OBJECTIVES: Medical students sometimes do not receive proper feedback from their instructors. This study evaluated a newly developed automated and personalized real-time feedback system intended to address this issue. METHODS: Third- and fourth-year medical students participated in quizzes focusing on 17 learning objectives and a five-scale survey that queried their prior knowledge related to blood transfusions. Immediately after completing the quizzes, the students received automated and personalized, real-time feedback and were instructed to take part in self-directed learning. This activity was followed by a final quiz. After completion of the final quiz, the students responded to the five-scale survey that probed the usefulness of and satisfaction with the automated, personalized, real-time feedback system. RESULTS: Eighty students took part in this study. The third-year group had a higher score for prior knowledge and also on the first quiz (P = 0.008, P = 0.046, respectively). There was no significant difference in final quiz scores between the third- and fourth-year groups (P = 0.633). The scores for usefulness of and satisfaction with the automated, real-time feedback system were 4.45 and 4.34, and 4.55 and 4.40 in the third- and fourth-year students, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The automated, personalized, real-time feedback system provided timely and effective feedback for medical students and was helpful for their self-directed learning.
Blood Transfusion ; Humans ; Learning* ; Students, Medical*

BACKGROUND: We evaluated three commercially available vitamin D assays to evaluate and compare the correlation and accuracy among them. METHODS: Vitamin D was measured in 71 patient samples using the Architect 25-OH vitamin D assay (Abbott), the ADVIA Centaur vitamin D total assay (Siemens), and the LIAISON 25 OH vitamin D total assay (Diasorin). The evaluation made use of both patient samples and standard reference material, SRM 972. To analyze correlations and differences, Pearson's correlation coefficients and paired sample t-tests were performed. RESULTS: Correlations among the three evaluated assays showed strong positive linear relationships (correlations among Siemens and DiaSorin, DiaSorin and Abbott, Abbott and Siemens: r=0.935, r=0.927, r=0.909, respectively). Mean (SD) vitamin D values on Siemens, Abbott, and DiaSorin assays in the 71 patient samples were 23.09 (10.41), 16.75 (11.26), and 16.76 (9.32), respectively. Results for the Siemens assay were significantly different from the other two methods (P<0.001). Target values for SRM 972 level 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 23.9, 14.0, 44.9, and 35.4, respectively. The Abbott, Siemens, and Diasorin assay values were closest to the target values in level 1, levels 2 and 3, and level 4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Correlations among vitamin D assays were good; however, the mean values of the Siemens assay were significantly higher than those of DiaSorin or Abbott. We found significant differences in vitamin D levels and discrepancies between patient samples and SRM 972 samples, which should be considered during use in a clinical setting.
Humans ; Immunoassay ; Vitamin D* ; Vitamins*

Background: We investigated how quiz activities can improve summative assessment outcomes by analyzing the relationship between them. Methods: We used 217 first-year medical students’ medical informatics data from 3 consecutive years. We analyzed summative assessment outcomes between quiz completion and incompletion groups, one-time and multiple-time quiz learning groups, and three combined comparisons between subgroups of quiz learning activity frequencies: 1 versus 2, 3, 4, and 6 (group 1), 1 and 2 versus 3, 4, and 6 (group 2), and 1, 2, and 3 versus 4 and 6 (group 3). We then analyzed correlations between the final quiz scores and summative assessment outcomes. Results: The summative assessment means for students who completed quizzes and those who did not were 87.16±8.73 and 83.22±8.31, respectively (p=0.001). The means for the one-time and multiple-time quiz learning groups were 86.54±8.94 and 88.71±8.10, respectively (p=0.223). The means for combined subgroups were not significantly different between groups (p>0.05), although a statistically significant increasing trend was found from groups 1 to 3 (0.223>0.203>0.075 using the t-test and 0.225>0.150>0.067 using the Mann-Whitney test, respectively). Summative assessment scores were not significantly correlated with quiz scores (r=0.115, p=0.213). Conclusions Quizzes helped students who used self-directed learning obtain better summative assessment outcomes. Formative quizzes presumably did not provide students with direct knowledge, but showed them their weak points and motivated them to work on areas where their knowledge was insufficient.

No abstract available.
Cell Line* ; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms* ; Urinary Bladder*

Various learning management systems (LMSs) are available to facilitate the development, management, and distribution of digital resources for both face-to-face and online instruction. In recent decades, these methods have shown potential for greater efficiency compared to traditional "chalk and talk" approaches. Additionally, they have paved the way for the establishment of ubiquitous learning environments, marking a new era in education. In a trend accelerated by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, LMSs have been increasingly adopted to overcome the restrictions inherent to in-person education. In medical education, LMSs such as Moodle, Canvas, Blackboard Learn, and others have been introduced and used to support teaching, learning, and assessment activities. Of these, Moodle stands out as the most popular choice for many medical schools and institutions, primarily due to its flexibility, functionality, and user-friendliness. The learning environment is gradually transforming from traditional in-person teaching to a hybrid educational approach, driven by the need to fulfill diverse educational demands. Numerous research studies have examined the usability of Moodle in medical education, demonstrating its effectiveness in addressing challenges related to adaptive personalized learning, collaborative learning, blended learning, and more. Consequently, Moodle has emerged as a valuable solution for medical educators seeking a versatile and robust platform to enhance their teaching methodologies. The present review focuses on the practical utilization of Moodle in medical education and the advantages it offers to this field.

