1,720,973 research outputs found
Podcast: Interventions for preventing abuse in the elderly
No full textThe typical Cochrane Review provides answers about the treatment of a disease but, occasionally, one comes along that tackles other major challenges facing society. One such new review in August 2016 looks at the evidence on various ways to prevent abuse in the elderly. Here’s one of the research team, Philip Baker from Queensland University of Technology in Australia to tell us what they found
Learning and teaching epidemiology with audience response technology
No full textBackground\ud
\ud
The learning and teaching of epidemiology is core to many public health programs. Many students find the content of epidemiology, and specifically risk of bias assessment, challenging to learn. Howbeit, learning is enhanced when knowledge is able to be acquired from an active-learning, hands-on experience. \ud
\ud
Methods\ud
\ud
The innovative use of wireless audience response technology “clickers” was incorporated into the lectures of the university’s post-graduate epidemiology units and the tailored epidemiological modules delivered for professional disciplines (e.g. optometry). Clickers were used to apply several pedagogical approaches of active learning including peer-instruction and real-world simulation. Students were also assessed for their gain in knowledge within the lecture (pre-post) and their perceptions of how the use of clickers helped them learn. The routine university-wide end of semester Insight Survey provided further information of the student’s satisfaction with the approach.\ud
\ud
Results\ud
\ud
The technology was useful in identifying deficits of knowledge of key concepts either before or after instruction. Where key concepts were re-tested post-lecture, as expected, knowledge increased significantly and provided immediate feed-back to students. Across the lecture series, typically 85% of students identified the technology helped them learn, increased their opportunity to interact with the lecturer, and recommend their use for future classes. The Insight Survey report identified 93% of respondents identified the unit in which clickers were consistently used provided good learning opportunities. Numerous student comments supported the teaching method.\ud
\ud
Conclusions\ud
\ud
Epidemiological subject matter lends itself to incorporation of audience response technology. The use of the technology to facilitate interactive voting provides an instant response and participation of everyone to enhance the classroom experience. The pedagogical approach increases students’ knowledge and increases their satisfaction with the unit.\u
The use of hypnosis in labor and delivery : a preliminary study
No full textSelf-hypnosis was taught to 87 obstetric patients (HYP) and was not taught to 56 other patients (CNTRL), all delivered by the same family physician, in order to determine whether the use of self-hypnosis by low-risk obstetric patients leads to fewer technologic interventions during their deliveries or greater satisfaction of parturients with their delivery experience or both. The outcomes of the deliveries of these two groups were compared, and the HYP group was compared to 352 low-risk patients delivered by other family physicians at the same hospital (WCH). Questionnaires were mailed postpartum to 156 patients, all delivered by the same family physician, to determine satisfaction with delivery using the Labor and Delivery Satisfaction Index (LADSI). The hypnosis group showed a significant reduction in the number of epidurals (11.4% less than CNTRL and 17.9% less than WCH, p < 0.05) and the use of intravenous lines (18.5% less for both, p < 0.05). The number of episiotomies was significantly less in the HYP group compared to WCH (15.9%, p < 0.05) and 11.5% less when compared to CNTRL. The tear rate was not statistically different. Combined use of the intervention triad (epidural–forceps–episiotomy) was less for HYP than for CNTRL (15.8% less) and WCH (10.2% less, p < 0.05). More deliveries were done in the labor room with HYP than CNTRL (21%, p < 0.05). The second stage was shortened by 10 min (HYP vs CNTRL). Overall satisfaction of HYP and CNTRL patients was similar and generally favorable
Family-based programmes for preventing smoking by children and adolescents (Review)
No full textBackground\ud
\ud
There is evidence that family and friends influence children's decisions to smoke.\ud
\ud
Objectives\ud
\ud
To assess the effectiveness of interventions to help families stop children starting smoking.\ud
\ud
Search methods\ud
\ud
We searched 14 electronic bibliographic databases, including the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL unpublished material, and key articles' reference lists. We performed free-text internet searches and targeted searches of appropriate websites, and hand-searched key journals not available electronically. We consulted authors and experts in the field. The most recent search was 3 April 2014. There were no date or language limitations.\ud
\ud
Selection criteria\ud
\ud
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions with children (aged 5-12) or adolescents (aged 13-18) and families to deter tobacco use. The primary outcome was the effect of the intervention on the smoking status of children who reported no use of tobacco at baseline. Included trials had to report outcomes measured at least six months from the start of the intervention.\ud
Data collection and analysis\ud
\ud
We reviewed all potentially relevant citations and retrieved the full text to determine whether the study was an RCT and matched our inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted study data for each RCT and assessed them for risk of bias. We pooled risk ratios using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model.\ud
\ud
Main results\ud
\ud
Twenty-seven RCTs were included. The interventions were very heterogeneous in the components of the family intervention, the other risk behaviours targeted alongside tobacco, the age of children at baseline and the length of follow-up. Two interventions were tested by two RCTs, one was tested by three RCTs and the remaining 20 distinct interventions were tested only by one RCT. Twenty-three interventions were tested in the USA, two in Europe, one in Australia and one in India.\ud
\ud
The control conditions fell into two main groups: no intervention or usual care; or school-based interventions provided to all participants. These two groups of studies were considered separately.\ud
\ud
Most studies had a judgement of 'unclear' for at least one risk of bias criteria, so the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate. Although there was heterogeneity between studies there was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity in the results. We were unable to extract data from all studies in a format that allowed inclusion in a meta-analysis.\ud
\ud
