Search

Background: Chinese medical schools have offered both professional and academic degrees for postgraduate students. However, there is limited information about the attitudes of professional-degree and academic-degree students. We aimed to examine the attitudes of full-time postgraduate students towards the curriculum, stratified by degree type. Methods: A 29-item online questionnaire was distributed to postgraduate students in West China School of Medicine of Sichuan University in 2020. The questionnaire was designed to collect students' demographic characteristics, attitudes towards curricular provision and content, and classroom organization. A comparison was made between groups based on degree type (academic degree versus professional degree). Results: Overall, 645 out of 908 students at West China School of Medicine completed the questionnaire. Comparing with students pursuing academic degrees, professional-degree students were more interested if the curriculum included specialized knowledge and clinical skills, and expressed concerns over the excessive compulsory courses and inadequate optional courses (p < 0.001), particularly prominent among first-year postgraduate students. Besides, a greater proportion of professional-degree students thought the curriculum was conflict with clinical work to some extent, and they also rated taking attendance in class as less reasonable (p < 0.01). Conversely, students pursuing academic degrees expressed that the courses were inadequate in interdisciplinary curriculum and had some crossover or repetition, and they assigned a higher importance rating for the curriculum when comparing professional-degree students (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Different attitudes toward the curriculum are observed between students pursuing professional degrees and those pursuing academic degrees. This study provides benchmark data for future postgraduate course reforms in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Due to the absence of evidence in the literature on Paralympic Powerlifting the present study investigated various methods to assess bench press maximum repetition and the way each method influences the measurement of minimum velocity limit (MVT), load at zero velocity (LD0), and force–velocity (FV). Objective: To evaluate the precision of the multi-point method using proximal loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% of one repetition maximum; 1RM) compared to the four-point method (50, 60, 70, and 80% of 1RM) and the two-point method using distant loads (40 and 80% and 50 and 80% of 1RM) in in the MVT, LD0, and FV, in bench press performed by Paralympic Powerlifters (PP). Methods: To accomplish this, 15 male elite PP athletes participated in the study (age: 27.7 ± 5.7 years; BM: 74.0 ± 19.5 kg). All participants performed an adapted bench press test (free weight) with 6 loads (40, 50, 60, 70, 80, and 90% 1RM), 4 loads (50, 60, 70, and 80% 1RM), and 2 loads (40–80% and 50–80% 1RM). The 1RM predictions were made by MVT, LD0, and FV. Results: The main results indicated that the multiple (4 and 6) pointsmethod provides good results in the MVT (R2 = 0.482), the LD0 (R2 = 0.614), and the FV (R2 = 0.508). The two-point method (50–80%) showed a higher mean in MVT [1268.2 ± 502.0 N; ICC95% 0.76 (0.31–0.92)], in LD0 [1504.1 ± 597.3 N; 0.63 (0.17–0.86)], and in FV [1479.2 ± 636.0 N; 0.60 (0.10–0.86)]. Conclusion: The multiple-point method (4 and 6 points) and the two-point method (40–80%) using the MVT, LD0, and FV all showed a good ability to predict bench press 1RM in PP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Obesity in women has more than doubled in the past thirty years. Increasing research suggests that increased cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) can largely attenuate the negative health risks associated with obesity. Though previous literature suggests that combined training may be the most effective for improving CRF in adults with obesity, there is minimal research investigating the efficacy of combined and resistance programmes in women with obesity. This article outlines a protocol for a parallel pilot study which aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of three exercise modalities in women with obesity for increasing CRF and strength and improving body composition and other health outcomes (i.e. quality of life). Methods and analysis: Sixty women (aged 18–50) with obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30 and/or waist circumference ≥ 88 cm) who are physically inactive, have no unstable health conditions and are safe to exercise will be recruited from September 2021 to December 2022. The main outcome will be feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and procedures. Trial feasibility outcomes will be evaluated to determine if a definitive trial should be undertaken. Trial acceptability will be explored through follow-up qualitative interviews with participants. Secondary outcomes will include CRF (predicted VO2 max), anthropometrics (i.e. BMI), strength (5RM bench press, leg dynamometry, grip strength) and other health outcomes (i.e., pain). Participants will be block randomised into one of four trial arms (aerobic exercise, resistance training and combined training groups, non-active control group) and measurements will be completed pre- and post-intervention. The exercise groups will receive an individualised supervised exercise programme for 3× sessions/week for 12 weeks. The change in mean values before and after intervention will be calculated for primary and secondary outcomes. ANOVA and t-tests will be applied to evaluate within-group and between-group differences. If sufficient participants are recruited, the data will be analysed using ANCOVA with the age and BMI as covariates. Discussion: This pilot will provide data on the feasibility and acceptability of trial procedures and of the programmes' three progressive time-matched exercise interventions (aerobic, resistance and combined) for women living with obesity, which will help inform future research and the potential development of a full-scale randomised clinical trial. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN13517067. Registered 16 November 2021—retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]