Search

In this paper, we aim to explore students' experiences of support mechanisms that support their wellbeing on an engineering degree programme at a research-intensive higher education institution and understand how theory relates to practice. This study was conducted using a mixed-methods approach involving student survey responses (N = 173), interviews with 16 students and focus groups. Kahu and Nelson's conceptual framework was used as a lens through which to explore student support mechanisms. Preliminary data analysis indicates that the intense workload adversely affects students as do some of the interactions they have with personal tutors and their peers. Our findings suggest that workload needs to be reduced, personal tutors need to fill gaps in their skills set, especially associated with student support, and institutional and departmental protocols be continually updated to support student wellbeing. Additionally, student wellbeing officers and professional, dedicated wellbeing advisors could be part of a long-term solution.

Molnupiravir is an antiviral, currently approved by the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) for treating at-risk COVID-19 patients, that induces lethal error catastrophe in SARS-CoV-2. How this drug-induced mechanism of action might impact the emergence of resistance mutations is unclear. To investigate this, we used samples from the AGILE Candidate Specific Trial (CST)−2 (clinical trial number NCT04746183). The primary outcomes of AGILE CST-2 were to measure the drug safety and antiviral efficacy of molnupiravir in humans (180 participants randomised 1:1 with placebo). Here, we describe the pre-specified exploratory virological endpoint of CST-2, which was to determine the possible genomic changes in SARS-CoV-2 induced by molnupiravir treatment. We use high-throughput amplicon sequencing and minor variant analysis to characterise viral genomics in each participant whose longitudinal samples (days 1, 3 and 5 post-randomisation) pass the viral genomic quality criteria (n = 59 for molnupiravir and n = 65 for placebo). Over the course of treatment, no specific mutations were associated with molnupiravir treatment. We find that molnupiravir significantly increased the transition:transversion mutation ratio in SARS-CoV-2, consistent with the model of lethal error catastrophe. This study highlights the utility of examining intra-host virus populations to strengthen the prediction, and surveillance, of potential treatment-emergent adaptations. Molnupiravir is an antiviral that forces lethal error catastrophe in SARS-CoV-2 RNAs. Here, the authors confirm the mechanism of action of molnupiravir in humans using samples obtained from the UK's AGILE phase IIa clinical trial investigating the antiviral efficacy of the drug against SARS-CoV-2. No treatment-associated SARS-CoV-2 mutations were identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Curriculum review is challenging, although if carried out strategically can be less so. The adoption of a theory of change approach for reviewing a chemical engineering curriculum at a research-intensive university in the UK is discussed. The curriculum review was undertaken as part of an institutional drive to modularise the curricula and align the number of contact and independent study hours for all undergraduate students in the institution. At the heart of our curriculum review is the student experience, which is often ignored in favour of the views of institutional management. The curriculum has been redesigned using a theory of change approach, which has enabled us to establish short and long-term plans based on our efforts to create a less burdensome, student-centred curriculum that incorporates our institutional learning and teaching strategy. As part of the process, assumptions needed to be surfaced, meaningful evidence collated, and a central end-goal identified These plans are evidence-based and include: the provision of a departmental wellbeing advisor, the application and development of interactive pedagogies, appropriate mechanisms that support slow learning through formative assessment and less of an assessment burden, and nurturing links with industry-based partners ensuring a greater emphasis on students' professional development and their exposure to chemical engineering industries. • Novel use was made of a theory of change approach to review an undergraduate chemical engineering curriculum. • Meaningful evidence from students was collated to ensure they were valued consultants throughout the process. • Short-term and long term changes were systematically identified through effective use of this framework for evaluation going forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we aim to explore students' experiences of support mechanisms that support their wellbeing on an engineering degree programme at a research-intensive higher education institution and understand how theory relates to practice. This study was conducted using a mixed-methods approach involving student survey responses (N = 173), interviews with 16 students and focus groups. Kahu and Nelson's conceptual framework was used as a lens through which to explore student support mechanisms. Preliminary data analysis indicates that the intense workload adversely affects students as do some of the interactions they have with personal tutors and their peers. Our findings suggest that workload needs to be reduced, personal tutors need to fill gaps in their skills set, especially associated with student support, and institutional and departmental protocols be continually updated to support student