The atmosphere of constant scrutiny of academic ability that prevails in medical colleges may leave some students at risk of expressing feelings of intellectual fraudulence and phoniness. Impostor phenomenon (IP) traits have been associated with anxiety, depression, job dissatisfaction, and poor professional performance. Internationally trained junior doctors exhibit stronger IP feelings than colleagues trained within their own country of citizenship. These feelings may develop during student life. International universities are diverse and complex environments where students may be emersed in a cultural milieu alien to their societies of origin, leading to feelings of isolation. Individuals with IP traits often perceive themselves as the “only one” experiencing this phenomenon, resulting in further isolation and negative self-evaluation, especially among women and underrepresented minorities. IP has also been linked to low self-esteem among students. This study assessed the prevalence of IP and its relationship to self-esteem among students at a campus of a European medical college with a large international student body situated in the Middle East. The self-administered questionnaires: Clance's Impostor Phenomenon Scale (CIPS) and Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) were completed by 290 medical students (58.3% females). Participants' median (range) age was 19 years (16–35). Students were of 28 different nationalities; the largest proportions were from Gulf Corporation Council (GCC) countries. The prevalence of low self-esteem was 18.6%, while 45.2% of the students demonstrated traits suggestive of IP. There was a strongly negative correlation between CIPS and RSES (r = −0.71). No significant gender differences were found in IP. Similarly, no differences in IP were found when comparing between age groups, previous experience in higher education or year of study. Multivariate analysis showed that students from GCC countries had higher levels of self-esteem relative to students from other regions. Low self-esteem was a strong predictor of IP. Country of origin may influence students' self-esteem studying in international university settings.

No abstract

Aims The impact of left ventricular dysfunction on clinical outcomes following revascularization is not well established in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). In this study, we evaluated the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on clinical outcomes of patients with ULMCA requiring revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

Currently, gender is not considered in the choice of the revascularization strategy for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. This study analyzed the effect of gender on the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ULMCA disease. Females who had PCI (n = 328) were compared with females who had CABG (n = 132) and PCI in males (n = 894) was compared with CABG (n = 784). Females with CABG had higher overall hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) than females with PCI. Male patients with CABG had higher MACE; however, mortality did not differ between males with CABG vs PCI. In female patients, follow-up mortality was significantly higher in CABG patients, and target lesion revascularization was higher in patients with PCI. Male patients had no difference in mortality and MACE between groups; however, MI was higher with CABG, and congestive heart failure was higher with PCI. In conclusion, women with ULMCA disease treated with PCI could have better survival with lower MACE compared with CABG. These differences were not evident in males treated with either CABG or PCI. PCI could be the preferred revascularization strategy in women with ULMCA disease.

The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant ( P=.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.