There was moderate quality evidence family-based interventions had a positive impact on preventing smoking when compared to a no intervention control. Nine studies (4810 participants) reporting smoking uptake amongst baseline non-smokers could be pooled, but eight studies with about 5000 participants could not be pooled because of insufficient data. The pooled estimate detected a significant reduction in smoking behaviour in the intervention arms (risk ratio [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.84). Most of these studies used intensive interventions. Estimates for the medium and low intensity subgroups were similar but confidence intervals were wide. Two studies in which some of the 4487 participants already had smoking experience at baseline did not detect evidence of effect (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.17).\ud
\ud
Eight RCTs compared a combined family plus school intervention to a school intervention only. Of the three studies with data, two RCTS with outcomes for 2301 baseline never smokers detected evidence of an effect (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96) and one study with data for 1096 participants not restricted to never users at baseline also detected a benefit (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.94). The other five studies with about 18,500 participants did not report data in a format allowing meta-analysis. One RCT also compared a family intervention to a school 'good behaviour' intervention and did not detect a difference between the two types of programme (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.38, n = 388).\ud
\ud
No studies identified any adverse effects of intervention.\ud
Authors' conclusions\ud
\ud
There is moderate quality evidence to suggest that family-based interventions can have a positive effect on preventing children and adolescents from starting to smoke. There were more studies of high intensity programmes compared to a control group receiving no intervention, than there were for other compairsons. The evidence is therefore strongest for high intensity programmes used independently of school interventions. Programmes typically addressed family functioning, and were introduced when children were between 11 and 14 years old. Based on this moderate quality evidence a family intervention might reduce uptake or experimentation with smoking by between 16 and 32%. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because effect estimates could not include data from all studies. Our interpretation is that the common feature of the effective high intensity interventions was encouraging authoritative parenting (which is usually defined as showing strong interest in and care for the adolescent, often with rule setting). This is different from authoritarian parenting (do as I say) or neglectful or unsupervised parenting
Do community-wide interventions increase physical activity? S1TEP
No full textBackground\ud
\ud
Not getting enough physical activity leads to poorer health. Regular physical activity can reduce the risk of chronic disease and improve one’s health and well-being. The lack of physical activity is a common and growing problem in many countries. We sought to evaluate the effects of community wide, multi-strategic interventions upon the physical activity patterns of populations.\ud
\ud
Method\ud
\ud
We undertook a Cochrane Systematic Review which included an extensive search of databases, including studies which met pre-determined criteria, and conducted independent risk of bias assessment and data extraction.\ud
\ud
Results\ud
\ud
After the selection process, 25 studies were included in the review. The strategies varied by the number and type of components and their intensity. No studies were identified as low risk of bias. Sixteen studies were identified as having a high risk of bias and thus untrustworthy. Nine studies were of considered to have an unclear risk of bias and some studies held back data they collected. The effects reported were inconsistent across the studies and the measures. Some of the better designed studies showed no improvement in measures of physical activity. Interventions which have an environmental change component seemed to be a promising direction. Those interventions which were primarily a mass media campaign were less likely to be successful.\ud
\ud
Conclusions\ud
\ud
Although numerous studies have been undertaken, there is considerable inconsistency in the findings of the available studies and this is confounded by serious methodological issues within the included studies. Simply combining interventions does not necessarily result in increased physical activity as many such studies, including some long term programs, failed to demonstrate efficacy. There is a clear need for well-designed studies and these studies should focus on the quality of measurement of physical activity. The review is currently being updated with newer studies
Mapping studies for inclusion in a Cochrane Overview to increase physical activity in children, adolescents and adults
No full text<b>Background</b>\ud
\ud
- A search of <u><a href="http://www.healthevidence.org/">Health Evidence</a></u> registry reveals an abundance of systematic reviews, rated ‘strong’ investigating interventions for increasing physical activity levels. However, the effect described and the scope of these reviews varies considerably, creating a challenge for overview authors.\ud
\ud
<b>Objective</b>\ud
\ud
- The overview’s aim was to minimise redundancy and overlap in the summary; providing public health decision makers with clear information to support evidence informed decisions.\ud
\ud
<b>Method</b>\ud
\ud
- We firstly identified and then mapped the included studies contained in eligible high quality systematic reviews. For each class, or type of intervention for the outcome (e.g. school-based interventions for PA), we selected the most important review from the strongest reviews that most completely described the intervention and the outcomes. We carefully examined the studies contained in the review. We sought to avoid overlap in succinctly summarise the current body of evidence from systematic reviews. We aimed to use the fewest number of reviews required to summarise the intervention approach.\ud
\ud
<b>Results </b>\ud
\ud
- Eighty systematic reviews were originally identified as eligible, of which 43 reviews were eliminated through the review or mapping process. Post-mapping, the overview included 37 systematic reviews containing 635 individual studies. Through mapping, 493 studies (78%) were identified as unique to only one included review.\ud
\ud
<b>Conclusion</b>\ud
\ud
- The purpose of overview was to synthesize evidence from a number of systematic reviews into a single convenient source that enables public health decision makers to apply evidence based practice. By mapping the studies contained within the systematic reviews we identified the breadth of the interventions and outcomes; and, the number of times a primary study has been included in high quality reviews. Through explicitly mapping the primary studies, the number of systematic reviews required was substantially reduced
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
