Search

Your search keyword '"Janet Harris"' showing total 127 results
Start Over Author "Janet Harris"
127 results on '"Janet Harris"'

1. Can communities be mobilised to build capacity to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic? A qualitative process evaluation

Author

Janet Harris, Paul Redgrave, Paulina Ramirez, and Frances Arnold

Subjects
Medicine
Abstract

Objectives Government guidance to manage COVID-19 was challenged by low levels of health and digital literacy and lack of information in different languages. ‘Covid Confidence’ sessions (CC-sessions) were evaluated to assess their effectiveness in counteracting misinformation and provide an alternative source of information about the pandemic.Design We worked with community anchor organisations to co-ordinate online CC-sessions serving three economically deprived, ethnically mixed, neighbourhoods. We conducted a qualitative, participatory process evaluation, in tandem with the CC-sessions to explore whether a popular opinion leader/local champion model of health promotion could mobilise pandemic responses. Group discussions were supplemented by final interviews to assess changes in community capacity to mobilise.Setting Sheffield, England, September 2020 to November 2021.Participants Community leaders, workers and volunteers representing a variety of local organisations resulted in 314 attendances at CC-sessions. A group of local health experts helped organisations make sense of government information.Results CC-sessions fostered cross-organisational relationships, which enabled rapid community responses. Community champions successfully adapted information to different groups. Listening, identifying individual concerns and providing practical support enabled people to make informed decisions on managing exposure and getting vaccinated. Some people were unable to comply with self-isolation due to overcrowded housing and the need to work. Communities drew on existing resources and networks.Conclusions CC-sessions promoted stronger links between community organisations which reduced mistrust of government information. In future, government efforts to manage pandemics should partner with communities to codesign and implement prevention and control measures.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Using co-production to implement patient reported outcome measures in third sector organisations: a mixed methods study

Author

Alexis Foster, Alicia O’Cathain, Janet Harris, Guy Weston, Lucy Andrews, and Olga Andreeva

Subjects
Patient-reported outcomes, Outcome assessment, Implementing, Third sector organisations, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Abstract Background Third sector organisations such as charities and community groups are using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) at an aggregated service level to demonstrate their impact to commissioners to generate or retain funding. Despite this motivation, organisations can struggle with implementing PROMs. Previous studies have identified facilitators including organisations using an appropriate measure, co-producing the PROMs process with staff, and investing resources to support the use of measures. However, to date no studies have applied this learning to third sector organisations to evaluate whether taking an evidence-informed implementation approach improves the use of PROMs. Methods A Community-Based Participatory Research approach was used which involved university-based researchers supporting two third sector organisations to implement PROMs. The researchers provided evidence-informed advice and training. The organisations were responsible for implementing PROMs. The researchers evaluated implementation through a mixed methods approach including five key informant interviews, four evaluation groups and analysis of collected PROMs data (n = 313). Results Both third sector organisations faced considerable constraints in incorporating known facilitators and addressing barriers. The organisations involved staff in choosing an acceptable measure. However, competing priorities including external pressures to use specific PROMs, busy workloads and staff opinions created challenges to using measures. Investment of time and energy into developing an outcomes-based organisational culture was key to enable the prioritisation of PROMs. For example, discussing PROMs in supervision so that they were viewed as part of people’s job roles. Organisations found that implementation took several years and was disrupted by other pressures. Conclusions Whilst organisations were motivated to implement PROMs to obtain or retain funding, they faced considerable practical and ideological challenges. Consequently, some stakeholders felt that alternative methods to measuring impact could potentially be more feasible than PROMs.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. Qualitative research to inform economic modelling: a case study in older people’s views on implementing the NICE falls prevention guideline

Author

Joseph Kwon, Yujin Lee, Tracey Young, Hazel Squires, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Falls, Falls risk, Falls prevention, National Institute for health and care excellence guideline, Implementation, Qualitative research, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Abstract Background High prevalence of falls among older persons makes falls prevention a public health priority. Yet community-based falls prevention face complexity in implementation and any commissioning strategy should be subject to economic evaluation to ensure cost-effective use of healthcare resources. The study aims to capture the views of older people on implementing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline on community-based falls prevention and explore how the qualitative data can be used to inform commissioning strategies and conceptual modelling of falls prevention economic evaluation in the local area of Sheffield. Methods Focus group and interview participants (n = 27) were recruited from Sheffield, England, and comprised falls prevention service users and eligible non-users of varying falls risks. Topics concerned key components of the NICE-recommended falls prevention pathway, including falls risk screening, multifactorial risk assessment and treatment uptake and adherence. Views on other topics concerning falls prevention were also invited. Framework analysis was applied for data analysis, involving data familiarisation, identifying themes, indexing, charting and mapping and interpretation. The qualitative data were mapped to three frameworks: (1) facilitators and barriers to implementing the NICE-recommended pathway and contextual factors; (2) intervention-related causal mechanisms for formulating commissioning strategies spanning context, priority setting, need, supply and demand; and (3) methodological and evaluative challenges for public health economic modelling. Results Two cross-component factors were identified: health motives of older persons; and professional competence. Participants highlighted the need for intersectoral approaches and prioritising the vulnerable groups. The local commissioning strategy should consider the socioeconomic, linguistic, geographical, legal and cultural contexts, priority setting challenges, supply-side mechanisms spanning provider, organisation, funding and policy (including intersectoral) and health and non-health demand motives. Methodological and evaluative challenges identified included: incorporating non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs; considering dynamic complexity; considering social determinants of health; and conducting equity analyses. Conclusions Holistic qualitative research can inform how commissioned falls prevention pathways can be feasible and effective. Qualitative data can inform commissioning strategies and conceptual modelling for economic evaluations of falls prevention and other geriatric interventions. This would improve the structural validity of quantitative models used to inform geriatric public health policies.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. A Guide to Selecting Participatory Research Methods Based on Project and Partnership Goals

Author

Stephanie R. Duea, Emily B. Zimmerman, Lisa M. Vaughn, Sónia Dias, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Social Sciences
Abstract

Participatory research engages community stakeholders in the research process, from problem identification and developing the research question, to dissemination of results. There is increasing recognition in the field of health research that community-engaged methods can be used throughout the research process. The volume of guidance for engaging communities and conducting participatory research has grown steadily in the past 40+ years, in many countries and contexts. Further, some institutions now require stakeholder engagement in research as a condition of funding. Interest in collaborating in the research process is also growing among patients and the public. This article provides an overview for selecting participatory research methods based on project and partnerships goals.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. Understanding how and why quality circles improve standards of practice, enhance professional development and increase psychological well-being of general practitioners: a realist synthesis

Author

Geoff Wong, Adrian Rohrbasser, Sharon Mickan, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Medicine
Abstract

Objectives To understand how and why participation in quality circles (QCs) improves general practitioners’ (GPs) psychological well-being and the quality of their clinical practice. To provide evidence-informed and practical guidance to maintain QCs at local and policy levels.Design A theory-driven mixed method.Setting Primary healthcare.Method We collected data in four stages to develop and refine the programme theory of QCs: (1) coinquiry with Swiss and European expert stakeholders to develop a preliminary programme theory; (2) realist review with systematic searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINHAL (1980–2020) to inform the preliminary programme theory; (3) programme refinement through interviews with participants, facilitators, tutors and managers of QCs and (4) consolidation of theory through interviews with QC experts across Europe and examining existing theories.Sources of data The coinquiry comprised 4 interviews and 3 focus groups with 50 European experts. From the literature search, we included 108 papers to develop the literature-based programme theory. In stage 3, we used data from 40 participants gathered in 6 interviews and 2 focus groups to refine the programme theory. In stage 4, five interviewees from different healthcare systems consolidated our programme theory.Result Requirements for successful QCs are governmental trust in GPs’ abilities to deliver quality improvement, training, access to educational material and performance data, protected time and financial resources. Group dynamics strongly influence success; facilitators should ensure participants exchange knowledge and generate new concepts in a safe environment. Peer interaction promotes professional development and psychological well-being. With repetition, participants gain confidence to put their new concepts into practice.Conclusion With expert facilitation, clinical review and practice opportunities, QCs can improve the quality of standard practice, enhance professional development and increase psychological well-being in the context of adequate professional and administrative support.PROSPERO registration number CRD42013004826.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. How patient and community involvement in diabetes research influences health outcomes: A realist review

Author

Janet Harris, Johannes Haltbakk, Trisha Dunning, Gunhild Austrheim, Marit Kirkevold, Maxine Johnson, and Marit Graue

Subjects
community engagement, diabetes, participatory research, partnership working, patient involvement, realist review, Medicine (General), R5-920, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Abstract Background Patient and public involvement in diabetes research is an international requirement, but little is known about the relationship between the process of involvement and health outcomes. Objective This realist review identifies who benefits from different types of involvement across different contexts and circumstances. Search strategies Medline, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched to identify interventions using targeted, embedded or collaborative involvement to reduce risk and promote self‐management of diabetes. People at risk/with diabetes, providers and community organizations with an interest in addressing diabetes were included. There were no limitations on date, language or study type. Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted from 29 projects using elements from involvement frameworks. A conceptual analysis of involvement types was used to complete the synthesis. Main results Projects used targeted (4), embedded (8) and collaborative (17) involvement. Productive interaction facilitated over a sufficient period of time enabled people to set priorities for research. Partnerships that committed to collaboration increased awareness of diabetes risk and mobilized people to co‐design and co‐deliver diabetes interventions. Cultural adaptation increased relevance and acceptance of the intervention because they trusted local delivery approaches. Local implementation produced high levels of recruitment and retention, which project teams associated with achieving diabetes health outcomes. Discussion and Conclusions Achieving understanding of community context, developing trusting relationships across sectors and developing productive partnerships were prerequisites for designing research that was feasible and locally relevant. The proportion of diabetes studies incorporating these elements is surprisingly low. Barriers to resourcing partnerships need to be systematically addressed.

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

7. How do third sector organisations or charities providing health and well-being services in England implement patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)? A qualitative interview study

Author

Alicia O'Cathain, Alexis Foster, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Medicine
Abstract

Objectives To identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in third sector organisations (TSOs) delivering health and well-being services.Design A qualitative interview study. Participants were recruited using purposive, opportunistic and snowballing methods. Framework analysis was used.Setting TSOs including charities, community groups and not-for-profit organisations in England, UK.Participants Thirty interviewees including service users, TSO front-line workers and managers, commissioners of TSOs and other stakeholders such as academic researchers.Results TSOs primarily used PROMs because of pressures arising from the external funding context. However, organisations often struggled to implement PROMs, rarely getting the process right first time. Facilitators for implementation included having an implementation lead committed to making it work, investing resources in data management systems and support staff and taking a collaborative approach to designing the PROMs process. The latter helped to ensure an appropriate PROMs process for the specific TSO including choosing a suitable measure and planning how data would be collected, processed and used. There was a dilemma about whether TSOs should use standardised well-being measures (eg, the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) or design their own PROM. Not all TSOs sustained the collection and reporting of PROMs over time because this required a change in organisational culture to view PROMs as beneficial for the TSO and PROMs becoming part of front-line workers’ job specifications.Conclusions TSOs are trying to use PROMs because they feel they have no choice but often struggle with implementation. Having an implementation lead, designing an appropriate process, investing resources, training staff and taking mitigating action to address potential barriers can facilitate implementation. Some of the findings are consistent with the experiences of more clinical services so appear relevant to the implementation of PROMs irrespective of the specific context.

