1,720,962 research outputs found
Effect of parent-delivered action observation therapy on upper limb function in unilateral cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial
No full textAIM:To determine whether home-based, parent-delivered therapy comprising action observation (AO) and repeated practice (RP) improves upper limb function more than RP alone in children with unilateral cerebral palsy (UCP).METHOD:Design: single-blinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial with 1:1 allocation comparing AO+RP (intervention) with RP alone (control). Randomization: computer-generated, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially-numbered envelopes.SETTING: northern England, August 2011 to September 2013.PARTICIPANTS: 70 children with UCP; mean age 5.6 years (SD 2.1), 31 female.INTERVENTION: home-based activities were provided, tailored to interests and abilities.DURATION: 15 minutes/day, 5 days/week for 3 months.ASSESSMENTS: Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA; primary outcome measure), Melbourne Assessment 2 (MA2), and ABILHAND-Kids at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months.RESULTS: Outcome data was available at 3 months for 28 children in the AO+RP group and 31 controls, and at 6 months for 26 and 28 children respectively. There were no between-group differences in AHA, MA2, or ABILHAND-Kids at 3 or 6 months versus baseline (all p>0.05). Combined-group improvements (p<0.001), observed in AHA and MA2 at 3 months, were maintained at 6 months. ABILHAND-Kids also showed improvement at 3 months (p=0.003), maintained at 6 months.INTERPRETATION: Parent-delivered RP (with or without AO) improves upper limb function and could supplement therapist input
Pilot and feasibility studies: what's the point?
No full textBackground: the appropriateness of research design and methodology of clinical trials is paramount if we are to succeed in reducing the amount of waste in research. Pilot and feasibility studies serve an important role in determining the most appropriate design and whether the trial will succeed to completion.Aims and objectives: the study will assess the role of pilot and feasibility studies in the design of clinical trials funded by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme.Method: there are three phases to the study: 1. Literature review, 2. Review of the ongoing HTA trial portfolio and, 3. Review of the HTA portfolio of published trials to determine the added value of the inclusion of a pilot or feasibility study. A list of HTA trials will be retrieved from three cohorts: completed standalone pilot or feasibility studies; completed and ongoing clinical trials which include an internal pilot or feasibility study; and successful applications in pre-contracting status in the HTA programme.Results: the results of the study will still be in development. The number of included trials and proposed checklist/classification system will be presented to determine how pilot and feasibility studies are used to inform the trial design and whether those that include a pilot or feasibility study recruit patients on time and within target.Conclusions: the findings from this study will be important in the context of the adding value in research agenda. This is partly due to the lack of existing evidence on the role of pilot and feasibility studies
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
The utility of PRISMA for abstracts in two cohorts: a comparison of health technology assessment and Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2009-2014
No full textRole of feasibility and pilot studies in randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study
No full textObjectives To assess the value of pilot and feasibility studies to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme. To explore the methodological components of pilot/feasibility studies and how they inform full RCTs.Study design Cross-sectional study.Setting Both groups included NIHR HTA programme funded studies in the period 1 January 2010–31 December 2014 (decision date). Group 1: stand-alone pilot/feasibility studies published in the HTA Journal or accepted for publication. Group 2: all funded RCT applications funded by the HTA programme, including reference to an internal and/or external pilot/feasibility study. The methodological components were assessed using an adapted framework from a previous study.Main outcome measures The proportion of stand-alone pilot and feasibility studies which recommended proceeding to full trial and what study elements were assessed. The proportion of ‘HTA funded’ trials which used internal and external pilot and feasibility studies to inform the design of the trial.Results Group 1 identified 15 stand-alone pilot/feasibility studies. Study elements most commonly assessed were testing recruitment (100% in both groups), feasibility (83%, 100%) and suggestions for further study/investigation (83%, 100%). Group 2 identified 161 ‘HTA funded’ applications: 59 cited an external pilot/feasibility study where testing recruitment (50%, 73%) and feasibility (42%, 73%) were the most commonly reported study elements: 92 reported an internal pilot/feasibility study where testing recruitment (93%, 100%) and feasibility (44%, 92%) were the most common study elements reported.Conclusions ‘HTA funded’ research which includes pilot and feasibility studies assesses a variety of study elements. Pilot and feasibility studies serve an important role when determining the most appropriate trial design. However, how they are reported and in what context requires caution when interpreting the findings and delivering a definitive trial
