RESUMEN
The utilization of over-the-counter (OTC) painkillers among medical students during academic exams has raised concerns about health risks and potential implications, including substance abuse and academic performance. This cross-sectional study aimed to estimate the prevalence of OTC painkiller utilization among medical students at Alfaisal University during academic exams. Additionally, the study explored and identified the factors that influenced the patterns of OTC painkiller utilization among these students. The study was conducted from January to May 2023, following approval from the Institutional Review Board. The research involved surveying medical students of different genders, nationalities, and academic years during examination periods. Out of 1,500 medical students, 194 participated, resulting in a response rate of approximately 13%. The study results revealed that 50.5% of medical students used OTC painkillers during exams. While there were no significant variations based on gender or nationality, the prevalence of OTC painkiller utilization varied significantly across academic years. During exam periods, the primary reason reported for using OTC painkillers was pain management. Additionally, some students mentioned using OTC painkillers to seek relaxation, improve sleep, enhance concentration, and stay alert. These insights shed light on the coping strategies practiced by students during high-stress academic periods. Most participants demonstrated familiarity with the guidelines for safe OTC painkiller utilization. Although the majority used painkillers infrequently or as needed, a subgroup reported increased utilization during exams. This finding highlights the importance of continuous monitoring and health education initiatives to prevent or address potential OTC painkiller abuse among medical students during exam periods. Ensuring the well-being of medical students is a priority, and appropriate measures should be employed to address any emerging concerns related to substance abuse. By addressing these issues proactively, educational institutions can promote a healthier academic environment during exam periods.
RESUMEN
The emergence of the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has transformed traditional classroom education to online learning worldwide. Challenges to this sudden transformation include protecting student privacy while using online medical education services. Consequently, dealing with challenges to online medical education became a heated debate at Alfaisal University. This study aimed to determine the challenges of using webcams during online classes and the ensuing implications for medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional study was conducted during the 2020-2021 academic year. The study investigators developed and validated a self-administered online questionnaire that targeted preclinical and clinical medical students at Alfaisal University, which is a private not-for-profit academic institution that was founded in 2008. Alfaisal University consists of five colleges: Medicine, Business, Engineering, Pharmacy, and Science. A total of 319 medical students completed the study questionnaire, with a response rate of 25%. The median age of the study sample was 21 years, with 63.3% females; 78.1% were in preclinical (first to third) years and 21.9% were in clinical (fourth to fifth) years. Of the respondents, 76.5% reported not using webcams when communicating via social media and 64.3% preferred blended learning, i.e., a combination of face-to-face and online learning. An overwhelming majority (91.5%) of study respondents were against using webcams in online classes for reasons including privacy (88.4%) and anxiety (64.4%). Privacy was the main concern of study respondents. Information about online privacy, including information being collected and how it will be used, should be provided to the students. Effective strategies to improve online learning experiences and protect the privacy of students should be explored.
RESUMEN
Determining the eligibility of principal investigators (PIs) is a challenging task, especially at an academic institution. The prevailing practice within the academic community is not to grant PI status to students. There is a lack of studies that have investigated students' eligibility to serve as PI. This study aimed to explore the faculty and students' perceptions of the PI eligibility of medical students. A secondary objective was to assist the university in developing an evidence-based PI eligibility policy. To achieve the study aims, the investigators developed and validated a survey that targeted both faculty and students of Alfaisal University, College of Medicine (COM). In total, 53 faculty (four were administrators), and 135 medical students responded. The response rates were approximately 50% and 12% for faculty and students, respectively. Of the faculty, 62% reported that medical students are not PI eligible without the supervision of a faculty member. Of the students, 77% reported that they were not qualified to serve as PI. The results of the current study support the practice at most universities of not allowing medical students to serve as PI.
