Search

In theory, teacher knowledge predicts instructional practice, thus impacting student outcomes. When it comes to knowledge to teach elementary-grade reading, most previous surveys have focused on knowledge essential for word reading development; few surveys have provided a picture of educator knowledge to teach both word reading and language comprehension. This article describes the development and validation of the Teacher Understanding of Literacy Constructs and Evidence-Based Instructional Practices (TULIP) survey, which assesses teacher knowledge in the domains of (a) phonological awareness, (b) phonics, decoding, and encoding, (c) reading fluency, (d) oral language, and (e) reading comprehension. The TULIP survey was created using an iterative development process involving a systematic review of research, expert review of items, field testing, and a pilot study. A validation study of the resulting TULIP survey was conducted with a sample of 313 in-service elementary-grade teachers of reading. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that both one-factor and five-factor models of the survey had acceptable fit. The overall TULIP scale had good reliability, and subscales representing knowledge within specific literacy domains had acceptable reliability (with the oral language subscale having lower reliability than the other four subscales). Knowledge overall and within each literacy domain was significantly related to education level, such that teachers with more education had higher scores.

Plain English summary There is a need for methods that engage lay people and other stakeholders, such as patients and healthcare providers, in developing research questions about health issues important to them and their communities. Involving stakeholders helps ensure that funding goes to research that addresses their concerns. The SEED Method engages stakeholders in a systematic process to explore health issues and develop research questions. Diverse groups of stakeholders participate at three levels: as collaborators that lead the process throughout, as participants who use their expertise to develop the questions, and as consultants who provide additional perspectives about the health topic. We used the SEED Method to engage 61 stakeholders from different socioeconomic and professional backgrounds to create research questions on lung cancer outcomes. Participants included cancer patients and caregivers, healthcare providers and administrators, and policymakers from a rural Virginia community. They developed causal models that diagrammed factors that influence lung cancer outcomes and the relationships between them. They used these models to develop priority research questions. The questions reflect the participants' diverse perspectives and address different areas of inquiry related to lung cancer outcomes, including access to care, support systems, social determinants of health, and quality of care. Participants felt well prepared to perform the project tasks because they had the opportunity to review lung cancer information, receive causal model and research question development training, and participate in facilitated group activities. The SEED Method can be used in a variety of settings and applied to any health topic of interest to stakeholders. Abstract Background Engagement of stakeholders in prioritization of health research can help ensure that funding is directed to research that reflects their concerns and needs. The Stakeholder Engagement in quEstion Development and Prioritization (SEED) Method is a multi-stakeholder methodology that uses principles of community engagement and causal modeling to develop health research questions that reflect the priorities of patients, clinicians, and other community stakeholders. We conducted a demonstration of the SEED Method to generate research questions on lung cancer outcomes, and to evaluate the process, outcomes, and effectiveness of the method for generating a research agenda that reflects diverse stakeholder perspectives. Methods The SEED Method engages community members at three levels: collaboration, participation, and consultation. We conducted a demonstration project from November, 2015 to July, 2016, in a rural Virginia community that was experiencing a significant disparity in lung cancer outcomes. A community research team led the project and selected three distinct stakeholder groups (Topic groups, TG) for participatory engagement in analysis of the health issue, causal modeling, and research question development. We evaluated the quality of stakeholder engagement and compared TG causal models and research questions to evaluate the diversity of stakeholder perspectives resulting from the methodology. Results The resulting research agenda poses questions on how a broad range of topics including access to care, support systems and coping mechanisms, social determinants of health, and quality of care impacts lung cancer outcomes. Participants felt well prepared for the tasks they were asked to perform due to the technical trainings and facilitated modeling and question development activities that are part of the SEED Method. The causal models and research questions developed by the Topic Groups reflected the diverse perspectives of the stakeholders. Conclusions The SEED Method has the potential to generate relevant stakeholder-centered research agendas on a variety of health-related topics, and to create community capacity for sustained research engagement.

The SEED Method is a multi-stakeholder approach that was created to involve diverse stakeholders in the development and prioritization of research questions using community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. Here we describe an adaptation of the SEED Method that focuses on developing and prioritizing strategies for addressing a health problem and bringing stakeholders together to develop and implement community action plans based on those strategies. We describe steps for implementing the SEED Method for community action planning and the results of a case study in a rural Virginia community with high opioid prescription and mortality rates. A participatory research team worked with three groups of Topic stakeholders to gather data, develop conceptual models, and create and prioritize strategies for reducing prescription and non-prescription opioid misuse and overdoses. Each group came up with 19 to 25 strategies and prioritized their top five, which included actions, services or programs, strategies, policies, and system changes. Attendees at community action planning meetings reviewed the 15 prioritized strategies, proposed three additional strategies, and prioritized their top choices. Community stakeholders started four work groups to implement the selected strategies in collaboration with the research team.

