occurred in 4.0% in the empagliflozin group and 4.6% in the placebo group) or death from any cause (in 4.5% and 5.1%, respectively). The rates of serious adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions Among a wide range of patients with chronic kidney disease who were at risk for disease progression, empagliflozin therapy led to a lower risk of progression of kidney disease or death from cardiovascular causes than placebo