RESUMEN
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted all aspects of our lives, including education and the economy, as we know it. Governments have issued stay-at-home directives, and as a result, colleges and universities have been shut down across the world. Hence, online classes have become a key component in the continuity of education. The present study aimed to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on online education at the College of Medicine (COM) of Alfaisal University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Between March and April 2020, we emailed a survey to 1,289 students and faculty members of the COM. We obtained 208 responses (16.1%); 54.8% of the respondents were females, and 66.8% were medical students; 14.9% were master's students, and 18.3% were faculty. Among the respondents, 41.8% reported having little or no online teaching/learning experience before the pandemic, and 62.5% preferred blending online and face-to-face instruction. The reported challenges to online medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic included issues related to communication (59%), student assessment (57.5%), use of technology tools (56.5%), online experience (55%), pandemic-related anxiety or stress (48%), time management (35%), and technophobia (17%). Despite these challenges, most of the respondents (70.7%) believed that the COVID-19 pandemic has boosted their confidence in the effectiveness of online medical education. Consequently, 76% of participants intended to integrate the online expertise garnered during the pandemic into their practice. In short, the modern study demonstrated a largely positive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on online medical education.
RESUMEN
Introduction The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is in a unique position and different from other nations that periodically host an event, such as the World Cup or the Olympics. The KSA is faced annually with millions of pilgrims coming from around the world to participate in the Hajj, Umrah, and Ziarah rituals. Continuously hosting such huge mass gatherings poses overwhelming challenges to the Saudi healthcare system. Consequently, an additional specialized cadre of qualified public health personnel is needed. The purpose of this article is to describe the establishment of an academic public health program that addresses this need. Materials & Methods In response to the dire need for public health specialists, a landmark project was launched in 2013 at Alfaisal University (AU). The project aimed to establish a Master of Public Health (MPH) program with a concentration in the health aspects of mass gatherings. The MPH program was created in collaboration with the United States-based Partners HealthCare International (PHI), the Saudi Global Center for Mass Gatherings Medicine (GCMGM) at the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Ministry of Education (MOE), and the Ministry of Hajj and Umrah (MOHU). A needs assessment was conducted to help in the program development. The needs assessment drew on the unpublished findings of an institutional review board (IRB)-approved anonymous market survey that was administered to prospective students of the MPH program. Results The needs assessment study revealed the need for an MPH program with concentrations in mass gatherings health, health policy and management, and biostatistics and epidemiology. Consequently, we designed an MPH program to include these three concentrations. In particular, the mass gatherings health concentration aimed at preparing qualified public health specialists to help manage risks to the Saudi public health system, to analyze health data, and to recommend policies associated with the continuous mass gatherings events. Challenges to program development included working with multiple governmental agencies, absence of a frame of reference to develop a program curriculum, a lack of qualified faculty, lengthy and tedious government approval procedures, and inadequate funding. After obtaining the required approvals, the MPH program with a concentration in mass gatherings health was inaugurated in the fall of 2016. This program is accredited by the Saudi government to prepare public health specialists trained and locally certified in mass gatherings health issues. Conclusions The public health experts of the AU have established what may be the first MPH program with a concentration in mass gatherings health. The main challenges to program development were identified, and appropriate actions to meet these challenges were taken. This innovative MPH produces certified specialists equipped with the analytical and policy-making tools necessary to continuously monitor and improve the public health aspects of mass gatherings. Besides, the program provides a frame of reference for the development of unique public health programs, not only in the KSA but worldwide.
