Purpose: Socioeconomic disadvantage remains a major determinant of equitable access to, and progression within, medical education. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines both the impact and the magnitude of financial and economic disadvantage on student selection and progression in medical school. Methods: Studies were included if they reported associations between socioeconomic indicators (e.g., parental income, occupation, education, geographic deprivation, or premedical debt) and selection or progression outcomes, and were excluded if they lacked clearly defined economic predictors or sufficient data for binary effect sizes. Searches were conducted across PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, Embase, ProQuest, and EBSCO (2005–2025). Study selection employed an active machine-learning screening process. Extracted data included sample characteristics, socioeconomic measures, and outcome types, with risk of bias assessed using the Risk of Bias Instrument. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted where appropriate. Results: Thirty-two studies of medical programs were included, yielding 28 effect sizes for selection and 9 for progression. Household economic and educational disadvantage, identified through parental indices, was consistently associated with reduced odds of admission (odds ratio [OR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55–0.65) and poorer progression (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.53–0.59). Geographic deprivation also exerted a negative effect, particularly on selection (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.5–0.93). Conclusion Socioeconomic disadvantage exerts a pervasive influence across the medical education continuum. Addressing these inequities requires sustained financial, academic, and psychosocial support both before and during their studies. Students’ economic circumstances should therefore be considered in medical school selection policy and curriculum development to further enhance equity within medical schools and the profession.

Purpose: Interviews play a crucial role in the medical school selection process, although little is known about interviewers’ non-verbal observable communications (NoVOC) during the interviews. This study investigates how interviewers perceive NoVOC exhibited by interviewees in two medical schools, one in Taiwan and the other in Australia. The study also explores potential cross-cultural differences in these perceptions. Methods: A 26-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi-like method to identify NoVOC. Interviewers from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (n=47 and N=78, respectively) rated these NoVOC between 2018 and 2021. Factor analyses identified and validated underlying factors. Measurement invariance across countries and genders was examined. Results: A total of 125 interviewers completed the questionnaire, including 78 from Taiwan and 47 from Australia. Using exploratory factor analysis, 14 items yielded reliable three factors “charming,” “disengaged,” and “anxious” (Cronbach’s α=0.853, 0.714, and 0.628, respectively). The measurement invariance analysis indicated that the factor models were invariant across genders but significantly different between the two countries. Further analysis revealed inconsistencies in interpreting the “anxious” factor between Taiwan and Australia. Conclusion The three distinct factors revealed in this study provide valuable insights into the NoVOC that interviewers perceive and evaluate during the interview process. The findings highlight the importance of considering non-verbal communication in selecting medical students and emphasize the need for training and awareness among interviewers. Understanding the impact of non-verbal behaviors can improve selection processes to mitigate bias and enhance the fairness and reliability of medical student selection.

Purpose: Interviews play a crucial role in the medical school selection process, although little is known about interviewers’ non-verbal observable communications (NoVOC) during the interviews. This study investigates how interviewers perceive NoVOC exhibited by interviewees in two medical schools, one in Taiwan and the other in Australia. The study also explores potential cross-cultural differences in these perceptions. Methods: A 26-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi-like method to identify NoVOC. Interviewers from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (n=47 and N=78, respectively) rated these NoVOC between 2018 and 2021. Factor analyses identified and validated underlying factors. Measurement invariance across countries and genders was examined. Results: A total of 125 interviewers completed the questionnaire, including 78 from Taiwan and 47 from Australia. Using exploratory factor analysis, 14 items yielded reliable three factors “charming,” “disengaged,” and “anxious” (Cronbach’s α=0.853, 0.714, and 0.628, respectively). The measurement invariance analysis indicated that the factor models were invariant across genders but significantly different between the two countries. Further analysis revealed inconsistencies in interpreting the “anxious” factor between Taiwan and Australia. Conclusion The three distinct factors revealed in this study provide valuable insights into the NoVOC that interviewers perceive and evaluate during the interview process. The findings highlight the importance of considering non-verbal communication in selecting medical students and emphasize the need for training and awareness among interviewers. Understanding the impact of non-verbal behaviors can improve selection processes to mitigate bias and enhance the fairness and reliability of medical student selection.