Background: The objective of this study was to determine whether manually performed calibration and quality control (QC) processes could be replaced with an automated laboratory system when installed analyzers fail to provide automated calibration and QC functions. Methods: Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), total cholesterol (TC), creatinine (Cr), direct bilirubin (DB), and lipase (Lip) items were used as analytes. We prepared pooled serum samples at 10 levels for each test item and divided them into two groups; five for the analytical measurement range (AMR) group and five for the medical decision point (MDP) group. Calibration and QC processes were performed for five consecutive days, and ALT, TC, Cr, DB, and Lip levels were measured in the two groups using automated and manual methods. Precision and the mean difference between the calibration and QC methods were evaluated using the reported values of the test items in each group. Results: Repeatability and within-laboratory coefficients of variation (CVs) between the automated system and the conventional manual system in the AMR group were similar. However, the mean reported values for test items were significantly different between the two systems. In the MDP group, repeatability and within-laboratory CVs were better with the automation system. All calibration and QC processes were successfully implemented with the Aptio total laboratory automation system. Conclusion The Aptio total laboratory automation system could be applied to routine practice to improve precision and efficiency.

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into medical research introduces significant ethical challenges that necessitate the strengthening of ethical frameworks. This review highlights the issues of privacy, bias, accountability, informed consent, and regulatory compliance as central concerns. AI systems, particularly in medical research, may compromise patient data privacy, perpetuate biases if they are trained on nondiverse datasets, and obscure accountability owing to their “black box” nature. Furthermore, the complexity of the role of AI may affect patients’ informed consent, as they may not fully grasp the extent of AI involvement in their care. Compliance with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and General Data Protection Regulation is essential, as they address liability in cases of AI errors. This review advocates a balanced approach to AI autonomy in clinical decisions, the rigorous validation of AI systems, ongoing monitoring, and robust data governance. Engaging diverse stakeholders is crucial for aligning AI development with ethical norms and addressing practical clinical needs. Ultimately, the proactive management of AI’s ethical implications is vital to ensure that its integration into healthcare improves patient outcomes without compromising ethical integrity.

Background: Procalcitonin (PCT) is a crucial biomarker for diagnosing sepsis and managing antibiotic therapy. This study evaluated the analytical performance and comparability of the Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays. Methods: The precision, detection capability, linearity, and reference range of both assays were assessed. A comparative analysis included 182 patient samples categorized into four risk groups to compare the results between Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays. Results: The Access PCT assay demonstrated precision within the manufacturer’s threshold, and its detection capabilities were verified. This assay exhibited excellent linearity and appropriate reference intervals. Comparative analysis indicated that the Access PCT assay reported higher overall PCT levels than the Elecsys BRAHMS assay, with high agreement between the assays (κ=0.941). However, the biases varied across different PCT concentration intervals. Conclusions Both the Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays performed robustly with notable concordance but varying biases at different concentration intervals. The observed biases require careful consideration in clinical decision-making, especially when adopting novel assay systems. Standardizing the calibration across different platforms is recommended to improve assay comparability.

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into medical research introduces significant ethical challenges that necessitate the strengthening of ethical frameworks. This review highlights the issues of privacy, bias, accountability, informed consent, and regulatory compliance as central concerns. AI systems, particularly in medical research, may compromise patient data privacy, perpetuate biases if they are trained on nondiverse datasets, and obscure accountability owing to their “black box” nature. Furthermore, the complexity of the role of AI may affect patients’ informed consent, as they may not fully grasp the extent of AI involvement in their care. Compliance with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and General Data Protection Regulation is essential, as they address liability in cases of AI errors. This review advocates a balanced approach to AI autonomy in clinical decisions, the rigorous validation of AI systems, ongoing monitoring, and robust data governance. Engaging diverse stakeholders is crucial for aligning AI development with ethical norms and addressing practical clinical needs. Ultimately, the proactive management of AI’s ethical implications is vital to ensure that its integration into healthcare improves patient outcomes without compromising ethical integrity.

Background: Procalcitonin (PCT) is a crucial biomarker for diagnosing sepsis and managing antibiotic therapy. This study evaluated the analytical performance and comparability of the Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays. Methods: The precision, detection capability, linearity, and reference range of both assays were assessed. A comparative analysis included 182 patient samples categorized into four risk groups to compare the results between Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays. Results: The Access PCT assay demonstrated precision within the manufacturer’s threshold, and its detection capabilities were verified. This assay exhibited excellent linearity and appropriate reference intervals. Comparative analysis indicated that the Access PCT assay reported higher overall PCT levels than the Elecsys BRAHMS assay, with high agreement between the assays (κ=0.941). However, the biases varied across different PCT concentration intervals. Conclusions Both the Access PCT and Elecsys BRAHMS PCT assays performed robustly with notable concordance but varying biases at different concentration intervals. The observed biases require careful consideration in clinical decision-making, especially when adopting novel assay systems. Standardizing the calibration across different platforms is recommended to improve assay comparability.