This meta-analysis included experimental or quasi-experimental intervention studies conducted between 1980 and 2020 that aimed to improve reading outcomes for Grade K-5 students with or at risk for dyslexia (i.e., students with or at risk for word reading difficulties, defined as scoring at or below norm-referenced screening or mean baseline performance thresholds articulated in our inclusion criteria). In all, 53 studies reported in 52 publications met inclusion criteria (m = 351; total student N = 6,053). We employed robust variance estimation to address dependent effect sizes arising from multiple outcomes and comparisons within studies. Results indicated a statistically significant main effect of instruction on norm-referenced reading outcomes (g = 0.33; p < 0.001). Because there was significant heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies (p < 0.01), we used meta-regression to identify the degree to which student characteristics (i.e., grade level), intervention characteristics (i.e., dosage, instructional components, multisensory nature, instructional group size), reading outcome domain (i.e., phonological awareness, word reading/spelling, passage reading, or reading comprehension), or research methods (i.e., sample size, study design) influenced intervention effects. Dosage and reading outcome domain were the only variables that significantly moderated intervention effects (p = 0.040 and p = 0.024, respectively), with higher dosage studies associated with larger effects (b = 0.002) and reading comprehension outcomes associated with smaller effects than word reading/spelling outcomes (b = -0.080).

Bilingualism and second language acquisition are discussed with reference to different theoretical perspectives. An integrated definition of bilingualism is provided and concepts underlying second language acquisition are presented. Theoretical persepectives according to Dodson (1985), Skinner (1985) and Krashen (1982) are explored. It is concluded that due to the diverse nature of bilingualism, a single universal theory of second language acquisition does not seem feasible, The need for an increased awareness of the complexity of bilingualism and second language acquisition, particularly within the multicultural and multilingual South African context, is highlighted.

Introduction There are no established methods to identify children with atypical diabetes for further study. We aimed to develop strategies to systematically ascertain cases of atypical pediatric diabetes using electronic medical records (EMR).Research design and methods We tested two strategies in a large pediatric hospital in the USA. Strategy 1: we designed a questionnaire to rule out typical diabetes and applied it to the EMR of 100 youth with diabetes. Strategy 2: we built three electronic queries to generate reports of three atypical pediatric diabetes phenotypes: unknown type, type 2 diabetes (T2D) diagnosed

Inclusive and modified sport promotes opportunities for participation usually for older people or people with disabilities, physical and or mental health issues. Walking sports, a form of modified sport, is often designed to support engagement in physical and social activity amongst people over 50 years. This qualitative study explored how walking football sessions were designed and delivered for, and experienced by people living with dementia and their family carers. We thematically analysed 18 qualitative interviews and identified three main themes (1) social impact, (2) embodied memories and (3) flexible carer respite. The findings increase our understanding of how walking sports such as football can be viewed as a psychosocial intervention and be modified to promote the inclusion and agency of people living with dementia and respite for family carers. The study offers best practice recommendations for those organising modified sports activities for older people living with dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Renal ectopy is a congenital anomaly that arises from the disruption of normal renal embryologic migration. Crossed fused renal ectopia (CFRE) occurs when the ectopic kidney crosses midline and fuses with the contralateral kidney. Blood supply can be variable, and can come from the aorta, iliac, or even hypogastric arteries. Careful consideration of blood supply and operative approach is warranted when considering an endovascular approach to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair of these patients. Methods: We present a case of a 72-year-old female who presented with abdominal and back pain. An inframesenteric AAA was found measuring 5.4 cm with CFRE supplied by a single right renal artery arising from the left common iliac artery. The right common iliac artery arose superior to the distal aorta just distal to the aneurysmal sac. Results: An endovascular aortic aneurysm repair was completed with a stent graft placed just distal to the takeoff of the superior mesenteric artery, with a left iliac limb placed just proximal to the right renal artery takeoff. The patient did well post-operatively and was discharged by post-operative day 2. CTA Aorta post-operatively showed widely patent endovascular stent grafts without evidence of an endoleak. The CFRE with right renal artery arising from the left common iliac artery was also widely patent. Conclusions: Renal ectopy is a congenital anomaly of the kidney and urinary tract, and can present with different vascular configurations. In the setting of a AAA amenable to EVAR, careful preoperative planning can facilitate a successful repair.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the role of intravenous lidocaine as a supplemental pain control modality in patients undergoing spine surgery. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the use of supplemental intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. We developed a comprehensive search strategy to adequately screen for randomized controlled trials involving intravenous lidocaine in spine surgery. Continuous outcomes included postoperative opiate consumption and postoperative pain scores. Dichotomous outcomes included nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, and wound infection. Results: A total of 3 RCTs comprising 235 patients were selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Cumulative morphine consumption at 48 h was not statistically significant between lidocaine and control groups. Postoperative pain was not statistically significant at any measured time points in the first and second day postoperatively. There was no statistical difference in postoperative complications including nausea, vomiting, pneumonia, delirium, or surgical site infection. Conclusion: Our results indicated that current literature does not support the use of intravenous lidocaine as an adjunctive measure of pain management after spine surgery. Given the relatively few numbers of studies in this field, further randomized controlled trials are needed to make a definitive conclusion on the effectiveness of lidocaine in spine surgery patients.