wellbeing. Additionally, student wellbeing officers and professional, dedicated wellbeing advisors could be part of a long-term solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The efficiency results show significant differences against traditional UK League Tables. • Highly ranked universities are not necessarily efficient, and vice versa. • 21 departments were identified as efficient while only 4 were inefficient. • Sensitivity and dynamic analyses provide further insight in the performance of the departments. University rankings have become an important tool to compare academic institutions within and across countries. Yet, they rely on aggregated scores based on subjective weights which render them sensitive to experts' preferences and not fully transparent to final users. To overcome this limitation, we apply Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to evaluate UK universities in the field of chemical engineering as a case study, using data retrieved from two national rankings. DEA is a non-parametric approach developed for the multi-criteria assessment of entities that avoids the use of subjective weightings and aggregated scores; this is accomplished by calculating an efficiency index, on the basis of which universities can be classified as either 'efficient' or 'inefficient'. Our analysis shows that the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) occupying the highest positions in the chemical engineering rankings might not be the most efficient ones, and vice versa , which highlights the need to complement the use of rankings with other analytical tools. Overall, DEA provides further insight into the assessment of HEIs, allowing institutions to better understand their weaknesses and strengths, while pinpointing sources of inefficiencies where improvement efforts must be directed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The antiviral drug molnupiravir was licensed for treating at-risk patients with COVID-19 on the basis of data from unvaccinated adults. We aimed to evaluate the safety and virological efficacy of molnupiravir in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with COVID-19.Methods: This randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial (AGILE CST-2) was done at five National Institute for Health and Care Research sites in the UK. Eligible participants were adult (aged ≥18 years) outpatients with PCR-confirmed, mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection who were within 5 days of symptom onset. Using permuted blocks (block size 2 or 4) and stratifying by site, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either molnupiravir (orally; 800 mg twice daily for 5 days) plus standard of care or matching placebo plus standard of care. The primary outcome was the time from randomisation to SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity on nasopharyngeal swabs and was analysed by use of a Bayesian Cox proportional hazards model for estimating the probability of a superior virological response (hazard ratio [HR]>1) for molnupiravir versus placebo. Our primary model used a two-point prior based on equal prior probabilities (50%) that the HR was 1·0 or 1·5. We defined a priori that if the probability of a HR of more than 1 was more than 80% molnupiravir would be recommended for further testing. The primary outcome was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in the safety population, comprising participants who had received at least one dose of allocated treatment. This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04746183, and the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN27106947, and is ongoing.Findings: Between Nov 18, 2020, and March 16, 2022, 1723 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 180 were randomly assigned to receive either molnupiravir (n=90) or placebo (n=90) and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. 103 (57%) of 180 participants were female and 77 (43%) were male and 90 (50%) participants had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. SARS-CoV-2 infections with the delta (B.1.617.2; 72 [40%] of 180), alpha (B.1.1.7; 37 [21%]), omicron (B.1.1.529; 38 [21%]), and EU1 (B.1.177; 28 [16%]) variants were represented. All 180 participants received at least one dose of treatment and four participants discontinued the study (one in the molnupiravir group and three in the placebo group). Participants in the molnupiravir group had a faster median time from randomisation to negative PCR (8 days [95% CI 8-9]) than participants in the placebo group (11 days [10-11]; HR 1·30, 95% credible interval 0·92-1·71; log-rank p=0·074). The probability of molnupiravir being superior to placebo (HR>1) was 75·4%, which was less than our threshold of 80%. 73 (81%) of 90 participants in the molnupiravir group and 68 (76%) of 90 participants in the placebo group had at least one adverse event by day 29. One participant in the molnupiravir group and three participants in the placebo group had an adverse event of a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher severity. No participants died (due to any cause) during the trial.Interpretation: We found molnupiravir to be well tolerated and, although our predefined threshold was not reached, we observed some evidence that molnupiravir has antiviral activity in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with a broad range of SARS-CoV-2 variants, although this evidence is not conclusive.Funding: Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, the Medical Research Council, and the Wellcome Trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]