Search

We used consensual qualitative research to explore eight counselor educators' experience integrating neuroscience into counseling curriculum. Six domains, 18 categories, and 37 subcategories emerged from the data highlighting barriers, successes, and future trajectory of incorporating neuroscience consistently and ethically into counselor training.

Background: The Antimicrobial Resistance Laboratory Network (AR Lab Network) was developed by the CDC to detect emerging antimicrobial-resistant (AR) threats and prevent outbreaks. However, low submission rates of AR isolates limit the potential of the AR Lab Network to address antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate barriers to submission of AR isolates in acute care hospitals (ACHs) and critical access hospitals (CAHs) within Texas Public Health Region 8 (PHR8) counties. Methods: A survey was designed and emailed to laboratory professionals to identify barriers to AR isolate submission. Responses were analyzed using 2-sided Fisher's exact tests to identify associations between responses and respondent characteristics. Results: Of the 33 hospitals within PHR8 invited to participate in the survey, responses were received from 21, a response rate of 63.6%. Lack of awareness of the AR Lab Network was the most frequently cited barrier to submission (65.4% of respondents). Other reported barriers to submission included lack of laboratory staff time (57.7%), lack of training with the submission process (34.6%), lack of personnel certified to ship infectious substances (23.1%), and lack of laboratory/shipping supplies (23.1%). Discussion: Regardless of the respondent's role, time in that role, or type of hospital in which they worked, the most common barrier to isolate submission was lack of awareness of the AR Lab Network. In the future, we will address the identified barriers by implementing educational outreach programs about AMR and the AR Lab Network for hospitals and other healthcare facilities within PHR8. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies have consistently documented that introductory geoscience students struggle with visualizing features presented on topographic maps. This is a problem that has the potential to increase in a digital age when engagement with maps consists primarily of GPS navigation via smartphones. Since the first augmented reality (AR) sandbox in 2012, geoscience educators have been wondering how it might be used to improve students' ability to read topographic maps. This study examines one potential approach. Here we present the results of research that took place over a full academic year at a large, primarily undergraduate-serving, public university in 40 lab sections of introductory geology. This research assessed data from 730 comparison and experimental group participants to determine (a) students' ability to represent a 2D topographic map in 3D, (b) the impact of the AR sandbox on student engagement, and (c) the impact of the AR sandbox on student learning. The results of this study revealed that students were successful in representing a 2D map in 3D and reported increased engagement in the experiment group due to experience with the AR sandbox; however, there was no difference in student learning between the experimental and comparison groups.

Effects of a person's sex and seating arrangement were tested with 310 participants (151 men and 159 women; M age = 20.0, SD = 3.3) from a large southwestern U.S. university who were asked to select a leader from among five persons depicted around a rectangular table. Participants chose a person shown seated at the head of the table as the leader of a group, regardless of that person's sex. This conflicts with prior research indicating gender bias against women as leaders.

SUMMARY: This article summarises key areas of research informing understanding of vulnerability factors and risk assessment and management across the lifespan, with particular reference to risk to self (self-harm and suicide). It relates the discussion to people attending sexual assault referral centres (SARCs), but is applicable in a range of clinical settings. Although people accessing SARCs often present with mental health difficulties and various other vulnerabilities, SARC practitioners often do not have specialist training in working with mental health difficulties, including individuals at risk to self. We discuss developmental differences that should be considered when assessing and managing risk to self, and examine relationships between mental health difficulties, risk to self, and rape and/or sexual assault. Finally, we offer advice on how to respond to risk presented by individuals who have experienced sexual violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]