RESUMEN
Introduction Maintaining research ethics within a university and monitoring the campus Institutional Review Board (IRB) are essential responsibilities not to be taken lightly. IRBs occasionally need to be reviewed to see that they, as well as researchers, are adhering to rules and regulations on ethics through their submission and review procedures. Since there are no established measures for assessing IRB quality, it is unclear how to determine whether IRBs are achieving their intended aims. This study used the feedback and input of campus members at a newly-established, private, non-profit university within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) to evaluate their campus IRB. Methods Following the university's IRB approval, and in close collaboration with the Saudi National Committee of Bioethics (NCBE), this cross-sectional study was conducted from February through May of 2019. Self-administered surveys were sent out via university emails to faculty and students at Alfaisal University in Riyadh of Saudi Arabia. The questions in the surveys included inquiries on participants' demographics, their familiarity with campus IRB research ethics, their satisfaction with IRB procedures, the challenges encountered during the IRB submission and review process, the effectiveness of a recent IRB-coordinated research ethics campaign, and any suggestions for IRB improvement. Surveys were sent to faculty members and students at five colleges on campus. Results Of the campus members who were sent surveys, 8% responded (175). Of those who responded, 29.7% had submitted at least one research proposal for IRB review during the past three years (2016-2019), and more than half of this group were satisfied with the IRB submission and review procedures. For those who had submitted at least one research proposal, respondents reported the more usual challenges that researchers tend to encounter, such as time-consuming and tedious IRB review processes and ambiguous IRB guidelines and regulations. The less typical IRB challenges that were reported, and that are unique to academia, include the IRB tendency to deny undergraduate student requests to serve as principal investigators of their research projects. Concerning IRB efforts to educate and train campus members on research ethics, only 26.3% of the participants were aware of the recently performed research ethics campaign, and 7.6% of the participants attended the end-of-campaign workshop. Of those who attended the workshop, 76.9% reported that the campaign and workshop effectively met their expectations. Conclusions This study revealed several issues encountered by university faculty and students seeking campus IRB approval for their research projects. The main academia-specific challenge was over whether undergraduate students could serve as PIs for research projects, and a universal one was that they find the IRB process to be very time-consuming and tedious, which is a situation that has already been relayed in several other articles on IRB issues. About two-thirds of respondents reported a lack of familiarity with the topic of research ethics. This challenge makes it clear that information on research ethics is not effectively reaching enough campus members in the busy environment of academia.
RESUMEN
AIM: To explore the specialty preferences and the factors influencing them among pre-clerkship (second-year and third-year) medical students at Alfaisal University-College of Medicine, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: An online, anonymous, cross-sectional, self-rating survey was administered. The survey explored socio-demographical data, specialty preferences and the factors influencing such preferences. A gender-wise statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-two students participated in the survey (n=252/308; response rate: 81.8%). The three main specialties chosen by males were general surgery (33.1%), pediatrics (7.9%), and neurology-ophthalmology (5.5%). Females also opted for general surgery (20.8%) followed by dermatology (11.2%) and pediatrics (8.8%). Gender-wise specialty preferences were noted: general surgery (p<0.028) and anesthesiology (p<0.045) by males, whereas obstetrics & gynecology (p<0.017) and dermatology (p<0.005) by females. Overall, the three major influences in choosing a specialty were "specialty interest" (86.5%), "specialty flexibility" (64.3%), and "anticipated income" (61.9%). Statistically significant differences were noticed between genders regarding the following factors: "specialty prestige" (p<0.005) by males and "culture-no opposite gender patients" by females (p<0.009). CONCLUSION: The overall two preferred specialties were general surgery (27%) and pediatrics (8.3%). Career counseling should be offered to students about each specialty's challenges/opportunities with an ultimate goal to match the country-specific demand and supply of physicians.
RESUMEN
There are limited numbers of studies which comprehensively explored the research publications authored by medical students. To descriptively analyze the student-authored research publications originating from Alfaisal University-College of Medicine (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) over a 6-year period. All student-authored research publications were retrieved from PubMed(®) and the College's publication database. Study inclusion criteria included: (1) at least one medical student author, (2) published and/or accepted in-press PubMed-indexed article from 10 September 2008 to 31 December 2014. Data was transferred to Microsoft Excel Software for descriptive statistical analysis of variable parameters. Seventy-three (n = 73) articles met the study inclusion criteria. They were published by 170 students; the majority were males (79.4 %) and clerkship students (65.9 %). There was a markedly steady increase in number of yearly publications from 1 publication in 2009 to 35 publications by the end of 2014. Fifty (68.5 %), twenty-nine (39.7 %) and thirty-seven (50.7 %) students were first, second and corresponding authors, respectively. The most frequent research areas were clinical science (43.8 %), basic science (23.3 %) and medical education (21.9 %). The most frequent research types were case reports (41.1 %), research articles (32.9 %) and correspondence letters (15.1 %). Fifty-seven (78.1 %) and sixteen (21.9 %) publications took place in local and abroad institutes, respectively. Most publications (71.2 %) had impact factors below 2. The mean ± SD of articles' impact factors and citations were 3.9 ± 9.9 and 1.9 ± 4.1, respectively. Students demonstrated positive attitudes towards publishing and significantly contributed to the institution's pool of research publications.