Introduction: Blood pressure measurement has a great implication in medicine. Every medical personnel should have a sound knowledge regarding blood pressure measurement. This study was conducted with the aim of determining the knowledge regarding blood pressure measurement among first and second year medical students of a medical college. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted by Department of Physiology of Nepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences from June to December 2021 after receiving the ethical approval from Institutional Review Committee with registration number 394. One hundred ninety-seven students from first and second year were included in the study using whole sampling technique. Data was entered and analysed using Microsoft Excel 2019 and Statistical Package for Social sciences version 16.0. Descriptive statistics like frequency, percentage for binary data and mean, standard deviation for continuous data were calculated. Results: Among 197 students from first and second year, 175 (88.83%) had satisfactory knowledge regarding blood pressure measurement with score≥8 in Objective Structured Practical Examination. Eighty five (85.86%) students from first year and 90 (91.84%) students from second year had scores ≥8, hence had satisfactory knowledge on blood pressure measurement. A total of 18 (18.18%) first year students achieved a score of 10, while 24 (24.49%) students of the second year scored 12, which were the modal score. Conclusions: The proportion of first and second year students having satisfactory knowledge regarding blood pressure measurement is higher in our study.
Introduction: Basic Life Support (BLS) and Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) are part of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. The knowledge of BLS and ACLS is very important in saving lives for healthcare workers for which they need training and updated knowledge on these topics. The aim of the study was to assess the knowledge on BLS and ACLS in a medical college of Kathmandu. Methods: This was a cross sectional retrospective study conducted in Nepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences. The pretest and posttest scores of the trainees who participated in BLS and ACLS training were analyzed to assess the improvement in the knowledge. The duration of the study was from 1st May 2021 to 31st October 2021 where two sessions of the training were conducted. Data were entered in Microsoft Excel and analysis was done in Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 16. Results: Out of 72 participants, the mean pretest score was 5.67 ± 1.91 (56.67%) on BLS (Total score 10) and 9.06 ± 2.21 (60.37%) on ACLS (Total score 15). Post-test scores for BLS and ACLS were 8.69 ± 1.03 (86.94%) and 11.43 ± 1.77 (76.20%) respectively. Statistically significant increase in the mean scores were seen in both BLS [df (71) = -13.532, p < 0.001] and ACLS ([df (71) = -9.956, p < 0.001] with 95% CI while comparing pretest BLS and ACLS with posttest BLS and ACLS scores. Conclusions: Improvement in knowledge was seen amongst participants after the training. This highlights the importance of such training in imparting knowledge regarding BLS and ACLS among healthcare personnel.
Rejection is faced by all of us; it is upon us to take it in one’s stride. If we consider rejection as a step in scientific writing, handling a rejection becomes easy and bearable. The very fact that most of the well known scientific authors have faced rejection somewhere down their academic career would perhaps help most of the academicians to take rejections logically. It is no wonder to many academicians that even Albert Einstein had been rejected for the post of Lecturer in numerous universities and worked as a clerk in a Patent office.1 The letter of rejection might state various reasons, common ones being lack of originality, incomprehensibility, poor scientific reasoning or unsuitable to that journal’s readership. No matter what the reason may have been, a set format of polite rejection mail from the most journals is quite familiar to most of us. This is a very important guiding principle for improvement of the quality of the article. This should be taken as a stepping-stone in the process of acceptance for publication. The rejection rate of journals can vary tremendously. Generally, the higher the academic value of the journal, the higher the rejection rate. Most of us are discouraged by the higher rejection of the highly reputed journals. Many reputed journals have a rejection rate of 80 to 85%.2 However, the best part of highly reputed journals is that along with their polite mail of rejection, they also send the expert opinion of the reviewers why the particular article would have been rejected. In this regards, it is sometimes more logical to consider such reputed journals for ones submission. If the rejection mail arrives in less than a month, then it is probable that it was not sent to a reviewer and was rejected by the editors, in view of basic formatting not being in consonant with the journal or the substance matter not fitting in with the scope of the journal. It is upon the author to decide whether to reform the article or send it to a new journal after the rejection. Generally, the pool of reviewers for many reputed journals have many names common. So, if the author does not modify the article and submit it to another journal, very likely, the reviewer’s comments also remain the same. Usually if the reviewer has sent some comments, amending the article according to the critical comments and resubmitting is wise and more scientific rather than hunting exasperatedly for optional journals. It is always advisable to rethink and spend some time reforming your article according to the journal’s guidelines and the reviewer checklists. And many of the times, it would be much prudent to take the reviewer’s comments seriously and it would surprise the author how his/her article can turn out so beautiful after modifications. If you are not ready to accept the reviewer’s comments, it is better to give reason validating your writing but continuous letter of rejection demands serious rethinking of the whole approach.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.