Validation of a 'Work Readiness Scale' for health professional (HP) graduates.

BACKGROUND: There is a continuing concern about how graduate work readiness (WR) reflects on the success of universities meeting the requirements of employment. This study is to establish a valid and reliable instrument measuring WR in health professions (HP) graduates of medicine, pharmacy and dentistry. METHODS: The study from March 2016 to April 2017 was conducted to validate the 'Work Readiness Scale' (WRS; Deakin University) using Principal Component Analysis and Cronbach - α for internal consistency. It was modified to a four-item even-point scale and distributed as an online survey to 335 final year students of the three programs. RESULTS: A reduction from 64 to 53 items provided good internal consistency in all factors: WC 0.85, OA 0.88, SI 0.88 and PC 0.71. The PC domain had the greatest item reduction from 22 to 6, whilst the SI domain increased in items from 8 to 19. These changes may be associated with difference in understanding or interpretation of the items in the SI domain. CONCLUSION: The modified WRS can be used to evaluate job readiness in HP graduates. However, it needs further refinement and validation in specific educational and employment contexts.

Oral hyperpigmented lesions--a case study.

An overweight woman, aged 58 years, presented for follow up of hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidaemia. She was noted to have hyperpigmented brown macules on the inner surface of the lower lip and buccal mucosa (Figure 1). She stated that she had first noticed these lesions when aged in her 40s. Her mother died at age 58 years from gastric cancer with extensive metastases, and her brother died at age 45 years from colon cancer with spread to the liver and lungs.

Recommendations and tips for passing the key feature problem examination.

The Key Feature Problem (KFP), is part of the Conjoint MAFP/FRACGP exit examination for Family Medicine specialisation in Malaysia. KFP tests candidates' skills in clinical reasoning and decision making. Over the years, KFP has been the cause of most of the failures in the Part 1 theory examination. This paper aims to highlight common errors committed by candidates and provide recommendations and practical examination technique tips on how to mitigate these errors. A summary of the 26 KFP cases used in the 2020 Conjoint KFP examination demonstrates the breadth and types of cases. From the feedback reports collated from eight assessors involved in this exam, we determined that although inadequate knowledge is probably the main contributor to failure, other easily correctible mistakes made by candidates further aggravate the situation. Common errors include offering more answers than requested, giving duplicate or incomplete answers, and writing answers out of context to the case scenario. The paper concludes with recommendations and sources for effective learning, and provides 12 examination technique tips. The tips include time management, reading carefully through the case, and checking that the answers are congruent with the questions asked.