Purpose: Interviews play a crucial role in the medical school selection process, although little is known about interviewers’ non-verbal observable communications (NoVOC) during the interviews. This study investigates how interviewers perceive NoVOC exhibited by interviewees in two medical schools, one in Taiwan and the other in Australia. The study also explores potential cross-cultural differences in these perceptions. Methods: A 26-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi-like method to identify NoVOC. Interviewers from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (n=47 and N=78, respectively) rated these NoVOC between 2018 and 2021. Factor analyses identified and validated underlying factors. Measurement invariance across countries and genders was examined. Results: A total of 125 interviewers completed the questionnaire, including 78 from Taiwan and 47 from Australia. Using exploratory factor analysis, 14 items yielded reliable three factors “charming,” “disengaged,” and “anxious” (Cronbach’s α=0.853, 0.714, and 0.628, respectively). The measurement invariance analysis indicated that the factor models were invariant across genders but significantly different between the two countries. Further analysis revealed inconsistencies in interpreting the “anxious” factor between Taiwan and Australia. Conclusion The three distinct factors revealed in this study provide valuable insights into the NoVOC that interviewers perceive and evaluate during the interview process. The findings highlight the importance of considering non-verbal communication in selecting medical students and emphasize the need for training and awareness among interviewers. Understanding the impact of non-verbal behaviors can improve selection processes to mitigate bias and enhance the fairness and reliability of medical student selection.

Purpose: Interviews play a crucial role in the medical school selection process, although little is known about interviewers’ non-verbal observable communications (NoVOC) during the interviews. This study investigates how interviewers perceive NoVOC exhibited by interviewees in two medical schools, one in Taiwan and the other in Australia. The study also explores potential cross-cultural differences in these perceptions. Methods: A 26-item questionnaire was developed using a Delphi-like method to identify NoVOC. Interviewers from the University of New South Wales, Australia, and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (n=47 and N=78, respectively) rated these NoVOC between 2018 and 2021. Factor analyses identified and validated underlying factors. Measurement invariance across countries and genders was examined. Results: A total of 125 interviewers completed the questionnaire, including 78 from Taiwan and 47 from Australia. Using exploratory factor analysis, 14 items yielded reliable three factors “charming,” “disengaged,” and “anxious” (Cronbach’s α=0.853, 0.714, and 0.628, respectively). The measurement invariance analysis indicated that the factor models were invariant across genders but significantly different between the two countries. Further analysis revealed inconsistencies in interpreting the “anxious” factor between Taiwan and Australia. Conclusion The three distinct factors revealed in this study provide valuable insights into the NoVOC that interviewers perceive and evaluate during the interview process. The findings highlight the importance of considering non-verbal communication in selecting medical students and emphasize the need for training and awareness among interviewers. Understanding the impact of non-verbal behaviors can improve selection processes to mitigate bias and enhance the fairness and reliability of medical student selection.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) is an increasingly common liver disease worldwide. MAFLD is diagnosed based on the presence of steatosis on images, histological findings, or serum marker levels as well as the presence of at least one of the three metabolic features: overweight/obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and metabolic risk factors. MAFLD is not only a liver disease but also a factor contributing to or related to cardiovascular diseases (CVD), which is the major etiology responsible for morbidity and mortality in patients with MAFLD. Hence, understanding the association between MAFLD and CVD, surveillance and risk stratification of MAFLD in patients with CVD, and assessment of the current status of MAFLD management are urgent requirements for both hepatologists and cardiologists. This Taiwan position statement reviews the literature and provides suggestions regarding the epidemiology, etiology, risk factors, risk stratification, nonpharmacological interventions, and potential drug treatments of MAFLD, focusing on its association with CVD.

