Methods: PRISMA guidelines were used as the basis of this systematic review. Relevant studies were identified by searching the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), as well as Epistemonikos for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials published not later than January 2021 involving adults with prediabetes and diabetes mellitus who were consuming brown rice compared to those consuming white rice. The primary outcomes measured were glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting blood glucose (FBG) levels. The secondary outcomes were body weight, waist circumference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels, LDL and HDL-cholesterol levels. The mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between brown and white-rice-diet groups were calculated using a random-effects model.

METHODS: We followed the guidelines suggested by Whetten for constructing a theoretical model for framework development. There were four phases in the model development. In the first phase, different literature review methods were used, and additional students' perspectives were collected through focus group discussions. Then, using the data, we constructed the theoretical model in the second phase. In the third phase, we validated the newly developed model and its related guidelines. Finally, we performed response process validation of the model with a group of medical teachers.

RESULTS: The developed systematic assessment resilience framework (SAR) promotes four constructs: self-control, management, engagement, and growth, through five phases of assessment: assessment experience, assessment direction, assessment preparation, examiner focus, and student reflection. Each phase contains a number of practical guidelines to promote resilience. We rigorously triangulated each approach with its theoretical foundations and evaluated it on the basis of its content and process. The model showed high levels of content and face validity.

METHODS: A randomised controlled trial involving 197 participants from three institutions was conducted. The control group attended a freestyle lecture on the gross anatomy of the heart, delivered by a qualified anatomist from each institution. The intervention group attended a CLT-bLM-based lecture on a similar topic, delivered by the same lecturer, three weeks thereafter. The lecturers had attended a CLT-bLM workshop that allowed them to prepare for the CLT-bLM-based lecture over the course of three weeks. The students' ratings on their cognitive engagement and internal motivation were evaluated immediately after the lecture using a validated Learners' Engagement and Motivation Questionnaire. The differences between variables were analysed and the results were triangulated with the focus group discussion findings that explored students' experience while attending the lecture.

RESULTS: The intervention group has a significantly higher level of cognitive engagement than the control group; however, no significant difference in internal motivation score was found. In addition, the intervention group reported having a good learning experience from the lectures.

METHODS: We conducted a phenomenological study on medical students at a public university. We utilized focus group discussions (FGDs) to investigate their experiences of TA. The FGDs were transcribed verbatim, and these transcripts were analyzed using Atlas.ti software. The thematic analysis followed the recommended guidelines.

RESULTS: Seven FGD sessions were conducted with 45 students. Three major themes emerged: the students, their academic resources, and the examiner. Each theme comprised mutually exclusive subthemes. The "students" theme was divided into negative vs. positive thoughts and self-negligence vs. self-care, "academic recources" into heavy curriculum vs. facilitative curricular aids, and "examiner" into criticism vs. feedback and strict vs. kind approaches.