Probable Interaction Between Warfarin and the Combination of Remdesivir With Dexamethasone for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment: A 2 Case Report

Purpose: To describe a potential drug interaction between warfarin and the combination of remdesivir with dexamethasone. Summary: Two male patients, a 71-year-old and 62-year-old presented to the emergency department for symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Both patients were on long-term warfarin therapy with their most recent international normalized ratio (INR) prior to admission within their patient specific goal as managed by their outpatient Pharmacist. In both instances, the patients denied any changes in diet, lifestyle, or missed doses of medications upon admission interview. During admission, both patients experienced a marked elevation in INR within 24 to 48 hours of the initiation of remdesivir with dexamethasone for COVID-19 pneumonia directed therapy. The patients were both eventually stable and were instructed to continue warfarin monitoring and management under the direction of their outpatient Pharmacist upon discharge. Conclusion: The underrecognized but probable interaction between warfarin in conjunction with remdesivir and dexamethasone warrants further analysis.

Do Interviews Influence Admission Decisions? An Empirical Analysis From an Institution

Introduction The admission interview is regarded as one of the most significant moments in the process of applying to medical school, but there is limited empirical evidence that supports this claim. Previous analyses have offered what is largely anecdotal evidence of the interview’s importance while also suggesting that there is ample opportunity for ethnic and gender bias to impact interview scores. We also asked what medical schools can learn from comparing the attributes of matriculants and those applicants who rejected offers of acceptance. Materials and Methods This study investigated the association between interview performance and admission committee decisions for applicants applying to the School of Medicine of the USU. The study cohort included all candidates who were invited for an on-site interview at the USU in 2014, 2015, and 2016 (n = 1825). Results Seventeen percent of the variance of the outcome variables—admission committee decisions to accept, place on the alternate list, or reject an applicant—can be explained by considering interview scores alone. Applicant age, race, ethnicity, and gender did not significantly impact interview overall ratings. Matriculants to the USU had similar interview ratings and distribution of gender, race, and ethnicity when compared to those applicants who rejected offers of acceptance. Matriculants were more likely to have previous military experience. Conclusion Our analysis provides some justification for the importance of the interview in the admission process. Applicant demographics (age, race, gender, and ethnicity) were not associated with interview scores. Differences between matriculants to the USU and those who rejected offers of acceptance are small, indicating that the USU continues to build a class body that excels in both cognitive and noncognitive domains.

Main and Regional Campus Assessments of Applicants to a Rural Physician Leadership Program

While the selection of qualified applicants often relies, in part, on scores generated from a medical school pre-admission interview (MSPI), the growth of regional medical campuses (RMCs) – many with specialized rural tracks, programs, or missions – has challenged schools to accommodate a wider range of stakeholder input. This study examines the reliabilities of main (urban) and regional (rural) campus interviewers’ assessments of applicants to a Rural Physician Leadership Program (RPLP) located in the southeastern United States. Data from RPLP applicants completing MSPIs on two campuses from 2009-2017 (n = 232) were examined in a generalizability analysis. In two separate interviews on each campus (4 total), raters independently evaluated applicants’ overall acceptability and likelihood of practicing in a rural area of the state. Results provided campus-specific and combined (composite) estimates of obtained and projected reliabilities. The person-by-campus interaction accounted for 11% and 5% of the respective variance in interviewers’ ratings of overall applicant acceptability and likelihood of rural in-state practice, and the reliability of mean scores across the four independent interviews (each with a single, unique rater) was 0.73 and 0.82. Error variances were higher among main campus interviewers, but scores correlated highly between the two campuses. While broadening the universe of generalization often results in decreased reliability, reliability was shown to be enhanced with the addition of regional (rural) campus interviews. As the RPLP matures, an examination of graduates’ actual practice locations should yield insights into the predictive validity of these pre-admissions assessments. More generally, research may wish to explore the conditions under which increasing the diversity of stakeholder input can be accommodated without concomitant reductions in overall reliability.

Main and Regional Campus Assessments of Applicants to a Rural Physician Leadership Program

While the selection of qualified applicants often relies, in part, on scores generated from a medical school pre-admission interview (MSPI), the growth of regional medical campuses (RMCs) – many with specialized rural tracks, programs, or missions – has challenged schools to accommodate a wider range of stakeholder input. This study examines the reliabilities of main (urban) and regional (rural) campus interviewers’ assessments of applicants to a Rural Physician Leadership Program (RPLP) located in the southeastern United States. Data from RPLP applicants completing MSPIs on two campuses from 2009-2017 (n = 232) were examined in a generalizability analysis. In two separate interviews on each campus (4 total), raters independently evaluated applicants’ overall acceptability and likelihood of practicing in a rural area of the state. Results provided campus-specific and combined (composite) estimates of obtained and projected reliabilities. The person-by-campus interaction accounted for 11% and 5% of the respective variance in interviewers’ ratings of overall applicant acceptability and likelihood of rural in-state practice, and the reliability of mean scores across the four independent interviews (each with a single, unique rater) was 0.73 and 0.82. Error variances were higher among main campus interviewers, but scores correlated highly between the two campuses. While broadening the universe of generalization often results in decreased reliability, reliability was shown to be enhanced with the addition of regional (rural) campus interviews. As the RPLP matures, an examination of graduates’ actual practice locations should yield insights into the predictive validity of these pre-admissions assessments. More generally, research may wish to explore the conditions under which increasing the diversity of stakeholder input can be accommodated without concomitant reductions in overall reliability.

Intended and unintended test constructs in a Multiple-Mini admission Interview. A validity study.

Admission interviews in higher education may be developed with the intention to select applicants with specific personal competences not captured by traditional grade-based admission. In this study, we examined whether the data structure of multiple-mini admission interview scores supported the presence of communication, empathy, collaboration, and resilience as independent test dimensions. In addition, the associations between the interview scores and unintended test constructs (station format, pre-university grades, age, gender) were examined. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses and regression analyses were used to examine interview data from a cohort of Danish medical school applicants. The proposed multi-dimensionality was not supported by the data structure. The influence of the unintended constructs examined was limited or non-existing. These results are in line with the scarce existing literature. This situation makes a priori claims that the multiple-mini interview can measure multi-dimensional personal competences inadvisable, and care should be taken about what is communicated to stakeholders.

Preparación para la entrevista personal de admisión a la Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia: de los sueños que se suspiran a las metas que se trabajan

Tomando en cuenta el Espíritu de la Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH) fundada en su compromiso con la excelencia, la integridad, la formación humana y la proyección comunitaria, se viene trabajando desde el año 2011 en el desarrollo del perfil del ingresante a UPCH, no solo en relación a las habilidades conversacionales, sino también en las habilidades sociales, habilidades para gestionar sus emociones, habilidades para planificar su vida y sus actividades así como el proceso de darse cuenta de las estrategias que puede utilizar para relacionarse con diferentes tipos de personas. El programa de entrenamiento para la entrevista personal de admisión se basa en la integración de los aportes de la Psicología Humanista, el enfoque Gestalt, la Logoterapia y la Programación Neurolingüística. Taking into account the Spirit of the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH) founded in the commitment to excellence, integrity, human formation and community outreach, since 2011 we have been working on the development of the profile of the entrant to UPCH, not only regarding the conversational skills, also in social skills, skills to manage their emotions, skills to take care of their life and activities as the process of realizing the strategies that can be used to relate to different types of people. The training program for the personal admission interview is based on the integration of the contributions of Humanistic Psychology, the Gestalt approach, Logotherapy and Neurolinguistic Programming.

Motivation and adherence to psychosocial treatment for alcohol and drug use-related problems

This is a prospective cohort study of 150 individuals attending a specialized health service for substance-related disorders. The study investigated the association between motivation to remain in treatment and treatment adherence. All service users were interviewed soon after admission to the treatment program and were followed-up during the first two months of treatment. A Cox Regression Model was used to estimate the hazard ratios for dropout during the two months following the admission interview. The results indicated that individuals with a primary-school education, lack of income, and low motivation toward treatment at the admission interview presented a higher risk of treatment dropout. This study showed the importance of motivation in changing addictive behavior and in adherence to treatment as essential factors for recovery.

Associations Between the Big Five Personality Traits and a Medical School Admission Interview

Introduction: Personality has became popular in medical student’s selection. However, few research exists about the association between the big five personality traits and the existent medical school selection tools. Our aim was to study which personality traits were selected by a medical school admission interview.Material and Methods: One hundred ninety four graduate applicants that had applied to the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto through the graduate entry approach, after ranked on previous achievement, were interviewed between the academic years of 2011 and 2013. From these, 181 (93.3%) answered to the NEO Five-Factor Inventory that assesses high order personality traits of openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. Admission interview corresponded to the second phase of the seriation process. Every applicant was interviewed and scored by three interviewers on seven dimensions asesssed by Lickert scale (1-10). Interview score was the sum of the dimensions. Linear mixed effects model and respective regression coefficients were used to estimate the association between personality traits from each interviewer’s score. Final models were adjusted for gender, interviewers and previous achievement.Results: Openness to experience (Beta = 0.18: CI 95%: 0.05; 0.30) had the strongest association with interview score followed by the interaction effect between the extraversion and conscientiousness traits (Beta = 0.14; CI 95%: 0.02; 0.25). Also, applicants scored higher when their gender was opposite to the interviewers.Discussion: Previous achievement and interview score had no association.Conclusion: Our admission interview selected different personality traits when compared to other selection tools. Medical schools should be aware of the implications of the adopted selection tools on the admitted medical student’s personality because it can help providing beneficial interventions.