Search

Castanea sativa is classified as non-indigenous in Britain and Ireland. It was long held that it was first introduced into Britain by the Romans, until a recent study found no corroborative evidence of its growing here before c. AD 650. This paper presents new data on the genetic diversity of C. sativa in Britain and Ireland and potential ancestral sources in continental Europe. Microsatellite markers and analytical methods tested in previous European studies were used to genotype over 600 C. sativa trees and coppice stools, sampled from ancient semi-natural woodlands, secondary woodlands and historic cultural sites across Britain and Ireland. A single overall genepool with a diverse admixture of genotypes was found, containing two sub groups differentiating Wales from Ireland, with discrete geographical and typological clusters. C. sativa genotypes in Britain and Ireland were found to relate predominantly to some sites in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy and Romania, but not to Greece, Turkey or eastern parts of Europe. C. sativa has come to Britain and Ireland from these western European areas, which had acted as refugia in the Last Glacial Maximum; we compare its introduction with the colonization/translocation of oak, ash, beech and hazel into Britain and Ireland. Clones of C. sativa were identified in Britain, defining for the first time the antiquity of some ancient trees and coppice stools, evincing both natural regeneration and anthropogenic propagation over many centuries and informing the chronology of the species’ arrival in Britain. This new evidence on the origins and antiquity of British and Irish C. sativa trees enhances their conservation and economic significance, important in the context of increasing threats from environmental change, pests and pathogens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Non-medical prescribing was introduced into the United Kingdom (UK) to improve patient care, through extending healthcare professionals’ roles. More recent government health service policy focuses on the increased demand and the need for efficiency. This systematic policy review aimed to describe any changes in government policy position and the role that non-medical prescribing plays in healthcare provision. Method: The systematic policy review included policy and consultation documents that describe independent non-medical prescribing. A pre-defined protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015019786). Professional body websites, other relevant websites and the following databases were searched to identify relevant documents: HMIC, Lexis Nexis, UK Government Web Archive, UKOP, UK Parliamentary Papers and Web of Science. Documents published between 2006 and February 2018 were included. Results and discussion: Following exclusions, 45 documents were selected for review; 23 relating to policy or strategy and 22 to consultations. Of the former, 13/23 were published 2006–2010 and the remainder since 2013. Two main themes were identified: chronological aspects and healthcare provision. In the former, a publication gap for policy documents resulted from a change in government and associated major healthcare service reorganisation. In the later, the role of non-medical prescribing was found to have evolved to support efficient service delivery, and cost reduction. For many professions, prescribing appears embedded into practice; however, the pharmacy profession continues to produce policy documents, suggesting that prescribing is not yet perceived as normal practice. Conclusion: Prescribing appears to be more easily adopted into practice where it can form part of the overall care of the patient. Where new roles are required to be established, then prescribing takes longer to be universally adopted. While this review concerns policy and practice in the UK, the aspect of role adoption has wider potential implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. This paper reports findings from an action research (AR) project called IMPRESS, which aims to strengthen PPI within CLAHRC East of England (EoE). IMPRESS combines AR with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore PPI within diverse case study projects, identifying actions to implement, test and refine to further embed PPI. Methods: We purposively selected CLAHRC EoE case study projects for in-depth analysis of PPI using NPT. Data were generated from project PPI documentation, semi-structured qualitative interviews with researchers and PPI contributors and focus groups. Transcripts and documents were subjected to abductive thematic analysis and triangulation within case. Systematic across case comparison of themes was undertaken with findings and implications refined through stakeholder consultation. Results: We interviewed 24 researchers and 13 PPI contributors and analysed 28 documents from 10 case studies. Three focus groups were held: two with researchers (n = 4 and n = 6) and one with PPI contributors (n = 5). Findings detail to what extent projects made sense of PPI, bought in to PPI, operationalised PPI and appraised it, thus identifying barriers and enablers to fully embedded PPI. Conclusion: Combining NPT with AR allows us to assess the embeddedness of PPI within projects and programme, to inform specific local action and report broader conceptual lessons for PPI knowledge and practice informing the development of an action framework for embedding PPI in research programmes. To embed PPI within similar programmes teams, professionals, disciplines and institutions should be recognised as variably networked into existing PPI support. Further focus and research is needed on sharing PPI learning and supporting innovation in PPI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]