Objective: Electronic learning and assessment was embraced in medical education worldwide following the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was done to determine the perceptions of medical undergraduates on formative electronic assessments conducted during COVID-19 lockdown and to estimate the mean marks scored in these assessments. Methods: This was a descriptive study done for a period of 3 months on online platform. Six online formative assessments were conducted on Google Forms or Kahoot. A questionnaire was administered as Google Form to collect the perceptions of the participants on perceived ease of use of platform, attitude, and practice adopted in online assessments. Data were analyzed using SPSS 16. Results: The response rate was 97.7%. Kahoot was perceived to be easier with lesser technical glitches and privacy concerns as compared to Google, while it was equivocal in terms of access assessment links, output storage, display clarity, overall user interface, network issues, need for computer literacy, and eyestrain caused. The participants had a positive attitude regarding the usefulness of online assessments however majority liked the traditional assessments more than the online assessments. While less than one-third (22%) had copy pasted some answers, more than half (54.4%) had referred to internet and more than three quarter (79.6%) had referred to textbooks/power points/notes while attending online assessments. Conclusion: The participants felt that Google Forms and Kahoot were comparable online assessment tools except for difficulty in filling, privacy concerns, and technical issues on Google Forms. The usefulness of online assessments was embraced by the participants but they felt that the traditional assessments were to be continued, while attending online assessments some students had referred to the internet or study materials.
Background: Fluid cytology plays an important role in delineating benign from malignant effusions, tumor staging, and also in diagnosing recurrences. Various methods are used in cytology for the preparation of smears. As the accurate diagnosis of the fluids aids in clinical decisions, the method of preparation of cytology smears, it is very important. Cytospin preparation of smears is one of the methods which provide higher cellular yield with better preservation of cellular morphology and is less time consuming. On the other hand, cell block method gives superior architectural details and provides options for immunocytochemistry. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic utility of cytospin in comparison to cell block method in peritoneal and pleural fluid cytology. The study is done to determine the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy of cytospin preparations with cell block method which is considered as the gold standard. Materials and Methods: This was a diagnostic test evaluation study done at the Department of Pathology, Government Medical College, Kottayam. The sample size was 240 which included all pleural and peritoneal fluids received in our cytology laboratory during the study period. Cytospin prepared smears of peritoneal and pleural fluids were compared with the tissue sections prepared by cell block method, to evaluate the diagnostic utility of cytospin. Tissue sections prepared from the cell blocks of effusions were considered as the gold standard for comparison. Results: A diagnostic test evaluation of cytospin preparation was done with cell block preparations. The sensitivity of cytopsin preparations in pleural and peritoneal fluid cytology is 94%. The specificity of cytopsin preparations in pleural and peritoneal fluid cytology is 100%. The positive predictive value of cytopsin preparations in pleural and peritoneal fluid cytology is 100% and the negative predictive value of cytopsin preparations in pleural and peritoneal fluid cytology is 96.8%. Hence, accuracy of the test is 97.9%. Conclusion: There is only minimal statistical difference between the results obtained by the cytospin and cell block methods. Cytospin method is less time consuming along with the advantage of higher cellular yield. Hence, the incorporation of cytospin along with the cell block technique is beneficial for augmenting the results of effusion cytology.
When the oral cancer is too advanced to be cured, maintaining patient's quality of life (QoL) is the primary goal of treatment. Palliative treatments play an even larger role to ease symptoms from the cancer treatment itself. The palliative treatment helps to keep the cancer patient comfortable and maintain QoL for many days as possible. Historically, palliative care was intended to relieve pain and discomfort for the dying ones where as recently it is considered as an integral part of cancer care since cancer patients are living longer. Non-pharmacological therapies such as complementary and alternative medicine have a developing role in the management of cancer and cancer-related symptoms. Integration of non-pharmacological therapies within traditional medical practice creates a comprehensive framework for managing symptoms, reducing suffering, and improving QoL. It incorporates the principles of patient centered, family systems-oriented care. The domains of care addressed by palliative care include physical, cultural, psychological, social, spiritual, legal, and ethical. This review briefly explains the different methods of non-pharmacological palliative care for head and neck cancer patients.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.