Search

Purpose Sharing and developing digital educational resources and open educational resources has been proposed as a way to harmonize and improve clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) education in European medical schools. Previous research, however, has shown that there are barriers to the adoption and implementation of open educational resources. The aim of this study was to determine perceived opportunities and barriers to the use and creation of open educational resources among European CPT teachers and possible solutions for these barriers. Methods CPT teachers of British and EU medical schools completed an online survey. Opportunities and challenges were identified by thematic analyses and subsequently discussed in an international consensus meeting. Results Data from 99 CPT teachers from 95 medical schools were analysed. Thirty teachers (30.3%) shared or collaboratively produced digital educational resources. All teachers foresaw opportunities in the more active use of open educational resources, including improving the quality of their teaching. The challenges reported were language barriers, local differences, lack of time, technological issues, difficulties with quality management, and copyright restrictions. Practical solutions for these challenges were discussed and include a peer review system, clear indexing, and use of copyright licenses that permit adaptation of resources. Conclusion Key challenges to making greater use of CPT open educational resources are a limited applicability of such resources due to language and local differences and quality concerns. These challenges may be resolved by relatively simple measures, such as allowing adaptation and translation of resources and a peer review system.

CONTRIBUTORS IN THE NETWORK OF TEACHERS IN PHARMACOTHERAPY (NOTIP) (ALPHABETIZED BY COUNTRY): Atanasova, Ivanka (Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, Bulgaria); Ganeva, Maria (Trakia University, Stara Zagora, Bulgaria); Gatchev, Emil (Medical University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria); Kostadinova, II (Medical University Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria); Mimica Matanovic, S (University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia); Vitezic, D (University of Rijeka Medical School, Rijeka, Croatia); Wozniak, Greta (University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus); Kmonickova, E (Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic); Urbanek, Karel (Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic); Damkier, P (University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark); Huupponen, RK (University of Turku, Turku, Finland); Auffret, Marine (Hospices civils de Lyon, Lyon, France); Bejan-Angoulvant, T (Université de Tours, Tours, France); Chouchana, Laurent (Hospital Cochin, Paris, France); Cracowski, Jean-Luc (University Grenoble Alpes, La Tronche, France); Drici, MD (University of Nice Côte d'Azur, Nice, France); Faillie, JL (CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France); Geniaux, Hélène (CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France); Molimard, M (Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France); Orlikowski, D (Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University, Versailles, France); Palin, Karine (University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France); Pers, Y-M (CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France); Picard, Nicolas (CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France); Simon, N (Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France); Toussirot, E (CHU de Besancon, Besancon, France); Boger, RH (University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany); Cascorbi, I (University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany); Mueller, SC (University Medicine Rostock, Rostock, Germany); Regenthal, R (University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany); Schwab, M (Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany); Schwaninger, MS (University of Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany); Thuermann, PA (University Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany); Wojnowski, L (University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany); Kouvelas, D (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece); Riba, P (Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary); Kerins, David M (University College, Cork, Ireland); Williams, David J (Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland); Cosentino, M (University of Insubria, Varese, Italy); De Ponti, Fabrizio (University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy); Filippelli, Amelia (University of Salerno, Baronissi, Italy); Leone, R (University of Verona, Verona, Italy); Locatelli, Vittorio (University of Milano - Bicocca, Monza, Italy); Jansone, Baiba (University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia); Gulbinovic, Romaldas (Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania); Mifsud, Janet (University of Malta, Msida, Malta); Braszko, Jan J (Medical University of Bialystok, Bialystok, Poland); kocic, I (Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland); Breitenfeld, Luiza (Beira Interior University, Covilh~a, Portugal); Castelo-Branco, M (University of Beira Interior, Covilh~a, Portugal); Conea, Simona (“Vasile Goldis” Western University of Arad, Arad, Romania); Magyar, Ioan (University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania); Bevc, S (University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia); Krzan, Mojca (University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia); Bernal, ML (University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain); Capellà, D (University of Girona, Girona, Spain); Carcas, A (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, University of Maribor, Spain); De Abajo, FJ (University of Alcalá, Alcalá de Henares, Spain); Lopez-Rico, M (University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain); Lucena, MI (University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain); Pontes, C (Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Sabadell, Spain); Sanz, EJ (Universidad de La Laguna, La Laguna, Spain); Böttiger, Y (Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden); Le Grevès, Madeleine (Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden); de Waard-Siebinga, I (University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands); Janssen, Ben JA (Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands); Knol, Wilma (University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands); Pandit, Rahul (University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands); van Rosse, F (Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands); Dent, G (Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom); Ferro, Albert (King's College London, London, United Kingdom); Hitchings, AW (St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom); Kapil, V (Queen Mary University London, London, United Kingdom); Linton, KD (University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom); Loke, YK (University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom); Okorie, Michael (Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, United Kingdom); Plumb, Richard David (Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom); Pontefract, Sarah (University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom); Ranmuthu, S (Queen Mary University London, London, United Kingdom); Sampson, AP (University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom); Thanacoody, HKR (Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom); Whitfield, Jonathan P (University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom); Wilson, Kurt (University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom) Improvement and harmonization of European clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) education is urgently required. Because digital educational resources can be easily shared, adapted to local situations and re‐used widely across a variety of educational systems, they may be ideally suited for this purpose Methods With a cross‐sectional survey among principal CPT teachers in 279 out of 304 European medical schools, an overview and classification of digital resources was compiled. Results Teachers from 95 (34%) medical schools in 26 of 28 EU countries responded, 66 (70%) of whom used digital educational resources in their CPT curriculum. A total of 89 of such resources were described in detail, including e‐learning (24%), simulators to teach pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics (10%), virtual patients (8%), and serious games (5%). Together, these resources covered 235 knowledge‐based learning objectives, 88 skills, and 13 attitudes. Only one third (27) of the resources were in‐part or totally free and only two were licensed open educational resources (free to use, distribute and adapt). A narrative overview of the largest, free and most novel resources is given. Conclusion Digital educational resources, ranging from e‐learning to virtual patients and games, are widely used for CPT education in EU medical schools. Learning objectives are based largely on knowledge rather than skills or attitudes. This may be improved by including more real‐life clinical case scenarios. Moreover, the majority of resources are neither free nor open. Therefore, with a view to harmonizing international CPT education, more needs to be learned about why CPT teachers are not currently sharing their educational materials.

