Knowledge, perception and practice of self-medication among premedical and basic science undergraduate medical students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and Objective: Responsible self-medication is recognized as an important component of self-care. Medical students are in a unique position as they cannot yet legally prescribe medicines but their knowledge about and exposure to medicines increase as they progress through their course. Xavier University School of Medicine in Aruba admits students mainly from the United States, Canada and other countries to the undergraduate medical course. The present study was carried out to study the knowledge, perceptions and practice of self-medication among premedical and undergraduate medical students.Materials and Methods: The study was conducted during June and July 2016 using a questionnaire which had been used previously. Knowledge and perceptions were studied by noting the respondents’ degree of agreement with asset of 40 statements. The use of selected classes of medicines for self-medication during the preceding one-year period was studied. The knowledge, perception and total scores were calculated and compared among different subgroups of respondents. Age, gender, nationality and semester of study of the respondents were noted.Results: Eighty-five of the 125 students enrolled (69.1%) participated. The mean knowledge, perception and total scores were 73.45, 62.75 and 136.2 (maximum possible scores were 105, 95 and 200 respectively). There was no significant difference in scores among subgroups of respondents. Analgesics, skin ointments, antipyretics and anti-allergics were commonly used for self-medication. Over half the respondents had used some form of self-medication during the preceding year. Conclusion: The present study provides preliminary information regarding self-medication practices among both premedical and basic science medical students. Further studies on factors influencing and information sources used during self-medication can be conducted. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences Vol.7(5) 2016 63-68
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".