Background/Aims: Despite the high efficacy of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), approximately 1–3% of hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients fail to achieve a sustained virological response. We conducted a nationwide study to investigate risk factors associated with DAA treatment failure. Machine-learning algorithms have been applied to discriminate subjects who may fail to respond to DAA therapy. Methods: We analyzed the Taiwan HCV Registry Program database to explore predictors of DAA failure in HCV patients. Fifty-five host and virological features were assessed using multivariate logistic regression, decision tree, random forest, eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and artificial neural network. The primary outcome was undetectable HCV RNA at 12 weeks after the end of treatment. Results: The training (n=23,955) and validation (n=10,346) datasets had similar baseline demographics, with an overall DAA failure rate of 1.6% (n=538). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, poor DAA adherence, and higher hemoglobin A1c were significantly associated with virological failure. XGBoost outperformed the other algorithms and logistic regression models, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 1.000 in the training dataset and 0.803 in the validation dataset. The top five predictors of treatment failure were HCV RNA, body mass index, α-fetoprotein, platelets, and FIB-4 index. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the XGBoost model (cutoff value=0.5) were 99.5%, 69.7%, 99.9%, 97.4%, and 99.5%, respectively, for the entire dataset. Conclusions Machine learning algorithms effectively provide risk stratification for DAA failure and additional information on the factors associated with DAA failure.

Background/Aims: Chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients who failed antiviral therapy are at increased risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the potential role of metformin and statins, medications for diabetes mellitus (DM) and hyperlipidemia (HLP), in reducing HCC risk among these patients. Methods: We included CHC patients from the T-COACH study who failed antiviral therapy. We tracked the onset of HCC 1.5 years post-therapy by linking to Taiwan’s cancer registry data from 2003 to 2019. We accounted for death and liver transplantation as competing risks and employed Gray’s cumulative incidence and Cox subdistribution hazards models to analyze HCC development. Results: Out of 2,779 patients, 480 (17.3%) developed HCC post-therapy. DM patients not using metformin had a 51% increased risk of HCC compared to non-DM patients, while HLP patients on statins had a 50% reduced risk compared to those without HLP. The 5-year HCC incidence was significantly higher for metformin non-users (16.5%) versus non-DM patients (11.3%; adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [aSHR]=1.51; P=0.007) and metformin users (3.1%; aSHR=1.59; P=0.022). Statin use in HLP patients correlated with a lower HCC risk (3.8%) compared to non-HLP patients (12.5%; aSHR=0.50; P<0.001). Notably, the increased HCC risk associated with non-use of metformin was primarily seen in non-cirrhotic patients, whereas statins decreased HCC risk in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients. Conclusions Metformin and statins may have a chemopreventive effect against HCC in CHC patients who failed antiviral therapy. These results support the need for personalized preventive strategies in managing HCC risk.

Purpose: Evaluating medical school selection tools is vital for evidence-based student selection. With previous reviews revealing knowledge gaps, this meta-analysis offers insights into the effectiveness of these selection tools. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted applying the following criteria: peer-reviewed articles available in English, published from 2010 and which include empirical data linking performance in selection tools with assessment and dropout outcomes of undergraduate entry medical programs. Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, general opinion pieces, or commentaries were excluded. Effect sizes (ESs) of the predictability of academic and clinical performance within and by the end of the medicine program were extracted, and the pooled ESs were presented. Results: Sixty-seven out of 2,212 articles were included, which yielded 236 ESs. Previous academic achievement predicted medical program academic performance (Cohen’s d=0.697 in early program; 0.619 in end of program) and clinical exams (0.545 in end of program). Within aptitude tests, verbal reasoning and quantitative reasoning predicted academic achievement in the early program and in the last years (0.704 & 0.643, respectively). Overall aptitude tests predicted academic achievement in both the early and last years (0.550 & 0.371, respectively). Neither panel interviews, multiple mini-interviews, nor situational judgement tests (SJT) yielded statistically significant pooled ES. Conclusion Current evidence suggests that learning outcomes are predicted by previous academic achievement and aptitude tests. The predictive value of SJT and topics such as selection algorithms, features of interview (e.g., content of the questions) and the way the interviewers’ reports are used, warrant further research.