Introduction: There are growing concerns among European health authorities regarding increasing prices for new cancer medicines, prices not necessarily linked to health gain and the implications for the sustainability of their healthcare systems. Areas covered: Narrative discussion principally among payers and their advisers regarding potential approaches to the pricing of new cancer medicines. Expert opinion: A number of potential pricing approaches are discussed including minimum effectiveness levels for new cancer medicines, managed entry agreements, multicriteria decision analyses (MCDAs), differential/tiered pricing, fair pricing models, amortization models as well as de-linkage models. We are likely to see a growth in alternative pricing deliberations in view of ongoing challenges. These include the considerable number of new oncology medicines in development including new gene therapies, new oncology medicines being launched with uncertainty regarding their value, and continued high prices coupled with the extent of confidential discounts for reimbursement. However, balanced against the need for new cancer medicines. This will lead to greater scrutiny over the prices of patent oncology medicines as more standard medicines lose their patent, calls for greater transparency as well as new models including amortization models. We will be monitoring these developments. © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

For about four months, in the 2018-2019 school year, students from Escola Secundária Jaime Moniz were involved in the project “UV-friendly or enemy?”. The project went through various activities that promoted interdisciplinarity between the disciplines of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Geology, and established contacts with their community. They also had the chance to conduct surveys and share the responses obtained on the Goballab platform, gaining awareness of the relevance of the problems associated with sun exposure at local and global levels. In the end, each group of students from each of the classes, created a product to present to the educational community, raising awareness of the problem studied. The products created were: posters, leaflets, games and a song (original lyrics and music) warning about the dangers and benefits of ultraviolet radiation for human health and the use of sunscreens.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a food intervention, with exposure combined with a tangible reward, on food neophobia, liking and intake of different vegetables, at the kindergarten school environment, in the South of Portugal. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Helper-dependent adenoviral (HDAd) vectors are attractive for liver-directed gene therapy because they can drive sustained high levels of transgene expression without chronic toxicity. However, high vector doses are required to achieve efficient hepatic transduction by systemic delivery because of a nonlinear dose response. Unfortunately, such high doses result in systemic vector dissemination and dose-dependent acute toxicity with potential lethal consequences. We have previously shown in nonhuman primates that delivery of HDAd in surgically isolated livers resulted in a significantly higher hepatic transduction with reduced systemic vector dissemination compared with intravenous delivery and multiyear transgene expression. Encouraged by these data, we have now employed a surgical vector delivery method in the Gunn rat, an animal model for Crigler-Najjar syndrome. After vector delivery into the surgically isolated liver, we show phenotypic correction at the low and clinically relevant vector dose of 1×1011 vp/kg. Correction of hyperbilirubinemia and increased glucuronidation of bilirubin in bile was achieved for up to 1 year after vector administration. Surgical delivery of the vector was well tolerated without signs of acute or chronic toxicity. This method of delivery could thereby be a safer alternative to liver transplantation for long-term treatment of Crigler-Najjar syndrome type I.

It is generally believed that increasing feeding frequency has immediate benefits, including reduced nutrient leaching and increased shrimp growth. In this context, the aim this work was to evaluate the effect of feeding frequency in growth performance of Farfantepenaeus paulensis. Juveniles of Farfantepenaeus paulensis were grown for 30 days in pen enclosures, at a stocking density of 5 shrimp/m2. The shrimp were fed on feeding trays at a rate of 8% of their biomass per day, with treatments of one, two, three and four times per day, with four replicates each. The results showed no differences (5% probability) in biomass gain of F. paulensis when feed was offered two, three or four times per day. However, it was observed that the once a day frequency had a negative influence on weight gain for this species of shrimp. We conclude that the supply of food with 35% crude protein twice a day is sufficient for the growth of F paulensis. Feeding frequency of three or four times can provide increased spending in the cultivation of juveniles of this species. RESUMOAcredita-se que uma frequência maior de alimentação traz benefícios imediatos, incluindo a redução da lixiviação de nutrientes e o aumento do crescimento do camarão. Nesse contexto, o objetivo do presente trabalho foi avaliar o efeito de diferentes frequências de oferta de alimento sobre o crescimento de Farfantepenaeus paulensis. Juvenis de Farfantepenaeus paulensis foram criados por 30 dias em tanques-rede, na densidade de estocagem de cinco camarões/m 2. Os camarões foram alimentados em comedouros com 8% da sua biomassa/dia, ofertados em parcelamentos de uma, duas, três e quatro vezes ao dia, com quatro repetições para cada tratamento. Os resultados mostraram que não ocorreram diferenças (5% de probabilidade) no ganho de biomassa de F. paulensis quando a frequência alimentar foi de duas, três ou quatro vezes ao dia. No entanto, os dados indicam que a frequência alimentar de uma vez ao dia interferiu negativamente no ganho de peso dessa espécie. Conclui-se que o fornecimento de ração com 35% de proteína bruta duas vezes ao dia é suficiente para o crescimento de F paulensis. O fornecimento de alimento três ou quatro vezes ao dia poderia acarretar maiores gastos no manejo de juvenis dessa espécie.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-12-30T10:19:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2005