Understanding Plain English summaries. A comparison of two approaches to improve the quality of Plain English summaries in research reports
Full text linkPlain English summary There is a need for the authors of research reports to be able to communicate their work clearly and effectively to readers who are not familiar with the research area. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), along with a number of other funding bodies and journals, require researchers to write short lay summaries, often termed plain English summaries (PESs), to make research accessible to the general public. Because many researchers write using technical, specialised language, particularly in scientific reports, writing PESs can be challenging. In this study we looked at how to improve the quality of PESs. We took PESs which had been submitted to the NIHR Journals Library and asked authors to rewrite them using new guidance. We also asked an independent medical writer to edit the summaries. We measured the quality of these three versions (original summary, rewritten summary and edited summary) in two ways. First, we asked a group of people who were not specialists in the subject area to read and rate how easy the summaries were to understand. Secondly, we used a well-known measure called the Flesch reading ease score to assess how easy the PESs were to read. We found that there was no difference in how easy people found the summaries to understand across the three versions. However, the PESs that were rewritten by the authors and that were edited by the independent medical writer were both easier to read than the originals. This shows that PESs can be improved and for organisations who feel that employing an independent writer to edit summaries, providing clear, practical guidance to authors may be a cost-effective alternative. Abstract Background Plain English summaries (PES) or lay summaries are often included as part of research reports and journal articles. These summaries are vital to ensure that research findings are accessible and available to non-specialist audiences, for example patients and members of the public. Writing a PES requires the adoption of a different style than is generally used in a traditional scientific report, and researchers can find this challenging. This study explored two possible ways to improve the quality of PESs in the NIHR Journals Library: 1) Providing enhanced guidance to authors and asking them to rewrite the PES and 2) Employing an independent medical writer to edit the PES. Methods We compared the three versions of the PES (original, author rewritten and independent writer edited) to assess 1) how easy they were to understand and 2) how easy they were to read. In order to establish how easy PESs were to understand, a group of 60 public reviewers read a set of summaries and rated them on a four point scale from “Did not understand” to “Understood all”. The Flesch reading ease score was used to measure how easy the summaries were to read. Results Results indicated no significant difference across the three versions of the PES in terms of ease of understanding. However, both the author rewritten and independent writer edited versions were significantly easier to read than the original. There was no significant difference in ease of reading between these two versions. Conclusion These findings suggest that employing independent medical writers to edit PESs and providing clear, practical guidance to authors are two ways in which the readability of PESs could be improved. Results have implications for journal editors and publishers seeking to enhance accessibility and availability of research findings
Social media and anatomy education: using twitter to enhance the student learning experience in anatomy
No full textNeuroanatomy is a difficult subject in medical education, with students often feeling worried and anxious before they have even started, potentially decreasing their engagement with the subject. At the University of Southampton, we incorporated the use of Twitter as a way of supporting students' learning on a neuroanatomy module to evaluate how it impacted upon their engagement and learning experience. The #nlm2soton hashtag was created and displayed (via a widget) on the university's virtual learning environment (VLE) for a cohort of 197 Year 2 medical students studying neuroanatomy. Student usage was tracked to measure levels of engagement throughout the course and frequency of hashtag use was compared to examination results. Student opinions on the use of Twitter were obtained during a focus group with eleven students and from qualitative questionnaires. The hashtag was used by 91% of the student cohort and, within this, more students chose to simply view the hashtag rather than make contributions. The completed questionnaire responses (n?=?150) as well as focus group outcomes revealed the value of using Twitter. A negligible correlation was found between student examination scores and their viewing frequency of the hashtag however, no correlation was found between examination scores and contribution frequency. Despite this, Twitter facilitated communication, relieved anxieties and raised morale, which was valued highly by students and aided engagement with neuroanatomy. Twitter was successful in creating and providing a support network for students during a difficult module. Anat Sci Educ. © 2016 American Association of Anatomists
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
- …
