INTRODUCTION: We developed a Clinical Frailty Scale algorithm (CFS-A) to minimise inter-rater variability and to facilitate wider application across clinical settings. We compared the agreement, diagnostic performance and predictive utility of CFS-A against standard CFS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed data of 210 hospitalised older adults (mean age, 89.4 years). Two independent raters assessed frailty using CFS-A. Agreement between CFS-A raters and with previously completed CFS was determined using Cohen's Kappa. Area under receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) for both measures were compared against the Frailty Index (FI). Independent associations between these measures and adverse outcomes were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Frailty prevalence were 81% in CFS and 96% in CFS-A. Inter-rater agreement between CFS-A raters was excellent (kappa 0.90, <0.001) and there was moderate agreement between CFS-A and standard CFS (kappa 0.42, <0.001). We found no difference in AUC against FI between CFS (0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.95) and CFS-A (0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.95; <0.001). Both CFS (OR, 3.59; 95% CI, 2.28-5.67; <0.001) and CFS-A (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 2.41-7.69; <0.001) were good predictors of mortality at 12 months. Similarly, CFS (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.81-3.69; <0.001) and CFS-A (OR, 3.58; 95% CI, 2.13-6.02; <0.001) were also good predictors of institutionalisation and/or mortality after adjusting for age, sex and illness severity. CONCLUSION Our study corroborated the results on inter-rater reliability, diagnostic performance and predictive validity of CFS-A which has the potential for consistent and efficient administration of CFS in acute care settings.

Background: We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the “Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study” (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments. Results: The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433–0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445–0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671–0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591–0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p<0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145). Conclusions The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.

Background: We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the “Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study” (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments. Results: The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433–0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445–0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671–0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591–0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p<0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145). Conclusions The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.

Background: We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the “Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study” (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments. Results: The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433–0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445–0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671–0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591–0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p<0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145). Conclusions The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.

Background: We compared the diagnostic performance of the short five-item and full seven-item Mini Sarcopenia Risk Assessment Questionnaire (MSRA-5 and MSRA-7) against the Strength, Assistance walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) and SARC-F with calf circumference (SARC-CalF) scales for sarcopenia in healthy community-dwelling older adults. Methods: We conducted a post-hoc cross-sectional secondary data analysis of a prospective cohort study, using data from 230 older adults (mean age 67.2±7.4 years, 92% Chinese, and 73% female) from the “Longitudinal Assessment of Biomarkers for characterization of early Sarcopenia and Osteosarcopenic Obesity in predicting frailty and functional decline in community-dwelling Asian older adults Study” (GeriLABS-2) conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Singapore. We performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to ascertain the area under the curve (AUC) for sarcopenia diagnosis using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 consensus criteria. We applied the Delong method to compare the AUCs of the four instruments. Results: The MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 demonstrated poor diagnostic performance (AUC of 0.511, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.433–0.589 and AUC of 0.526, 95% CI 0.445–0.606, respectively), compared to that in SARC-CalF (AUC of 0.739, 95% CI 0.671–0.808) and SARC-F (AUC of 0.564, 95% CI 0.591–0.636). The SARC-CalF demonstrated significantly superior discriminatory ability compared to that in the SARC-F, MSRA-5, and MSRA-7 (all p<0.01). The MSRA-5 demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.464) and specificity (0.597) than in the SARC-CalF (0.661 and 0.738, respectively), whereas the MSRA-7 had higher specificity (0.887) and lower sensitivity (0.145). Conclusions The poor diagnostic performances of the MSRA-5 and MSRA-7 in our study suggest limitations of self-reported questionnaires for assessing general and dietary risk factors for sarcopenia in healthy and culturally diverse community-dwelling older adults. Studies in different populations are needed to ascertain the utility of the MSRA for the community detection of sarcopenia.

OBJECTIVETo review the functions of these intracellular signals in their regulation of retinal ganglion cell (RGC) axon regeneration.

DATA SOURCESRelevant articles published in English or Chinese from 1970 to present were selected from PubMed. Searches were made using the terms "intrinsic determinants, axon regeneration, RGC, optic nerve regeneration, and central nervous system axon regeneration."

STUDY SELECTIONArticles studying the mechanisms controlling RGC and central nervous system (CNS) axon regeneration were reviewed. Articles focusing on the intrinsic determinants of axon regeneration were selected.

RESULTSLike other CNS neurons of mammals, RGCs undergo a developmental loss in their ability to grow axons as they mature, which is a critical contributing factor to the failure of nerve regeneration and repair after injury. This growth failure can be attributed, at least in part, by the induction of molecular programs preventing cellular overgrowth and termination of axonal growth upon maturation. Key intracellular signals and transcription factors, including B cell lymphoma/leukemia 2, cyclic adenine monophosphate, mammalian target of rapamycin, and Krüppel-like transcription factors, have been identified to play central roles in this process.

CONCLUSIONSIntense effort and substantial progress have been made to identify the various intrinsic growth pathways that regulate RGC axon regeneration. More work is needed to elucidate the mechanisms of and the interrelationship between the actions of these factors and to successfully achieve regeneration and repair of the severed RGC axons.

Animals ; Cyclic AMP ; physiology ; Humans ; Kruppel-Like Transcription Factors ; physiology ; Nerve Regeneration ; Optic Nerve ; physiology ; PTEN Phosphohydrolase ; physiology ; Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-bcl-2 ; physiology ; Suppressor of Cytokine Signaling 3 Protein ; Suppressor of Cytokine Signaling Proteins ; physiology ; TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases ; physiology

INTRODUCTIONIncreasing financial challenges have resulted in great debt among medical graduates worldwide. In Singapore, more scholarships and bursaries have been disbursed in recent years to support students who are financially challenged. We aimed to study the financial status of medical students in National University of Singapore (NUS) Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine (i.e. NUS Medicine), Singapore, and the financial support available to them.

METHODSA cross-sectional quantitative study was performed. Surveys were distributed and completed by medical students of NUS Medicine. Information regarding household income, financial assistance, monthly allowance and expense, and concurrent occupations was collected. We compared our findings with the results of a similar study performed in 2007 and national income data.

RESULTSA total of 956 (66.2%) out of 1,445 medical students completed the survey. 19.5% and 58.5% of respondents came from households with monthly incomes < SGD 3,000 and > SGD 7,000, respectively. 20.6% of students had loans, 18.9% had scholarships and bursaries, and 14.4% worked to support themselves.

CONCLUSIONMedical school fees have risen by more than 50% over the past ten years. Our study found that there were increases in the proportion of students from both the lower- and higher-income segments, with proportionally fewer students from the middle-income segment. A large number of students were working and/or had some form of financial support. More should be done to meet the needs of financially challenged medical students to ensure equal access to quality medical education.

INTRODUCTION: Medical school fees are rising globally. Student debt and financial background may affect residency choices, but few studies have been conducted in Asia. This study aimed to explore the relationship between financial background, student debt and postgraduate residency choices among medical students in Singapore. METHODS: An anonymised survey of all medical students in Singapore was conducted and had a response rate of 67.9%. RESULTS: 40.5% of our study population would graduate with debt. Medical students with monthly per capita household income < SGD 1,000 were more likely to graduate with debt (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-2.7; p < 0.001) and feel burdened by the cost of medical education (unadjusted OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.0-3.9; p < 0.001). Students with monthly per capita household income < SGD 1,000 (unadjusted OR 1.818, 95% CI 1.338-2.470, p < 0.001; adjusted OR 1.692, 95% CI 1.202-2.381, p = 0.003) and those with debt (unadjusted OR 1.623, 95% CI 1.261-2.090, p < 0.001; adjusted OR 1.393, 95% CI 1.048-1.851, p = 0.022) were more likely to rank at least one economic factor as 'very significant' in influencing their postgraduate training choices. CONCLUSION It is concerning that despite financial aid schemes, the cost of medical education remains a burden to students from lower-income households in Singapore. Student debt and financial background may distort postgraduate career choices, creating an undue push towards high-paying specialties.
Career Choice ; Choice Behavior ; Education, Medical ; economics ; Humans ; Internship and Residency ; economics ; Odds Ratio ; Schools, Medical ; economics ; Singapore ; Social Class ; Students, Medical ; statistics & numerical data ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Training Support