10 research outputs found
Art Demonstration, 1975 Miss Seonaid M. Robertson Workshop 1
No full textArtist, author, and art educator Seonaid M. Robertson visited Jacksonville State University on March 21, 1975 for a lecture and reception.https://digitalcommons.jsu.edu/lib_ac_histimg_1970/2307/thumbnail.jp
Art Demonstration, 1975 Miss Seonaid M. Robertson Workshop 3
No full textArtist, author, and art educator Seonaid M. Robertson visited Jacksonville State University on March 21, 1975 for a lecture and reception.https://digitalcommons.jsu.edu/lib_ac_histimg_1970/2309/thumbnail.jp
Art Demonstration, 1975 Miss Seonaid M. Robertson Workshop 4
No full textArtist, author, and art educator Seonaid M. Robertson visited Jacksonville State University on March 21, 1975 for a lecture and reception.https://digitalcommons.jsu.edu/lib_ac_histimg_1970/2310/thumbnail.jp
Art Demonstration, 1975 Miss Seonaid M. Robertson Workshop 2
No full textArtist, author, and art educator Seonaid M. Robertson visited Jacksonville State University on March 21, 1975 for a lecture and reception.https://digitalcommons.jsu.edu/lib_ac_histimg_1970/2308/thumbnail.jp
Seonaid Robertson (1912–2008): the transformation of 'chaotic experience' through arts education
No full textSeonaid Robertson (1912–2008) was a school teacher, arts advisor, lecturer and author writing about arts education. Her life-long focus was on how arts education supported young people’s transition from childhood to adolescence. She studied at Edinburgh Art School and by the early 1940s, under the influence of Herbert Read, had developed a strong interest in ceramics and the therapeutic aspects of arts education and psychoanalysis. She studied psychology at the University of London after World War Two but reacted against much of the mainstream thinking of the period. She preferred to focus on ways children could make a connection with their own cultural heritage and heal themselves after traumatic experiences
The first in the archives: Zelia Nuttall and Mexican manuscripts
No full textDuring the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the amateur scholar and archaeologist Zelia Nuttall was not only digging in Mexican archaeological fields for artifacts but also digging through European and Mexican archives for manuscripts. Nuttall characterized her motivation for seeking out indigenous writings in these archives as altruistic, and she often asserted that this work was carried out purely in the interest of science. Not content to simply uncover these neglected manuscripts, however, she also sought to share the materials through publications. Nuttall was involved in the publication of the Codex Nuttall (previously known as the Zouche Codex), the Codex Magliabechiano III, and several primary sources related to Sir Francis Drake. She also attempted to publish the manuscript now known as the Florentine Codex, but she was never able to achieve this. This essay will explore Nuttall’s archival research, which led her to publish, or attempt to publish, the materials that she found in archives and to thereby make them more widely accessible. Despite a few great successes, such as the publication of the Codex Nuttall, Nuttall was often frustrated by a lack of money for printing, competition from other scholars, and the process of working with the Peabody Museum to print facsimiles. Nuttall’s position as a woman scholar and an amateur left her without institutional support in an era when such associations became increasingly important.
Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'Closed Access', the embargo will last until 2021-05-01The student, Seonaid Valiant, accepted the attached license on 2019-04-18 at 17:49.The student, Seonaid Valiant, submitted this Thesis for approval on 2019-04-18 at 17:56.This Thesis was approved for publication on 2019-04-23 at 09:24.DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #13765 on 2019-08-22 at 16:23:19Made available in DSpace on 2019-08-23T20:48:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2
VALIANT-THESIS-2019.pdf: 1715955 bytes, checksum: bd09b102ee37810fd3cb0616debd4fb4 (MD5)
LICENSE.txt: 4212 bytes, checksum: 0ccde78475f95ab2b0392b666c0652bf (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2019-04-23Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112350
Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:48:32Z
Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD systemLimited Restriction Lifted for Item 112350 on 2021-08-24T09:15:24Z
Book review : Improving Outcomes for Looked After Children By Jacqui Horsburgh
No full textImproving Outcomes for Looked After Children offers an evidence-based and practical account of ways in which practitioners can help improve educational outcomes for care experienced children. The author sets out clearly the rationale behind this, in that many children who are care experienced have historically underperformed academically compared to their peers. The author outlines reasons throughout the book as to why this may be the case and highlights the importance of teacher and peer relationships as a supportive strategy for improvement. Examples contained within the book discuss and reflect on the importance of learning with and from peers, alongside socio-cultural learning to support improvements in educational outcomes. Early on the author makes clear the value of each person's role in Corporate Parenting and that care experienced children belong to everyone, thereby highlighting the need for Corporate Parents to continue to work together to ensure children feel loved, safe and respected. The benefits of establishing a sense of belonging for care experienced children and them knowing that someone believes in them is clearly outlined
Weighing up the SEF.
