No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundApplying for medical school is the first and also one of the most important career choices a physician makes. It is important to understand the reasons behind this decision if we are to choose the best applicants for medical schools and enable them to pursue satisfying careers.MethodsRespondents to the Finnish Junior Physician 88, Physician 1998 and Physician 2008 studies were asked: “To what extent did the following factors influence your decision to apply for medical school?” In 1998 and 2008 the respondents were also asked: “If you were starting your studies now, would you start studying medicine?” and had to answer “Yes” or “No”. The odds ratios for the answer “No” were tested using logistic regression models.Results"Interest in people” was the main motive for starting to study medicine. “Good salary” and “Prestigious profession” were more important motives for males and “Vocation” and “Interest in people” for females. There were some significant changes in the motives for entering medicine in the 20-year period between studies. “Vocation” and “Wide range of professional opportunities” as important motives for entering medicine predicted satisfaction with the medical profession. DiscussionStrong inner motivation may indicate the ability to adapt to the demands of work as a physician.ConclusionsMedical schools should try to select those applicants with the greatest vocational inclination towards a medical career.

Objectives: Elevated soluble urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor (suPAR) is a biomarker associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between plasma suPAR levels (testing the cut-offs ⩽4, 4-6, and ⩾6 ng/mL) with risk of 14-day mortality, and with the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Methods: Observational cohort study of patients presenting with symptoms of COVID-19 at Department of Emergency Medicine, Amager and Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark from March 19th, 2020 to April 3rd, 2020. Plasma suPAR was measured using suPARnostic technologies. Patients were followed for development of mechanical ventilation and mortality for 14 days. Validation of our findings were carried out in a similar sized COVID-19 patient cohort from Mikkeli Central Hospital, Finland. Results: Among 386 patients with symptoms of COVID-19, the median (interquartile range) age was 64 years (46-77), 57% were women, median suPAR was 4.0 ng/mL (2.7-5.9). In total, 35 patients (9.1%) died during the 14 days follow-up. Patients with suPAR ⩽4 ng/mL (N = 196; 50.8%) had a low risk of mortality (N = 2; 1.0%; negative predictive value of 99.0%, specificity 55.3%, sensitivity 95.2%, positive predictive value 17.4%). Among patients with suPAR ⩾6 ng/mL (N = 92; 23.8%), 16 died (17.4%). About 99 patients (25.6%) tested positive for SARS CoV-2 and of those 12 (12.1%) developed need for mechanical ventilation. None of the SARS-CoV-2 positive patients with suPAR ⩽4 ng/mL (N = 28; 38.8%) needed mechanical ventilation or died. The Mikkeli Central Hospital validation cohort confirmed our findings concerning suPAR cut-offs for risk of development of mechanical ventilation and mortality. Conclusions: Patients with symptoms of COVID-19 and suPAR ⩽4 or ⩾6 ng/mL had low or high risk, respectively, concerning the need for mechanical ventilation or mortality. We suggest cut-offs for identification of risk groups in patients presenting to the ED with symptoms of or confirmed COVID-19.

Vernakalant was safe, more effective and faster than flecainide in the cardioversion of recent-onset atrial fibrillation. The difference in efficacy was especially apparent among men.