No full textAn assessment of the use of the NOO Standard Evaluation Framework across family-based weight management interventions in one regio
Discontinuation and tapering of prescribed opioids and risk of overdose among people on long-term opioid therapy for pain with and without opioid use disorder in British Columbia, Canada: A retrospective cohort study
No full textBackground The overdose crisis in North America has prompted system-level efforts to restrict opioid prescribing for chronic pain. However, little is known about how discontinuing or tapering prescribed opioids for chronic pain shapes overdose risk, including possible differential effects among people with and without concurrent opioid use disorder (OUD). We examined associations between discontinuation and tapering of prescribed opioids and risk of overdose among people on long-term opioid therapy for pain, stratified by diagnosed OUD and prescribed opioid agonist therapy (OAT) status. Methods and findings For this retrospective cohort study, we used a 20% random sample of residents in the provincial health insurance client roster in British Columbia (BC), Canada, contained in the BC Provincial Overdose Cohort. The study sample included persons aged 14 to 74 years on long-term opioid therapy for pain (≥90 days with ≥90% of days on therapy) between October 2014 and June 2018 (n = 14,037). At baseline, 7,256 (51.7%) persons were female, the median age was 55 years (quartile 1–3: 47–63), 227 (1.6%) persons had been diagnosed with OUD (in the past 3 years) and recently (i.e., in the past 90 days) been prescribed OAT, and 483 (3.4%) had been diagnosed with OUD but not recently prescribed OAT. The median follow-up duration per person was 3.7 years (quartile 1–3: 2.6–4.0). Marginal structural Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to estimate the effect of prescribed opioid treatment for pain status (discontinuation versus tapered therapy versus continued therapy [reference]) on risk of overdose (fatal or nonfatal), stratified by the following groups: people without diagnosed OUD, people with diagnosed OUD receiving OAT, and people with diagnosed OUD not receiving OAT. In marginal structural models with IPTW adjusted for a range of demographic, prescription, comorbidity, and social-structural exposures, discontinuing opioids (i.e., ≥7-day gap[s] in therapy) was associated with increased overdose risk among people without OUD (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12, 1.83; p = 0.004), people with OUD not receiving OAT (AHR = 3.18; 95% CI 1.87, 5.40; p Conclusions Discontinuing prescribed opioids was associated with increased overdose risk, particularly among people with OUD. Prescribed opioid tapering was associated with reduced overdose risk among people with OUD not receiving OAT. These findings highlight the need to avoid abrupt discontinuation of opioids for pain. Enhanced guidance is needed to support prescribers in implementing opioid therapy tapering strategies with consideration of OUD and OAT status. In a retrospective cohort study from Canada, Dr Mary Kennedy and colleagues explore the effect of discontinuation and tapering of prescribed opioids on risk of overdose among people on long-term opioid therapy for pain with and without opioid use disorder. Author summary Why was this study done? In Canada and the United States, a rise in opioid-related morbidity and mortality has prompted system-level efforts to restrict opioid prescribing for chronic pain. Guidelines implemented in Canada and the United States have recommended tapering prescribed opioids for pain to the lowest effective dose, potentially discontinuing therapy, among people receiving opioid therapy for chronic pain when risks outweigh benefits. Although there is emerging evidence to suggest that deprescribing opioid therapy for chronic pain may increase risk of opioid-related harms, most existing studies have focused on non-representative subpopulations. To our knowledge, no studies to date have examined whether the effects of discontinuing and tapering opioid therapy for pain on overdose risk might differ among people with and without concurrent opioid use disorder. What did the researchers do and find? Drawing on administrative data linked at the individual level for a random sample of residents registered in the provincial health insurance client roster in British Columbia, Canada, we identified 14,037 persons prescribed long-term opioid therapy for pain between October 2014 and June 2018. We examined associations between discontinuation and tapering of prescribed opioid therapy for pain (versus continued treatment) and risk of overdose, stratified by whether patients had been diagnosed with opioid use disorder and recently prescribed opioid agonist therapy. We found that discontinuing opioid therapy for pain was associated with increased overdose risk among people without opioid use disorder (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12, 1.83; p = 0.004). However, stronger associations were observed among people with opioid use disorder, including those not receiving opioid agonist therapy (AHR = 3.18; 95% CI 1.87, 5.40; p What do these findings mean? Abrupt discontinuation of prescribed opioid treatment for pain is contraindicated given its association with increased risk of overdose. Enhanced guidance is needed to support healthcare providers in implementing safe and effective strategies for tapering opioid treatment for pain that are tailored to the unique needs of individual patients, with particular consideration of opioid use disorder and prescribed opioid agonist therapy status
Azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial
No full textSummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication