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. The facilitators and barriers to implementing patient reported outcome measures in organisations delivering health related services: a systematic review of reviews

Author

Alexis Foster, Liz Croot, John Brazier, Janet Harris, and Alicia O’Cathain

Subjects
Patient-reported outcomes, Quality of life, Outcome assessment, Implementing, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Abstract Background There is increasing interest in using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) within organisations delivering health related services. However, organisations have had mixed success in implementing PROMs and there is little understanding about why this may be. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing PROMs in organisations. Method A systematic review of reviews was undertaken. Searches were conducted of five electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, during the week of the 20th February 2017. Additional search methods included website searching and reference checking. To be included, a publication had to be a review of the literature, describe its methods and include information related to implementing PROMs. The reviews were extracted using a standardised form and assessed for their risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The findings were synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (PROSPERO) (CRD42017057491). Results Initially 2047 records were identified. After assessing eligibility, six reviews were included. These reviews varied in their review type and focus. Different issues arose at distinct stages of the implementation process. Organisations needed to invest time and resources in two key stages early in the implementation process: ‘designing’ the processes for using PROMs within an organisation; and ‘preparing’ an organisation and its staff. The ‘designing’ stage involved organisations planning not just which PROMs to use and how to administer them, but also how the data would be used for clinical purposes. The ‘preparing’ stage involved getting an organisation and its staff ready to use PROMs, particularly persuading clinicians of the validity and value of PROMs, delivering training, and developing electronic systems. Having an implementation lead overseeing the process and developing the process based on feedback were also identified as facilitating implementation. Conclusion Organisations implementing PROMs need to invest time and resources in ‘designing’ the PROMs strategy and ‘preparing’ the organisation to use PROMs. Focusing on these earlier stages may prevent problems arising when PROMs are used in practice.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. Adjusting a mainstream weight management intervention for people with intellectual disabilities: a user centred approach

Author

Liz Croot, Melanie Rimmer, Sarah Salway, Chris Hatton, Emma Dowse, Jacquie Lavin, Sarah E. Bennett, Janet Harris, and Alicia O’Cathain

Subjects
Intellectual disability, Obesity, Weight management, Intervention development, Complex intervention, Behaviour change, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Abstract Background People with intellectual disabilities (ID) may not be able to access and respond to uniformly delivered health interventions. Public bodies have a legal duty to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to policies and practices to provide fair access and treatment for people with ID. This study aimed to identify adjustments to the Slimming World weight management programme to improve accessibility and assess acceptability and feasibility for this population. Methods This user-centred qualitative study was carried out with a steering group of people with ID (n = 4). Barriers and facilitators to using Slimming World were identified through interviews and focus groups with people with ID (n = 54), carers (n = 12) current members with ID (n = 8) and Slimming World group leaders (n = 11). Adjustments were made and their feasibility and acceptability were explored in a before-and-after mixed methods study where people with ID attended Slimming World for eight weeks. Participants (n = 9), carers (n = 7) and Slimming World group leaders (n = 4) were interviewed to explore their experiences of the adjustments. Participants were weighed at baseline then each week. Results Four key adjustments were identified and addressed by Slimming World who developed prototype Easy Read materials and a letter for carers. Six of the nine participants attended Slimming World for eight weeks and lost weight (1.4 kg to 6.6 kg, reduction in BMI between 0.5 and 1.7 kg/m2), indicating that the adjustments were feasible and acceptable. Two participants dropped out because they felt uncomfortable in a mainstream group and another left because they lacked control over food choice in their residential setting. Conclusions This user-centred approach identified reasonable adjustments that were feasible to implement. In a small uncontrolled feasibility study, people with ID were positive about the adjustments and lost weight. However, issues in the wider context of people’s lives, such as obesogenic environments and concerns about joining mainstream groups, limited the acceptability of Slimming World even with these adjustments. These findings have important implications for policy and suggest that environmental and organisational level interventions are needed alongside those targeting individual behaviour to tackle the obesogenic environment in which many people with ID spend their time, in order to reduce inequalities associated with the consequences of obesity.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

10. Assessing the complexity of interventions within systematic reviews: development, content and use of a new tool (iCAT_SR)

Author

Simon Lewin, Maggie Hendry, Jackie Chandler, Andrew D. Oxman, Susan Michie, Sasha Shepperd, Barnaby C. Reeves, Peter Tugwell, Karin Hannes, Eva A. Rehfuess, Vivien Welch, Joanne E. Mckenzie, Belinda Burford, Jennifer Petkovic, Laurie M. Anderson, Janet Harris, and Jane Noyes

Subjects
Complex interventions, Systematic review, Tool, Intervention development, Evidence synthesis, Complex, Medicine (General), R5-920
Abstract

Abstract Background Health interventions fall along a spectrum from simple to more complex. There is wide interest in methods for reviewing ‘complex interventions’, but few transparent approaches for assessing intervention complexity in systematic reviews. Such assessments may assist review authors in, for example, systematically describing interventions and developing logic models. This paper describes the development and application of the intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews (iCAT_SR), a new tool to assess and categorise levels of intervention complexity in systematic reviews. Methods We developed the iCAT_SR by adapting and extending an existing complexity assessment tool for randomized trials. We undertook this adaptation using a consensus approach in which possible complexity dimensions were circulated for feedback to a panel of methodologists with expertise in complex interventions and systematic reviews. Based on these inputs, we developed a draft version of the tool. We then invited a second round of feedback from the panel and a wider group of systematic reviewers. This informed further refinement of the tool. Results The tool comprises ten dimensions: (1) the number of active components in the intervention; (2) the number of behaviours of recipients to which the intervention is directed; (3) the range and number of organizational levels targeted by the intervention; (4) the degree of tailoring intended or flexibility permitted across sites or individuals in applying or implementing the intervention; (5) the level of skill required by those delivering the intervention; (6) the level of skill required by those receiving the intervention; (7) the degree of interaction between intervention components; (8) the degree to which the effects of the intervention are context dependent; (9) the degree to which the effects of the interventions are changed by recipient or provider factors; (10) and the nature of the causal pathway between intervention and outcome. Dimensions 1–6 are considered ‘core’ dimensions. Dimensions 7–10 are optional and may not be useful for all interventions. Conclusions The iCAT_SR tool facilitates more in-depth, systematic assessment of the complexity of interventions in systematic reviews and can assist in undertaking reviews and interpreting review findings. Further testing of the tool is now needed.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

11. Quality circles for quality improvement in primary health care: Their origins, spread, effectiveness and lacunae- A scoping review.

Author

Adrian Rohrbasser, Janet Harris, Sharon Mickan, Kali Tal, and Geoff Wong

Subjects
Medicine, Science
Abstract

Quality circles or peer review groups, and similar structured small groups of 6-12 health care professionals meet regularly across Europe to reflect on and improve their standard practice. There is debate over their effectiveness in primary health care, especially over their potential to change practitioners' behaviour. Despite their popularity, we could not identify broad surveys of the literature on quality circles in a primary care context. Our scoping review was intended to identify possible definitions of quality circles, their origins, and reported effectiveness in primary health care, and to identify gaps in our knowledge. We searched appropriate databases and included any relevant paper on quality circles published until December 2017. We then compared information we found in the articles to that we found in books and on websites. Our search returned 7824 citations, from which we identified 82 background papers and 58 papers about quality circles. We found that they originated in manufacturing industry and that many countries adopted them for primary health care to continuously improve medical education, professional development, and quality of care. Quality circles are not standardized and their techniques are complex. We identified 19 papers that described individual studies, one paper that summarized 3 studies, and 1 systematic review that suggested that quality circles can effectively change behaviour, though effect sizes varied, depending on topic and context. Studies also suggested participation may affirm self-esteem and increase professional confidence. Because reports of the effect of quality circles on behaviour are variable, we recommend theory-driven research approaches to analyse and improve the effectiveness of this complex intervention.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

13. Adapting primary care for new migrants: a formative assessment

Author

Elizabeth Such, Elizabeth Walton, Brigitte Delaney, Janet Harris, and Sarah Salway

Subjects
migrant, primary healthcare, general practice, Medicine (General), R5-920
Abstract

Background: Immigration rates have increased recently in the UK. Migrant patients may have particular needs that are inadequately met by existing primary care provision. In the absence of national guidance, local adaptations are emerging in response to these new demands. Aim: To formatively assess the primary care services offered to new migrants and the ways in which practitioners and practices are adapting to meet need. Design & setting: Online survey and case studies of current practice across primary care in the UK. Case studies were selected from mainstream and specialist general practice as well as primary care provision in the third sector. Method: Non-probability sample survey of primary care practitioners (n = 70) with descriptive statistical analysis. Qualitative case studies (n = 8) selected purposively; in-depth exploration of organisational and practitioner adaptations to services. Analysis is structured around the principles of equitable care. Results: Survey results indicated that practitioners focused on working with communities and external agencies and adapting processes of, for example, screening, vaccination, and health checks. Lack of funding was cited most frequently as a barrier to service development (n = 51; 73%). Case studies highlighted the prominence partnership working and of an organisational and practitioner focus on equitable care. Adaptations centred on addressing wider social determinants, trauma, and violence, and additional individual needs; and on delivering culturally-competent care. Conclusion: Despite significant resource constraints, some primary care services are adapting to the needs of new migrants. Many adapted approaches can be characterised as equity-oriented.

Published
2017
Full Text
View/download PDF

14. Can community-based peer support promote health literacy and reduce inequalities? A realist review

Author

Janet Harris, Jane Springett, Liz Croot, Andrew Booth, Fiona Campbell, Jill Thompson, Elizabeth Goyder, Patrice Van Cleemput, Emma Wilkins, and Yajing Yang

Subjects
community, peer support, health, literacy, review, engagement, inequality, training, Public aspects of medicine, RA1-1270
Abstract

Background: Community-based peer support (CBPS) has been proposed as a potentially promising approach to improve health literacy (HL) and reduce health inequalities. Peer support, however, is described as a public health intervention in search of a theory, and as yet there are no systematic reviews exploring why or how peer support works to improve HL. Objective: To undertake a participatory realist synthesis to develop a better understanding of the potential for CBPS to promote better HL and reduce health inequalities. Data sources: Qualitative evidence syntheses, conceptual reviews and primary studies evaluating peer-support programmes; related studies that informed theoretical or contextual elements of the studies of interest were included. We conducted searches covering 1975 to October 2011 across Scopus, Global Health (including MEDLINE), ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database (PQDT) [including the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and Social Work Abstracts], The King’s Fund Database and Web of Knowledge, and the Institute of Development Studies supplementary strategies were used for the identification of grey literature. We developed a new approach to searching called ‘cluster searching’, which uses a variety of search techniques to identify papers or other research outputs that relate to a single study. Study eligibility criteria: Studies written in English describing CBPS research/evaluation, and related papers describing theory, were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Studies were selected on the basis of relevance in the first instance. We first analysed within-programme articulation of theory and appraised for coherence. Cross-programme analysis was used to configure relationships among context, mechanisms and outcomes. Patterns were then identified and compared with theories relevant to HL and health inequalities to produce a middle-range theory. Results: The synthesis indicated that organisations, researchers and health professionals that adopt an authoritarian design for peer-support programmes risk limiting the ability of peer supporters (PSs) to exercise autonomy and use their experiential knowledge to deliver culturally tailored support. Conversely, when organisations take a negotiated approach to codesigning programmes, PSs are enabled to establish meaningful relationships with people in socially vulnerable groups. CBPS is facilitated when organisations prioritise the importance of assessing community needs; investigate root causes of poor health and well-being; allow adequate time for development of relationships and connections; value experiential cultural knowledge; and share power and control during all stages of design and implementation. The theory now needs to be empirically tested via further primary research. Limitations: Analysis and synthesis were challenged by a lack of explicit links between peer support for marginalised groups and health inequalities; explicitly stated programme theory; inconsistent reporting of context and mechanism; poor reporting of intermediate process outcomes; and the use of theories aimed at individual-level behaviour change for community-based interventions. Conclusions: Peer-support programmes have the potential to improve HL and reduce health inequalities but potential is dependent upon the surrounding equity context. More explicit empirical research is needed, which establishes clearer links between peer-supported HL and health inequalities. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002297. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

15. Assessing societal effects: Lessons from evaluation approaches in transdisciplinary research fields

Author

Josefa Kny, Rachel Claus, Janet Harris, and Martina Schäfer

Subjects
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous), Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
Abstract

Achieving societal effects is crucial for transdisciplinary research. In this article, we present key characteristics of impact evaluation of transdisciplinary research. We compare different approaches in sustainability, public health, and development research to advance joint learning and define common challenges.To address complex societal problems, transdisciplinary approaches are increasingly being employed in research to achieve both scientific and societal effects. Comparing experiences of different impact evaluation approaches enables mutual learning across research fields. We provide an overview of the key characteristics of different approaches to assess the impact of transdisciplinary research across the fields of public health, development, and sustainability; uncover commonalities and challenges in applying these approaches; and suggest how they can be overcome by drawing on examples from specific approaches and fields. We find commonalities in terms of conceptual framing as well as data collection and analysis from which we derive the following key challenges:1. evidencing causal claims, 2. including multiple perspectives on effects, and 2. sustaining continuous monitoring and evaluation. We conclude that impact evaluation of transdisciplinary research must capture the interplay and effects of multiple actors, processes, and impact pathways to promote learning and empirical rigour and suggest how funders can support this endeavour.

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

16. Using knowledge brokering to produce community-generated evidence

Author

Alexis Foster, Debbie Mathews, Jane Springett, Guy Weston, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Value (ethics), Knowledge management, business.industry, Statutory law, Good evidence, Voluntary sector, Social care, Business, Social determinants of health, Health outcomes, Social Sciences (miscellaneous), Devolution
Abstract

Background: Devolution and integration of health and social care have placed increasing pressure on local statutory services, with a corresponding shift of health and social care to community organisations. The voluntary and charitable sector (VCS) is expected to make the case for increased funding by providing evidence of value and impact.\ud \ud \ud Aims and objectives: This paper explores the challenges of compiling evidence on health outcomes which do not reflect the holistic nature of VCS support. We document how knowledge brokering can be used to enable the VCS to generate evidence.\ud \ud \ud Key conclusions: Knowledge brokering (KB) may be an effective approach for developing community-generated evidence. Brokering is also needed to change perspectives on what counts as good evidence\ud \ud \ud \ud \ud Key messages\ud \ud Health outcome measures are not seen to be appropriate by the voluntary sector for social prescribing services.\ud \ud \ud A new evidence base is needed that reflects the social determinants of health.\ud \ud \ud Knowledge brokering may be an effective approach for developing community-generated evidence.\ud \ud \ud Brokering is also needed to change perspectives on what counts as good evidence.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

17. Emotional intelligence in nurse managers as it relates to staff nurse job satisfaction and retention: a scoping review

Author

Jacqueline Phillips, Elizabeth Hinton, Michelle Palokas, Janet Harris, and Robin Christian

Subjects
education.field_of_study, business.industry, Emotional intelligence, Population, Context (language use), CINAHL, Hospitals, Job Satisfaction, United States, Observational Studies as Topic, Systematic review, Nursing, Health care, Humans, Job satisfaction, Nurse Administrators, Psychology, education, business, General Nursing, Emotional Intelligence, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Qualitative research
Abstract

Objective The objective of this review was to map what is known about nurse manager emotional intelligence in relation to nurse job satisfaction and retention, and the tools used to measure emotional intelligence in this context. Introduction As the health care environment responds to the demands of high-quality and low-cost care, nurse managers must ensure that patient care environments are safe, efficient, and effective. Understanding nurse manager emotional intelligence may help organizations improve nurse satisfaction and retention as a strategy for reducing costs. Inclusion criteria This review considered experimental and quasi-experimental study designs, analytical observational studies, descriptive observational studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, qualitative studies, and text and opinion papers. Studies with staff nurses and experiences working with nurse managers were included. Studies that examined emotional intelligence of nurse managers, in any context, related to staff job satisfaction and retention in nursing and/or that discussed tools used to measure nurse managers' emotional intelligence were considered for inclusion. Methods This review followed JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Key information sources searched included CINAHL (EBSCO), Health and Psychosocial Instruments (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier), EBSCO Health Source (EBSCO), JBI Databases of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports (Ovid), ERIC (EBSCO), WorldWideScience (Worldwidescience.com), Wiley Online Library (Onlinelibrary.wiley.com), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest), MedNar (MedNar.com), Google Scholar (GoogleScholar.com), and ScienceDirect (Elsevier). Studies published in English from 1995 to September 2019were included in the review. Two independent reviewers assessed titles and abstracts against the inclusion criteria. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved in full and assessed in detail. The data extraction tool was developed by the authors to examine information retrieved. Results Eight quantitative studies were included, all from the United States. The studies included 232 nurse manager participants and 3731 staff nurse participants from academic and non-academic hospitals. Seven of eight studies used the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test to measure nurse manager emotional intelligence, and one study used the Emotional Quotient Inventory 2.0. Of the eight included studies, six studies showed no significant relationship among emotional intelligence and nurse job satisfaction and/or retention, one revealed a positive correlation, and one revealed both positive and negative correlations. Conclusions Limited research exists to determine whether nurse manager emotional intelligence plays a role in staff nurse job satisfaction and/or retention. All studies reported a need for further research, including the use of differing methodologies and a more diverse nursing population. This review may raise awareness among nurse managers as well as health care organizations about understanding and developing emotional intelligence.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

18. Prospective, multicenter study to evaluate performance and safety of a re-engineered temporary lead for InterStim™ therapy evaluation

Author

Dean Elterman, Jodi Michaels, Eric Margolis, Janet Harris‐Hicks, Kimberly Burgess, Christopher Betts, Christopher Harding, Geoffrey Towers, Hashim Hashim, Akin Ojo‐Carons, Amanda White, Tracy Cannon‐Smith, Nathan Grunow, Katie Bittner, and Keith Xavier

Subjects
Treatment Outcome, Urinary Bladder, Overactive, Urology, Humans, Electric Stimulation Therapy, Urinary Incontinence, Urge, Neurology (clinical), Prospective Studies
Abstract

The basic evaluation or percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE) is a method to assess pre-implantation therapeutic response in patients considering sacral neuromodulation for the treatment of refractory overactive bladder. A new PNE lead with a more robust design and greater distensibility designed to reduce the possibility of lead migration has recently been introduced to the market. The aim of this prospective, multicenter, global, postmarket study was to evaluate the clinical performance and safety of the new InterStim PNE lead with the foramen needle.Patients with overactive bladder were enrolled in this study. The primary objective of this study was to determine the proportion of subjects who demonstrated motor or sensory response(s) during lead placement using the InterStim PNE lead. Additional measures included the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I), patient satisfaction at the end of therapy evaluation, and change in bladder symptoms from baseline to the end of therapy evaluation (1-week follow-up visit).One-hundred and ten subjects met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and underwent a lead implant procedure. Of those, 108 had a successful procedure and 107 completed the 1-week follow-up visit. Ninety-nine percent of subjects (109/110) had a motor or sensory response during needle placement (95% confidence interval [CI]: 95%-100%) and 97% of subjects (107/110) had a motor or sensory response during lead placement (95% CI: 92%-99%). The majority of subjects (88%, 95/108) reported their bladder condition was better at the follow-up visit compared to before the PNE implant procedure, as reported in PGI-I. Subjects reported being satisfied with how the therapy impacted their voiding symptoms (82%, 88/108) and that they would recommend this therapy (87%, 94/108) to other patients. Symptom improvement was demonstrated with urinary urge incontinence subjects having an average of 4.2 ± 3.4 urinary incontinence episodes/day at baseline and 2.2 ± 2.5 at follow-up, and urinary frequency subjects having an average of 12.5 ± 4.4 voids/day at baseline and 10.5 ± 4.3 voids/day at follow-up. Lead removal was deemed to be easy and safe by the implanting physician, with a total of three adverse device effects in 3/110 subjects. No event was categorized as serious and all were resolved without sequelae.The updated InterStim PNE lead with a more robust design and greater distensibility designed to reduce migration was shown to have a high rate of motor or sensory response during lead placement. Furthermore, subjects reported high rates of global improvements and amelioration of symptoms, and the lead was easy to remove with minimal morbidity.

Published
2022

21. Economic evaluation of community-based falls prevention interventions for older populations: a systematic methodological overview of systematic reviews

Author

Hazel Squires, Matthew Franklin, Joseph Kwon, Yujin Lee, Tracey Young, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Aged, 80 and over, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Health Policy, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Humans, Accidental Falls, Middle Aged, Aged, Systematic Reviews as Topic
Abstract

Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens on older people. The volume of falls prevention economic evaluations has increased, the findings from which have been synthesised by systematic reviews (SRs). Such SRs can inform commissioning and design of future evaluations; however, their findings can be misleading and incomplete, dependent on their pre-specified criteria. This study aims to conduct a systematic overview (SO) to: (1) systematically identify SRs of community-based falls prevention economic evaluations; (2) describe the methodology and findings of SRs; (3) critically appraise the methodology of SRs; and (4) suggest commissioning recommendations based on SO findings. Methods The SO followed the PRISMA guideline and the Cochrane guideline on SO, covering 12 databases and grey literature for the period 2003–2020. Eligible studies were SRs with 50% or more included studies that were economic evaluations of community-based falls prevention (against any comparator) for older persons (aged 60 +) or high-risk individuals aged 50–59. Identified SRs’ aims, search strategies and results, extracted data fields, quality assessment methods/results, and commissioning and research recommendations were synthesised. The comprehensiveness of previous SRs’ data synthesis was judged against criteria drawn from literature on falls prevention/public health economic evaluation. Outcomes of general population, lifetime decision models were re-analysed to inform commissioning recommendations. The SO protocol is registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021234379). Results Seven SRs were identified, which extracted 8 to 33 data fields from 44 economic evaluations. Four economic evaluation methodological/reporting quality checklists were used; three SRs narratively synthesised methodological features to varying extent and focus. SRs generally did not appraise decision modelling features, including methods for characterising dynamic complexity of falls risk and intervention need. Their commissioning recommendations were based mainly on cost-per-unit ratios (e.g., incremental cost-effectiveness ratios) and neglected aggregate impact. There is model-based evidence of multifactorial and environmental interventions, home assessment and modification and Tai Chi being cost-effective but also the risk that they exacerbate social inequities of health. Conclusions Current SRs of falls prevention economic evaluations do not holistically inform commissioning and evaluation. Accounting for broader decisional factors and methodological nuances of economic evaluations, particularly decision models, is needed.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

22. Long Covid: a global health issue – a prospective, cohort study set in four continents

Author

Synne Jenum, Renaud Tamisier, Clark D Russell, Rachel Evans, Piero Valentini, Sylvain Diamantis, Dominique Deplanque, Jordi Rello, Agnes Meybeck, Maxime Hentzien, Clotilde Allavena, André Cabié, Firouzé Bani-Sadr, Patrick Rossignol, Lionel Piroth, Mathieu Blot, Marie-Pierre Debray, François Angoulvant, Marc Leone, Ewen M Harrison, Maria Zambon, Michael Edelstein, Florentia Kaguelidou, Marc Lambert, Olivier Lairez, Tom Solomon, Carrol Gamble, Laura Marsh, Christiana Kartsonaki, Natalie Wright, Behzad Nadjm, Srinivas Murthy, Gail Carson, Jake Dunning, Laura Merson, Peter Horby, Timothy M Uyeki, Piero Olliaro, Guillermo Maestro de la Calle, Stephen R Knight, Thomas M Drake, Marlene Murris, Aurore Bousquet, Kenneth A McLean, Hugues Cordel, Marc Fabre, Laurence Bouillet, Katrina Hann, Xavier Duval, James Lee, Christian Rabaud, Paul Klenerman, Jean-Christophe Lucet, Jean-François Timsit, Jennifer Lee, David J Lowe, Nicolas Terzi, Saad Nseir, Gwenhaël Colin, Steve Webb, Kalynn Kennon, Caroline Mudara, Diana Hernández, Yazdan Yazdanpanah, Jean-François Payen, Samreen Ijaz, Joanne McPeake, Meera Chand, Catherine A Shaw, Cameron J Fairfield, Bruno Levy, Eric D'ortenzio, Pierre Delobel, Tiphaine Goulenok, Bronner P Gonçalves, Arnaud Scherpereel, Danilo Buonsenso, Mark G Pritchard, Susanne Dudman, Adrien Auvet, Caterina Caminiti, Debby Bogaert, Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers, Amandine Gagneux-Brunon, Merce Jourdain, Sue Smith, Jia Wei, Antoine Khalil, Clément Le Bihan, Nathalie Pansu, Vincent Le Moing, Victor Fomin, Christophe Fraser, Daniel Munblit, William Greenhalf, François-Xavier Lescure, Nicolas Carlier, Saye Khoo, Annemarie B Docherty, Christopher A Green, Riinu Pius, Louise Sigfrid, Sophie Halpin, Clare Jackson, Antonia Ho, Malcolm G Semple, Andrew Dagens, Carlo Palmieri, Lance Turtle, Zeno Bisoffi, Thomas Flament, Julie Mankikian, Romain Basmaci, Peter Openshaw, Rob Fowler, Tom Fletcher, Adrien Lemaignen, Pierre Tattevin, Christelle Delmas, Hélène Espérou, Claire Lévy-Marchal, Olivier Picone, Jeanne Sibiude, Cecile Yelnik, Michelle Girvan, Piero L Olliaro, Beatrice Alex, Benjamin Bach, Wendy S Barclay, Graham S Cooke, Ana da Silva Filipe, Alexander J Mentzer, Alison M Meynert, Mahdad Noursadeghi, Shona C Moore, Massimo Palmarini, William A Paxton, Georgios Pollakis, David L Robertson, Vanessa Sancho-Shimizu, Janet T Scott, Shiranee Sriskandan, David Stuart, Charlotte Summers, Emma C Thomson, Ryan S Thwaites, Lance C W Turtle, Hayley Hardwick, Wilna Oosthuyzen, Fiona Griffiths, Jo Dalton, Egle Saviciute, Stephanie Roberts, Janet Harrison, Marie Connor, Gary Leeming, Ross Hendry, Victoria Shaw, Jade Ghosn, Lucille Blumberg, Nicolas Benech, Odile Launay, Yoan Lavie-Badie, Minh Le, Elise Artaud-Macari, Muge Cevik, Nicola Latronico, Mylène Maillet, Didier Laureillard, Ben Morton, Claire Hastie, Nicholas Sedillot, Anne-Sophie Boureau, Laurent Abel, Guillaume Martin-Blondel, Valérie Garrait, Isabelle Delacroix, Andrea Cortegiani, Jean-Benoît Arlet, Raphaël Borie, Kévin Bouiller, Vincent Langlois, Mélanie Roriz, Vincent Dubée, John H Amuasi, Madiha Hashmi, Edwin Jesudason, Jan Cato Holter, Anders Benjamin Kildal, Luis Felipe Reyes, Anna Beltrame, Sulaiman Lakoh, Stéphanie Fry, Lynsey Goodwin, Laurent Plantier, Anna Casey, Denis Malvy, Nina Jamieson, François Dubos, Jean-Sébastien Hulot, Paola Rodari, Frank Bloos, Cécile Tromeur, Paul Loubet, Marina Esposito-Farèse, France Mentré, Valérie Gaborieau, Cécile Goujard, Vincent Thibault, Adam Ali, Sadie Kelly, Fernando A Bozza, Bertrand Dussol, Marion Schneider, Marielle Buisson, Yves Levy, Carine Roy, Walter Picard, Olivier Sanchez, Nazir Lone, Antoine Kimmoun, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Nathan Peiffer-Smadja, Julien Poissy, Lila Bouadma, Bruno Lina, Maude Bouscambert, Alexandre Gaymard, Gilles Peytavin, Jeremie Guedj, Claire Andrejak, Cedric Laouenan, Anissa Chair, Samira Laribi, Marie-Capucine Tellier, Sandrine Couffin-Cadiergues, Ventzislava Petrov-Sanchez, Alpha Diallo, Sarah Tubiana, Patrick Imbert, Emmanuelle Mercier, Waasila Jassat, Arsene Kpangon, Dominique Luton, Simone Piva, Sophie Mahy, Pierre-Adrien Bolze, Sarah Moore, Raphael Favory, Andrea Angheben, Andrea Rossanese, Matthew Hall, Johann Auchabie, Christophe Rapp, Vincent Peigne, Fredrik Müller, Christl A Donnelly, François Goehringer, Elodie Curlier, Catherine Chirouze, Vegard Skogen, Stéphane Jaureguiberry, Laurent Bitker, Hodane Yonis, Laurent Mandelbrot, Jérémie Pasquier, Bato Hammarström, Thushan de Silva, Polina Bugaeva, Julie Chas, Dario Sinatti, Arne Søraas, Murray Wham, Sara Clohisey, Seán Keating, Thibault Chiarabini, Agnes Sommet, Hugues Aumaître, Charlotte Charpentier, Sylvie LeGac, Sarah E McDonald, Jeanne Truong, Anne-Hélène Boivin, Mariachiara Ippolito, Ellen Pauley, Diane Descamps, Sérgio Gaião, Stéphane Lasry, Amanda Rojek, Charlotte Salmon Gandonniere, Sebastien Preau, Benoit Thill, Karine Faure, Denis Garot, Grégory Corvaisier, Elsa Nyamankolly, Merete Ellingjord-Dale, Eva Geraud, Barbara Wanjiru Citarella, Kévin Alexandre, Nathalie Allou, Séverine Ansart, Laurène Azemar, Cecile Azoulay, Delphine Bachelet, Claudine Badr, Valeria Balan, Marie Bartoli, Joaquín Baruch, Jules Bauer, Alexandra Bedossa, Husna Begum, Marine Beluze, Delphine Bergeaud, Giulia Bertoli, Simon Bessis, Sybille Bevilcaqua, Karine Bezulier, Krishna Bhavsar, Laetitia Bodenes, Isabela Bolaños, Olivier Bouchaud, Sabelline Bouchez, Camile Bouisse, Marielle Boyer-Besseyre, Axelle Braconnier, Ingrid G Bustos, Denis Butnaru, Eder Caceres, Cyril Cadoz, Valentine Campana, Pauline Caraux-Paz, Thierry Carmoi, Marie-Christine Carret, Maire-Laure Casanova, Guylaine Castor-Alexandre, François-Xavier Catherine, Minerva Cervantes-Gonzalez, Catherine Chakveatze, Jean-Marc Chapplain, Antoine Cheret, Bernard Cholley, Marie-Charlotte Chopin, Roxane Courtois, Stéphanie Cousse, Alexa Debard, Nathalie DeCastro, Romain Decours, Eve Defous, Karen Delavigne, Elisa Demonchy, Emmanuelle Denis, Mathilde Desvallées, Kévin Didier, Jean-Luc Diehl, Vincent Dinot, Fara Diop, Alphonsine Diouf, Félix Djossou, Céline Dorival, Nathalie Dournon, Murray Dryden, Alexandre Ducancelle, Paul Dunand, Brigitte Elharrar, Philippine Eloy, Isabelle Enderle, Ilka Engelmann, Vincent Enouf, Olivier Epaulard, Manuel Etienne, Isabelle Fabre, François-Xavier Ferrand, Eglantine Ferrand Devouge, Nicolas Ferriere, Céline Ficko, Erwan Fourn, Rostane Gaci, Jean-Charles Gagnard, Esteban Garcia-Gallo, Tristan Gigante, Guillermo Giordano, Valérie Gissot, Petr Glybochko, Marie Gominet, Isabelle Gorenne, Laure Goubert, Pascal Granier, Segolène Greffe, Martin Guego, Romain Guery, Anne Guillaumot, Laurent Guilleminault, Thomas Guimard, Ali Hachemi, Nadir Hadri, Rebecca Hamidfar, Lars Heggelund, Rupert Higgins, Hikombo Hitoto, Alexandre Hoctin, Isabelle Hoffmann, Ikram Houas, Margaux Isnard, Danielle Jaafar, Salma Jaafoura, Julien Jabot, Florence Jego, Cédric Joseph, Ouifiya Kafif, Sabina Kali, Younes Kerroumi, Marie Lachatre, Marie Lacoste, Marie Lagrange, Fabrice Laine, Antonio Lalueza, Marie Langelot-Richard, Delphine Lariviere, Andy Law, Laurent Lefebvre, Bénédicte Lefebvre, Benjamin Lefèvre, Jean-Daniel Lelievre, Véronique Lemee, Anthony Lemeur, Quentin Lepiller, Olivier Lesens, Mathieu Lesouhaitier, Geoffrey Liegeon, Guillaume Lingas, Sylvie Lion-Daolio, Marine Livrozet, Bouchra Loufti, Guillame Louis, Liem Luong, Moïse Machado, Gabriel Macheda, Rafael Mahieu, Thomas Maitre, Victoria Manda, Aldric Manuel, Samuel Markowicz, Martin Martinot, Mathieu Mattei, Laurence Maulin, Thierry Mazzoni, Cécile Mear-Passard, Antoine Merckx, Mayka Mergeay-Fabre, Vanina Meysonnier, Mehdi Mezidi, Isabelle Michelet, Lucia Moro, Julien Moyet, Jimmy Mullaert, Nadège Neant, Nikita Nekliudov, Anthony Nghi, Duc Nguyen, Nadia Ouamara, Rachida Ouissa, Eric Oziol, Justine Pages Maïder Pagadoy, Aurélie Papadopoulos, Bruno Pastene, Christelle Paul, Florent Peelman, Daniel Perez, Thomas Perpoint, Vincent Pestre, Ryadh Pokeerbux, Diane Ponscarme, Marie Rafiq, Blandine Rammaert, Stanislas Rebaudet, Sarah Redl, Anne-Sophie Resseguier, Matthieu Revest, Laurent Richier, Patrick Rispal, Karine Risso, Olivier Robineau, Manuel Rosa-Calatrava, Benoît Roze, Hélène Salvator, Pierre-François Sandrine, Benjamine Sarton, Eric Senneville, Albert Sotto, Sarah Stabler, Andrey Svistunov, Coralie Tardivon, François Téoulé, Olivier Terrier, Simon-Djamel Thiberville, Peter S Timashev, Noémie Tissot, Tiffany Trouillon, Christelle Tual, Noémie Vanel, Charline Vauchy, Aurélie Veislinger, Fanny Vuotto, Aurélie Wiedemann, Marion Zabbe, David Zucman, Silvio Hamacher, Ekaterina Pazukhina, Allegra Chatterjee, Kyle Gomez, Matteo Puntoni, Oksana Kruglova, Yock Ping Chow, Yash Doshi, Sara Isabel Duque Vallejo, Elsa D Ibáñez-Prada, Yuli V Fuentes, Margaret E O'Hara, Tigist Menkir, Amal Abrous, Younes Ait Tamlihat, Aliya Mohammed Alameen, Marta Alessi, Kazali Enagnon Alidjnou, Jean Baptiste Assie, Eyvind W Axelsen, John Kenneth Baillie, José Luis Bernal Sobrino, Sonja Hjellegjerde Brunvoll, Roar Bævre-Jensen, Jose Andres Calvache, Léo Chenard, Juan Luis Cruz Bermúdez, Jaime Cruz Rojo, Charlene Da Silveira, John Arne Dahl, Etienne De Montmollin, Cristina De Rose, Fernanda Dias Da Silva, Thomas Drake, Amiel A Dror, Anne Margarita Dyrhol-Riise, Linn Margrete Eggesbø, Mohammed El Sanharawi, William Finlayson, Aline-Marie Florence, Linda Gail Skeie, Noelia García Barrio, Anatoliy Gavrylov, Louis Gerbaud Morlaes, Yanay Gorelik, Mette Stausland Istre, Silje Bakken Jørgensen, Karl Trygve Kalleberg, Beathe Kiland Granerud, Eyrun Floerecke Kjetland Kjetland, Gry Kloumann Bekken, Galyna Kutsyna, Nadhem Lafhej, Cyril Le Bris, Georges Le Falher, Lucie Le Fevre, Quentin Le Hingrat, Marion Le Maréchal, Soizic Le Mestre, Gwenaël Le Moal, Hervé Le Nagard, Sophie Letrou, Wei Shen Lim, Andreas Lind, Carlos Lumbreras Bermejo, Miles Lunn, Olga Martynenko, Roberta Meta, Lina Morales Cely, Clara Mouton Perrot, Alamin Mustafa, Karl Erik Müller, Ebrahim Ndure, Anders Benteson Nygaard, Claudia Milena Orozco-Chamorro, Paul Otiku, Miguel Pedrera Jiménez, Frank Olav Pettersen, Chiara Piubelli, Víctor Quirós González, Else Quist-Paulsen, Dag Henrik Reikvam, Antonia Ricchiuto, Aleksander Rygh Holten, Nadia Saidani, Pablo Serrano Balazote, Nassima Si Mohammed, Lene Bergendal Solberg, Edouard Soum, Elisabetta Spinuzza, Trude Steinsvik, Birgitte Stiksrud, Mathew Thorpe, Vadim Tieroshyn, Kristian Tonby, Anders Tveita, Sylvie Van Der Werf, Paul Henri Wicky, Ibrahim Richard Bangura, Leonardo Bastos, Daniel Cassaglia, Barbara Citarella, Sarah Duque, Anne Margarita Dyrhol Riise, Annelies Gillesen, Bronner P Goncalvez, Margareta O’Hara, Lars Hegelund, Aquiles Henriquez Trujillo, Elsa D Ibañez, Jane Ireson, Oksana Krugalova, Sam Lissaeur, Sinnadurai Manohan, Prasan K Panda, Daniel R Plotkin, Liliana Resende, Sergio Ruiz Saltana, Steffi Ryckaert, Girish Sindhwani Pulm, and Caroline Vika

Subjects
Medicine (General), R5-920, Infectious and parasitic diseases, RC109-216
Abstract

Introduction A proportion of people develop Long Covid after acute COVID-19, but with most studies concentrated in high-income countries (HICs), the global burden is largely unknown. Our study aims to characterise long-term COVID-19 sequelae in populations globally and compare the prevalence of reported symptoms in HICs and low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).Methods A prospective, observational study in 17 countries in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America, including adults with confirmed COVID-19 assessed at 2 to

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

23. Economic Models of Community-Based Falls Prevention: A Systematic Review With Subsequent Commissioning And Methodological Recommendations

Author

Hazel Squires, Matthew Franklin, Joseph Kwon, Yujin Lee, Tracey Young, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Models, Economic, Health Policy, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Accidental Falls, Female, Independent Living, Middle Aged, Exercise, RC, Aged
Abstract

Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens among older populations, making their prevention a priority. Health economic models can inform whether the falls prevention intervention represents a cost-effective use of resources and/or meet additional objectives such as reducing social inequities of health. This study aims to conduct a systematic review (SR) of community-based falls prevention economic models to: (i) systematically identify such models; (ii) synthesise and critically appraise modelling methods/results; and (iii) formulate methodological and commissioning recommendations. Methods The SR followed PRISMA 2021 guideline, covering the period 2003–2020, 12 academic databases and grey literature. A study was included if it: targeted community-dwelling persons aged 60 and over and/or aged 50–59 at high falls risk; evaluated intervention(s) designed to reduce falls or fall-related injuries; against any comparator(s); reported outcomes of economic evaluation; used decision modelling; and had English full text. Extracted data fields were grouped by: (A) model and evaluation overview; (B) falls epidemiology features; (C) falls prevention intervention features; and (D) evaluation methods and outcomes. A checklist for falls prevention economic evaluations was used to assess reporting/methodological quality. Extracted fields were narratively synthesised and critically appraised to inform methodological and commissioning recommendations. The SR protocol is registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021232147). Results Forty-six models were identified. The most prevalent issue according to the checklist was non-incorporation of all-cause care costs. Based on general population, lifetime models conducting cost-utility analyses, seven interventions produced favourable ICERs relative to no intervention under the cost-effectiveness threshold of US$41,900 (£30,000) per QALY gained; of these, results for (1) combined multifactorial and environmental intervention, (2) physical activity promotion for women, and (3) targeted vitamin D supplementation were from validated models. Decision-makers should explore the transferability and reaches of interventions in their local settings. There was some evidence that exercise and home modification exacerbate existing social inequities of health. Sixteen methodological recommendations were formulated. Conclusion There is significant methodological heterogeneity across falls prevention models. This SR’s appraisals of modelling methods should facilitate the conceptualisation of future falls prevention models. Its synthesis of evaluation outcomes, though limited to published evidence, could inform commissioning.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

24. Systematic review and critical methodological appraisal of community-based falls prevention economic models

Author

Hazel Squires, Matthew Franklin, Joseph Kwon, Tracey Young, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Health Policy
Abstract

Background Falls impose significant health and economic burdens on community-dwelling older persons. Decision modelling can inform commissioning of alternative falls prevention strategies. Several methodological challenges arise when modelling public health interventions including community-based falls prevention. This study aims to conduct a systematic review (SR) to: systematically identify community-based falls prevention economic models; synthesise and critically appraise how the models handled key methodological challenges associated with public health modelling; and suggest areas for further methodological research. Methods The SR followed the 2021 PRISMA reporting guideline and covered the period 2003–2020 and 12 academic databases and grey literature. The extracted methodological features of included models were synthesised by their relevance to the following challenges: (1) capturing non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs; (2) considering heterogeneity and dynamic complexity; (3) considering theories of human behaviour and implementation; and (4) considering equity issues. The critical appraisal assessed the prevalence of each feature across models, then appraised the methods used to incorporate the feature. The methodological strengths and limitations stated by the modellers were used as indicators of desirable modelling practice and scope for improvement, respectively. The methods were also compared against those suggested in the broader empirical and methodological literature. Areas of further methodological research were suggested based on appraisal results. Results 46 models were identified. Comprehensive incorporation of non-health outcomes and societal intervention costs was infrequent. The assessments of heterogeneity and dynamic complexity were limited; subgroup delineation was confined primarily to demographics and binary disease/physical status. Few models incorporated heterogeneity in intervention implementation level, efficacy and cost. Few dynamic variables other than age and falls history were incorporated to characterise the trajectories of falls risk and general health/frailty. Intervention sustainability was frequently based on assumptions; few models estimated the economic/health returns from improved implementation. Seven models incorporated ethnicity- and severity-based subgroups but did not estimate the equity-efficiency trade-offs. Sixteen methodological research suggestions were made. Conclusion Existing community-based falls prevention models contain methodological limitations spanning four challenge areas relevant for public health modelling. There is scope for further methodological research to inform the development of falls prevention and other public health models.

Published
2021

25. Qualitative Research to Inform Economic Modelling: Older People’s Views on Implementing the Nice Falls Prevention Guideline in English Community Context

Author

Hazel Squires, Yujin Lee, Janet Harris, Tracey Young, and Joseph Kwon

Subjects
Medical education, Community context, Nice, Sociology, Guideline, Older people, computer, Qualitative research, computer.programming_language
Abstract

Background: High prevalence of falls among older persons makes falls prevention a public health priority. Yet community-based falls prevention face complexity in implementation and any commissioning strategy should be subject to rigorous economic evaluation to ensure cost-effective use of scarce healthcare resources. The study aims to capture the subjective views of older people in Sheffield on implementing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline on community-based falls prevention and explore how the qualitative data can be used to inform commissioning strategies and the conceptual modelling of falls prevention economic evaluation. Methods: Focus group and interview participants (n=27) were recruited from Sheffield, England, and comprised falls prevention service users and eligible non-users of varying falls risks. Topics concerned key components of the NICE-recommended falls prevention pathway, including falls risk screening, multifactorial risk assessment and treatment uptake and adherence. Views on other topics concerning falls were also invited. Framework analysis was applied for data analysis, involving data familiarisation, identifying themes, indexing, charting and mapping and interpretation. The qualitative data were mapped to three frameworks: (1) facilitators and barriers to implementing the NICE-recommended pathway and contextual factors; (2) intervention-related causal mechanisms for formulating commissioning strategies spanning context, priority setting, need, supply and demand; and (3) methodological and evaluative challenges for public health economic modelling. Results: Two cross-component factors were identified: health motives of older persons; and professional competence. Participants highlighted the need for intersectoral approaches and prioritising the vulnerable groups. The local commissioning strategy should consider the socioeconomic, linguistic, geographical, legal and cultural contexts, priority setting challenges, supply-side mechanisms spanning provider, organisation, funding and policy (including intersectoral) and health and non-health demand motives. Methodological and evaluative challenges identified included: incorporating wider costs and effects; considering dynamic complexity in ageing process; considering social determinants of health; and conducting equity analyses. Conclusions: Holistic qualitative research can inform how commissioned falls prevention pathways can be feasible and effective. Qualitative data can inform commissioning strategies and conceptual modelling for economic evaluation of falls prevention and other geriatric interventions. This would improve the structural validity of quantitative models used to inform geriatric public health policies.

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

26. How patient and community involvement in diabetes research influences health outcomes: A realist review

Author

Johannes Haltbakk, Marit Kirkevold, Trisha Dunning, Maxine Johnson, Gunhild Austrheim, Janet Harris, and Marit Graue

Subjects
Biomedical Research, Diabetes risk, Community organization, Psychological intervention, MEDLINE, Participatory action research, Review Article, community engagement, CINAHL, partnership working, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Nursing, Intervention (counseling), Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, 030212 general & internal medicine, realist review, Review Articles, patient involvement, lcsh:R5-920, diabetes, Community engagement, lcsh:Public aspects of medicine, 030503 health policy & services, Community Participation, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, lcsh:RA1-1270, Treatment Outcome, participatory research, Patient Participation, lcsh:Medicine (General), 0305 other medical science, Psychology
Abstract

Background\ud \ud Patient and public involvement in diabetes research is an international requirement, but little is known about the relationship between the process of involvement and health outcomes.\ud \ud Objective\ud \ud This realist review identifies who benefits from different types of involvement across different contexts and circumstances. Search strategies Medline, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched to identify interventions using targeted, embedded or collaborative involvement to reduce risk and promote self‐management of diabetes. People at risk/with diabetes, providers and community organizations with an interest in addressing diabetes were included. There were no limitations on date, language or study type.\ud \ud Data extraction and synthesis\ud \ud Data were extracted from 29 projects using elements from involvement frameworks. A conceptual analysis of involvement types was used to complete the synthesis.\ud \ud Main results\ud \ud Projects used targeted (4), embedded (8) and collaborative (17) involvement. Productive interaction facilitated over a sufficient period of time enabled people to set priorities for research. Partnerships that committed to collaboration increased awareness of diabetes risk and mobilized people to co‐design and co‐deliver diabetes interventions. Cultural adaptation increased relevance and acceptance of the intervention because they trusted local delivery approaches. Local implementation produced high levels of recruitment and retention, which project teams associated with achieving diabetes health outcomes.\ud \ud Discussion and Conclusions\ud \ud Achieving understanding of community context, developing trusting relationships across sectors and developing productive partnerships were prerequisites for designing research that was feasible and locally relevant. The proportion of diabetes studies incorporating these elements is surprisingly low. Barriers to resourcing partnerships need to be systematically addressed.

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

27. Narrative in VR journalism: research into practice

Author

Janet Harris and James Taylor

Subjects
History, Communication, Immersion (virtual reality), Media studies, Center (algebra and category theory), Journalism, Narrative, Virtual reality, Education, West africa
Abstract

In 2015 The Tow Center for Journalism produced a live-motion virtual reality (VR) journalism story on the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, ‘Secret Location’. They stated that this new form appeared to change how journalists must construct their stories. They also challenged the industry to explore the journalistic application of VR beyond ‘highly produced documentaries’ (Owen et al. 2015. “Virtual Reality Journalism.” Tow Centre. CJR. https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/virtual_reality_journalism.php). We decided to make a short news VR film that explored the construction of this form of media and asked which narrative characteristic engaged the viewer to continue watching in a medium where the viewer was already immersed in the storyworld. Our findings suggest that even when the VR technology immerses the viewer into an illusion of presence, the traditional characteristics of narrative, character, plot, and subject remain of fundamental importance in the construction of a news story, and, it was the tension of what happens next, that is the plot, that was the strongest narrative driver in this short journalistic VR film. We also reflect on some issues raised in the production of the piece, such as the time taken, the limitations of creative editing and whether the expectations that VR raises might impact on the experience of viewing a VR news items.

Published
2021

28. How do third sector organisations or charities providing health and well-being services in England implement patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)? A qualitative interview study

Author

Alexis Foster, Alicia O’Cathain, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Organizational culture, Context (language use), Medicine, health economics, Humans, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Voluntary Health Agencies, Health policy, Qualitative Research, Health economics, business.industry, health policy, General Medicine, Public relations, Dilemma, England, Charities, Scale (social sciences), Well-being, Public Health, business, Delivery of Health Care, Qualitative research
Abstract

ObjectivesTo identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in third sector organisations (TSOs) delivering health and well-being services.DesignA qualitative interview study. Participants were recruited using purposive, opportunistic and snowballing methods. Framework analysis was used.SettingTSOs including charities, community groups and not-for-profit organisations in England, UK.ParticipantsThirty interviewees including service users, TSO front-line workers and managers, commissioners of TSOs and other stakeholders such as academic researchers.ResultsTSOs primarily used PROMs because of pressures arising from the external funding context. However, organisations often struggled to implement PROMs, rarely getting the process right first time. Facilitators for implementation included having an implementation lead committed to making it work, investing resources in data management systems and support staff and taking a collaborative approach to designing the PROMs process. The latter helped to ensure an appropriate PROMs process for the specific TSO including choosing a suitable measure and planning how data would be collected, processed and used. There was a dilemma about whether TSOs should use standardised well-being measures (eg, the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) or design their own PROM. Not all TSOs sustained the collection and reporting of PROMs over time because this required a change in organisational culture to view PROMs as beneficial for the TSO and PROMs becoming part of front-line workers’ job specifications.ConclusionsTSOs are trying to use PROMs because they feel they have no choice but often struggle with implementation. Having an implementation lead, designing an appropriate process, investing resources, training staff and taking mitigating action to address potential barriers can facilitate implementation. Some of the findings are consistent with the experiences of more clinical services so appear relevant to the implementation of PROMs irrespective of the specific context.

Published
2020

29. Introduction: The Future of Journalism

Author

Stuart Allan, Cynthia Carter, Lina Dencik, Richard Jeremy Sambrook, Janet Harris, Karin Wahl-Jorgensen, Stephen Cushion, Inaki Garcia-Blanco, and Andy Williams

Subjects
Political science, Media studies, Journalism
Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

31. Adjusting a mainstream weight management intervention for people with intellectual disabilities: a user centred approach

Author

Sarah Salway, Emma Dowse, Melanie Rimmer, Alicia O’Cathain, Jacquie Lavin, Janet Harris, Liz Croot, Sarah Bennett, and Chris Hatton

Subjects
Adult, Gerontology, 030506 rehabilitation, Population, Psychological intervention, Intellectual disability, Context (language use), Health Promotion, Health Services Accessibility, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Complex intervention, Weight management, Humans, 030212 general & internal medicine, Obesity, education, Qualitative Research, Health policy, education.field_of_study, Intervention development, Research, Health Policy, lcsh:Public aspects of medicine, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Health services research, Behaviour change, lcsh:RA1-1270, Social Discrimination, Focus Groups, Focus group, User centred, Feasibility Studies, Female, Qualitative, 0305 other medical science, Psychology, Qualitative research
Abstract

Background\ud People with intellectual disabilities (ID) may not be able to access and respond to uniformly delivered health interventions. Public bodies have a legal duty to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to policies and practices to provide fair access and treatment for people with ID. This study aimed to identify adjustments to the Slimming World weight management programme to improve accessibility and assess acceptability and feasibility for this population.\ud \ud Methods\ud This user-centred qualitative study was carried out with a steering group of people with ID (n = 4). Barriers and facilitators to using Slimming World were identified through interviews and focus groups with people with ID (n = 54), carers (n = 12) current members with ID (n = 8) and Slimming World group leaders (n = 11). Adjustments were made and their feasibility and acceptability were explored in a before-and-after mixed methods study where people with ID attended Slimming World for eight weeks. Participants (n = 9), carers (n = 7) and Slimming World group leaders (n = 4) were interviewed to explore their experiences of the adjustments. Participants were weighed at baseline then each week.\ud \ud Results\ud Four key adjustments were identified and addressed by Slimming World who developed prototype Easy Read materials and a letter for carers. Six of the nine participants attended Slimming World for eight weeks and lost weight (1.4 kg to 6.6 kg, reduction in BMI between 0.5 and 1.7 kg/m2), indicating that the adjustments were feasible and acceptable. Two participants dropped out because they felt uncomfortable in a mainstream group and another left because they lacked control over food choice in their residential setting.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud This user-centred approach identified reasonable adjustments that were feasible to implement. In a small uncontrolled feasibility study, people with ID were positive about the adjustments and lost weight. However, issues in the wider context of people’s lives, such as obesogenic environments and concerns about joining mainstream groups, limited the acceptability of Slimming World even with these adjustments. These findings have important implications for policy and suggest that environmental and organisational level interventions are needed alongside those targeting individual behaviour to tackle the obesogenic environment in which many people with ID spend their time, in order to reduce inequalities associated with the consequences of obesity.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

32. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews

Author

Andrew Booth, Janet Harris, Angela Harden, Jane Noyes, Kate Flemming, Margaret Cargo, Tomas Pantoja, Ruth Garside, Karin Hannes, James Thomas, Harden, Angela, Thomas, James, Cargo, Margaret, Harris, Janet, Pantoja, Tomas, Flemming, Kate, Booth, Andrew, Garside, Ruth, Hannes, Karin, and Noyes, Jane

Subjects
Biomedical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, Epidemiology, Process (engineering), Computer science, Management science, Multimethodology, Guidelines as Topic, Context (language use), Evidence-based medicine, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Systematic review, Intervention (counseling), Humans, systematic reviews, mixed methods research, qualitative research, implementation research, process evaluations, Cochrane collaboration, qualitative evidence synthesis, 030212 general & internal medicine, Implementation research, Delivery of Health Care, Qualitative Research, 030217 neurology & neurosurgery, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Qualitative research
Abstract

The Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group develops and publishes guidance on the synthesis of qualitative and mixed-method evidence from process evaluations. Despite a proliferation of methods for the synthesis of qualitative research, less attention has focused on how to integrate these syntheses within intervention effectiveness reviews. In this article, we report updated guidance from the group on approaches, methods, and tools, which can be used to integrate the findings from quantitative studies evaluating intervention effectiveness with those from qualitative studies and process evaluations. We draw on conceptual analyses of mixed methods systematic review designs and the range of methods and tools that have been used in published reviews that have successfully integrated different types of evidence. We outline five key methods and tools as devices for integration which vary in terms of the levels at which integration takes place; the specialist skills and expertise required within the review team; and their appropriateness in the context of limited evidence. In situations where the requirement is the integration of qualitative and process evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews, we recommend the use of a sequential approach. Here, evidence from each tradition is synthesized separately using methods consistent with each tradition before integration takes place using a common framework. Reviews which integrate qualitative and process evaluation evidence alongside quantitative evidence on intervention effectiveness in a systematic way are rare. This guidance aims to support review teams to achieve integration and we encourage further development through reflection and formal testing. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

33. How do health professionals acknowledge Web-based knowledge in pregnancy consultations?

Author

Eva Haukeland Fredriksen, Janet Harris, and Karen Marie Moland

Subjects
020205 medical informatics, media_common.quotation_subject, education, Identity (social science), 02 engineering and technology, Norwegian, Literacy, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Nursing, 0202 electrical engineering, electronic engineering, information engineering, medicine, Web application, 030212 general & internal medicine, health care economics and organizations, media_common, Pregnancy, business.industry, Pelvic girdle pain, medicine.disease, language.human_language, General Health Professions, language, The Internet, medicine.symptom, business, Psychology, Qualitative research
Abstract

Websites for pregnancy health are an important source of information for pregnant women, but how different cadres of health professionals value and utilize pregnant women's e-health literacy (e-HL) and Web-based knowledge in pregnancy consultations is not well understood. Using a qualitative research design and pelvic girdle pain as a tracer condition, we explored how Norwegian doctors, midwives and physiotherapists manage women's e-HL and Web-based knowledge in pregnancy consultations. The recognition of pregnant women's e-HL and Web-based knowledge differed across professional groups and produced dismissive, reactive and proactive attitudes depending on time pressure, professional identity and Internet experience.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

35. Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital with and without respiratory symptoms

Author

Barbara Wanjiru Citarella, Christiana Kartsonaki, Elsa D. Ibáñez-Prada, Bronner P. Gonçalves, Joaquin Baruch, Martina Escher, Mark G. Pritchard, Jia Wei, Fred Philippy, Andrew Dagens, Matthew Hall, James Lee, Demetrios James Kutsogiannis, Evert-Jan Wils, Marília Andreia Fernandes, Bharath Kumar Tirupakuzhi Vijayaraghavan, Prasan Kumar Panda, Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Shinichiro Ohshimo, Arie Zainul Fatoni, Peter Horby, Jake Dunning, Jordi Rello, Laura Merson, Amanda Rojek, Michel Vaillant, Piero Olliaro, Luis Felipe Reyes, S.A. Moharam, Sabriya Abdalasalam, Alaa Abdalfattah Abdalhadi, Naana Reyam Abdalla, Walaa Abdalla, Almthani Hamza Abdalrheem, Ashraf Abdalsalam, Saedah Abdeewi, Esraa Hassan Abdelgaum, Mohamed Abdelhalim, Mohammed Abdelkabir, Israa Abdelrahman, Sheryl Ann Abdukahil, Lamees Adil Abdulbaqi, Salaheddin Abdulhamid, Widyan Abdulhamid, Nurul Najmee Abdulkadir, Eman Abdulwahed, Rawad Abdunabi, Ryuzo Abe, Laurent Abel, Ahmed Mohammed Abodina, Amal Abrous, Lara Absil, Kamal Abu Jabal, Nashat Abu Salah, Abdurraouf Abusalama, Tareg Abdallah Abuzaid, Subhash Acharya, Andrew Acker, Elisabeth Adam, Safia Adem, Manuella Ademnou, Francisca Adewhajah, Diana Adrião, Anthony Afum-Adjei Awuah, Melvin Agbogbatey, Saleh Al Ageel, Aya Mustafa Ahmed, Musaab Mohammed Ahmed, Shakeel Ahmed, Zainab Ahmed Alaraji, Abdulrahman Ahmed Elhefnawy Enan, Reham Abdelhamid Ahmed Khalil, Ali Mostafa Ahmed Mohamed Abdelaziz, Kate Ainscough, Eka Airlangga, Tharwat Aisa, Ali Aisha, Bugila Aisha, Ali Ait Hssain, Younes Ait Tamlihat, Takako Akimoto, Ernita Akmal, Chika Akwani, Eman Al Qasim, Ahmed Alajeeli, Ahmed Alali, Razi Alalqam, Aliya Mohammed Alameen, Mohammed Al-Aquily, Zinah A. Alaraji, Khalid Albakry, Safa Albatni, Angela Alberti, Osama Aldabbourosama, Tala Al-dabbous, Amer Aldhalia, Abdulkarim Aldoukali, Senthilkumar Alegesan, Marta Alessi, Beatrice Alex, Kévin Alexandre, Abdulrahman Al-Fares, Asil Alflite, Huda Alfoudri, Qamrah Alhadad, Hoda Salem Alhaddad, Maali Khalid Mohamed Abdalla Alhasan, Ahmad Nabil Alhouri, Hasan Alhouri, Adam Ali, Imran Ali, Maha TagElser Mohammed Ali, Syed Ali Abbas, Yomna Ali Abdelghafar, Naseem Ali Sheikh, Kazali Enagnon Alidjnou, Mahmoud Aljadi, Sarah Aljamal, Mohammed Alkahlout, Akram Alkaseek, Qabas Alkhafajee, Clotilde Allavena, Nathalie Allou, Lana Almasri, Abdulrahman Almjersah, Raja Ahmed Alqandouz, Walaa Alrfaea, Moayad Alrifaee, Rawan Alsaadi, Yousef Al-Saba'a, Entisar Alshareea, Eslam Alshenawy, Aneela Altaf, João Melo Alves, João Alves, Rita Alves, Joana Alves Cabrita, Maria Amaral, Amro Essam Amer, Nur Amira, Amos Amoako Adusei, John Amuasi, Roberto Andini, Claire Andrejak, Andrea Angheben, François Angoulvant, Sophia Ankrah, Séverine Ansart, Sivanesen Anthonidass, Massimo Antonelli, Carlos Alexandre Antunes de Brito, Ardiyan Apriyana, Yaseen Arabi, Irene Aragao, Francisco Arancibia, Carolline Araujo, Antonio Arcadipane, Patrick Archambault, Lukas Arenz, Jean-Benoît Arlet, Christel Arnold-Day, Lovkesh Arora, Rakesh Arora, Elise Artaud-Macari, Diptesh Aryal, Angel Asensio, Elizabeth A. Ashley, Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Sheharyar Ashraf, Abir Ben Ashur, Franklin Asiedu-Bekoe, Namra Asif, Mohammad Asim, Grace Assi, Jean Baptiste Assie, Amirul Asyraf, Fouda Atangana, Ahmed Atia, Minahel Atif, Asia Atif Abdelrhman Abdallahrs, Anika Atique, Moad Atlowly, AM Udara Lakshan Attanyake, Johann Auchabie, Hugues Aumaitre, Adrien Auvet, Abdelmalek Awad Ali Mohammed, Eyvind W. Axelsen, Ared Ayad, Ahmed Ayman Hassan Helmi, Laurène Azemar, Mohammed Azizeldin, Cecile Azoulay, Hakeem Babatunde, Benjamin Bach, Delphine Bachelet, Claudine Badr, Roar Bævre-Jensen, Nadia Baig, John Kenneth Baillie, J Kevin Baird, Erica Bak, Agamemnon Bakakos, Nazreen Abu Bakar, Hibah Bileid Bakeer, Ashraf Bakri, Andriy Bal, Mohanaprasanth Balakrishnan, Irene Bandoh, Firouzé Bani-Sadr, Renata Barbalho, Nicholas Yuri Barbosa, Wendy S. Barclay, Saef Umar Barnett, Michaela Barnikel, Helena Barrasa, Cleide Barrigoto, Marie Bartoli, Joaquín Baruch, Romain Basmaci, Muhammad Fadhli Hassin Basri, AbdAlkarim Batool, Denise Battaglini, Jules Bauer, Diego Fernando Bautista Rincon, Denisse Bazan Dow, Abigail Beane, Alexandra Bedossa, Ker Hong Bee, Husna Begum, Sylvie Behilill, Albertus Beishuizen, Aleksandr Beljantsev, David Bellemare, Anna Beltrame, Beatriz Amorim Beltrão, Marine Beluze, Nicolas Benech, Lionel Eric Benjiman, Suzanne Bennett, Luís Bento, Jan-Erik Berdal, Lamis Berdeweel, Delphine Bergeaud, Hazel Bergin, Giulia Bertoli, Lorenzo Bertolino, Simon Bessis, Sybille Bevilcaqua, Karine Bezulier, Amar Bhatt, Krishna Bhavsar, Isabella Bianchi, Claudia Bianco, Sandra Bichoka, Farah Nadiah Bidin, Felwa Bin Humaid, Mohd Nazlin Bin Kamarudin, Muhannud Binnawara, Zeno Bisoffi, Patrick Biston, Laurent Bitker, Mustapha Bittaye, Jonathan Bitton, Pablo Blanco-Schweizer, Catherine Blier, Frank Bloos, Mathieu Blot, Filomena Boccia, Laetitia Bodenes, Debby Bogaert, Anne-Hélène Boivin, Ariel Bolanga, Isabela Bolaños, Pierre-Adrien Bolze, François Bompart, Aurelius Bonifasius, Joe Bonney, Diogo Borges, Raphaël Borie, Hans Martin Bosse, Elisabeth Botelho-Nevers, Lila Bouadma, Olivier Bouchaud, Sabelline Bouchez, Damien Bouhour, Kévin Bouiller, Laurence Bouillet, Camile Bouisse, Latsaniphone Bountthasavong, Anne-Sophie Boureau, John Bourke, Maude Bouscambert, Aurore Bousquet, Marielle Boyer-Besseyre, Maria Boylan, Fernando Augusto Bozza, Axelle Braconnier, Cynthia Braga, Timo Brandenburger, Filipa Brás Monteiro, Luca Brazzi, Dorothy Breen, Patrick Breen, David Brewster, Kathy Brickell, Tessa Broadley, Helen Brotherton, Alex Browne, Nicolas Brozzi, Sonja Hjellegjerde Brunvoll, Marjolein Brusse-Keizer, Petra Bryda, Nina Buchtele, Polina Bugaeva, Marielle Buisson, Danilo Buonsenso, Erlina Burhan, Donald Buri, Aidan Burrell, Ingrid G. Bustos, Denis Butnaru, André Cabie, Susana Cabral, Joana Cabrita, Eder Caceres, Cyril Cadoz, Rui Caetano Garcês, Kate Calligy, Jose Andres Calvache, João Camões, Valentine Campana, Paul Campbell, Josie Campisi, Cecilia Canepa, Mireia Cantero, Janice Caoili, Pauline Caraux-Paz, Sheila Cárcel, Filipa Cardoso, Filipe Cardoso, Nelson Cardoso, Sofia Cardoso, Simone Carelli, Nicolas Carlier, Thierry Carmoi, Gayle Carney, Inês Carqueja, Marie-Christine Carret, François Martin Carrier, Ida Carroll, Gail Carson, Maire-Laure Casanova, Mariana Cascão, Siobhan Casey, José Casimiro, Bailey Cassandra, Silvia Castañeda, Nidyanara Castanheira, Guylaine Castor-Alexandre, Ivo Castro, Ana Catarino, François-Xavier Catherine, Paolo Cattaneo, Roberta Cavalin, Giulio Giovanni Cavalli, Alexandros Cavayas, Adrian Ceccato, Masaneh Ceesay, Shelby Cerkovnik, Minerva Cervantes-Gonzalez, Muge Cevik, Anissa Chair, Catherine Chakveatze, Adrienne Chan, Meera Chand, Jean-Marc Chapplain, Charlotte Charpentier, Julie Chas, Muhammad Mobin Chaudry, Jonathan Samuel Chávez Iñiguez, Anjellica Chen, Yih-Sharng Chen, Léo Chenard, Matthew Pellan Cheng, Antoine Cheret, Thibault Chiarabini, Julian Chica, Suresh Kumar Chidambaram, Leong Chin Tho, Catherine Chirouze, Davide Chiumello, Sung-Min Cho, Bernard Cholley, Danoy Chommanam, Marie-Charlotte Chopin, Yock Ping Chow, Ting Soo Chow, Nathaniel Christy, Hiu Jian Chua, Jonathan Chua, Jose Pedro Cidade, José Miguel Cisneros Herreros, Anna Ciullo, Jennifer Clarke, Rolando Claure-Del Granado, Sara Clohisey, Cassidy Codan, Caitriona Cody, Jennifer Coles, Megan Coles, Gwenhaël Colin, Michael Collins, Pamela Combs, Jennifer Connolly, Marie Connor, Anne Conrad, Elaine Conway, Graham S. Cooke, Hugues Cordel, Amanda Corley, Sabine Cornelis, Alexander Daniel Cornet, Arianne Joy Corpuz, Andrea Cortegiani, Grégory Corvaisier, Camille Couffignal, Sandrine Couffin-Cadiergues, Roxane Courtois, Stéphanie Cousse, Juthaporn Cowan, Rachel Cregan, Gloria Crowl, Jonathan Crump, Claudina Cruz, Marc Csete, Ailbhe Cullen, Matthew Cummings, Gerard Curley, Elodie Curlier, Colleen Curran, Paula Custodio, Ana da Silva Filipe, Charlene Da Silveira, Al-Awwab Dabaliz, John Arne Dahl, Darren Dahly, Umberto D'Alessandro, Peter Daley, Zaina Dalloul, Heidi Dalton, Jo Dalton, Seamus Daly, Juliana Damas, Joycelyn Dame, Cammandji Damien, Nick Daneman, Jorge Dantas, Frédérick D'Aragon, Gillian de Loughry, Diego de Mendoza, Etienne De Montmollin, Rafael Freitas de Oliveira França, Ana Isabel de Pinho Oliveira, Rosanna De Rosa, Cristina De Rose, Thushan de Silva, Peter de Vries, Jillian Deacon, David Dean, Alexa Debard, Bianca DeBenedictis, Marie-Pierre Debray, Nathalie DeCastro, William Dechert, Romain Decours, Eve Defous, Isabelle Delacroix, Alexandre Delamou, Eric Delaveuve, Karen Delavigne, Nathalie M. Delfos, Ionna Deligiannis, Andrea Dell'Amore, Christelle Delmas, Pierre Delobel, Corine Delsing, Elisa Demonchy, Emmanuelle Denis, Dominique Deplanque, Pieter Depuydt, Diane Descamps, Mathilde Desvallées, Santi Dewayanti, Pathik Dhangar, Alpha Diallo, Souleymane Taran Diallo, Sylvain Diamantis, André Dias, Fernanda Dias Da Silva, Rodrigo Diaz, Juan Jose Diaz, Priscila Diaz, Bakary K. Dibba, Kévin Didier, Jean-Luc Diehl, Wim Dieperink, Jérôme Dimet, Vincent Dinot, Fara Diop, Alphonsine Diouf, Yael Dishon, Cedric Djadda, Félix Djossou, Annemarie B. Docherty, Helen Doherty, Arjen M. Dondorp, Christl A. Donnelly, Yoann Donohue, Sean Donohue, Peter Doran, Céline Dorival, Eric D'Ortenzio, Yash Doshi, Phouvieng Douangdala, James Joshua Douglas, Renee Douma, Nathalie Dournon, Joanne Downey, Mark Downing, Thomas Drake, Aoife Driscoll, Ibrahim Kwaku Duah, Claudio Duarte Fonseca, Vincent Dubee, François Dubos, Audrey Dubot-Pérès, Alexandre Ducancelle, Toni Duculan, Susanne Dudman, Abhijit Duggal, Paul Dunand, Mathilde Duplaix, Emanuele Durante-Mangoni, Lucian Durham, III, Bertrand Dussol, Juliette Duthoit, Xavier Duval, Anne Margarita Dyrhol-Riise, Sim Choon Ean, Ada Ebo, Marco Echeverria-Villalobos, Michael Edelstein, Siobhan Egan, Linn Margrete Eggesbø, Khadeja Ehzaz, Carla Eira, Mohammed El Sanharawi, Marwan El Sayed, Mohammed Elabid, Mohamed Bashir Elagili, Subbarao Elapavaluru, Mohammad Elbahnasawy, Sohail Elboshra, Brigitte Elharrar, Jacobien Ellerbroek, Merete Ellingjord-Dale, Hamida ELMagrahi, Mohammad Muatasm Elmubark, Loubna Elotmani, Lauren Eloundou, Philippine Eloy, Basma Elshaikhy, Tarek Elshazly, Wafa Elsokni, Aml Ahmed Eltayeb, Iqbal Elyazar, Zarief Kamel Emad, Hussein Embarek, Isabelle Enderle, Tomoyuki Endo, Gervais Eneli, Chan Chee Eng, Ilka Engelmann, Vincent Enouf, Olivier Epaulard, Haneen Esaadi, Mariano Esperatti, Hélène Esperou, Catarina Espírito Santo, Marina Esposito-Farese, Rachel Essaka, Lorinda Essuman, João Estevão, Manuel Etienne, Anna Greti Everding, Mirjam Evers, Isabelle Fabre, Marc Fabre, Ismaila Fadera, Asgad Osman Abdalla Fadlalla, Amna Faheem, Arabella Fahy, Cameron J. Fairfield, Zul Fakar, Komal Fareed, Pedro Faria, Ahmed Farooq, Hanan Fateena, Mohamed Fathi, Salem Fatima, Karine Faure, Raphaël Favory, Mohamed Fayed, Niamh Feely, Jorge Fernandes, Susana Fernandes, François-Xavier Ferrand, Eglantine Ferrand Devouge, Joana Ferrão, Mário Ferraz, Benigno Ferreira, Isabel Ferreira, Bernardo Ferreira, Sílvia Ferreira, Nicolas Ferriere, Céline Ficko, Claudia Figueiredo-Mello, William Finlayson, Thomas Flament, Tom Fletcher, Aline-Marie Florence, Letizia Lucia Florio, Brigid Flynn, Deirdre Flynn, Jean Foley, Victor Fomin, Tatiana Fonseca, Patricia Fontela, Karen Forrest, Simon Forsyth, Denise Foster, Giuseppe Foti, Berline Fotso, Erwan Fourn, Robert A. Fowler, Marianne Fraher, Diego Franch-Llasat, Christophe Fraser, John F. Fraser, Marcela Vieira Freire, Ana Freitas Ribeiro, Craig French, Caren Friedrich, Ricardo Fritz, Stéphanie Fry, Nora Fuentes, Masahiro Fukuda, G. Argin, Valérie Gaborieau, Rostane Gaci, Massimo Gagliardi, Jean-Charles Gagnard, Amandine Gagneux-Brunon, Abdou Gai, Sérgio Gaião, Linda Gail Skeie, Adham Mohamed Galal Mohamed Ramadan, Phil Gallagher, Carrol Gamble, Yasmin Gani, Arthur Garan, Rebekha Garcia, Julia Garcia-Diaz, Esteban Garcia-Gallo, Navya Garimella, Denis Garot, Valérie Garrait, Basanta Gauli, Anatoliy Gavrylov, Alexandre Gaymard, Johannes Gebauer, Eva Geraud, Louis Gerbaud Morlaes, Nuno Germano, Malak Ghemmeid, Praveen Kumar Ghisulal, Jade Ghosn, Marco Giani, Tristan Gigante, Elaine Gilroy, Guillermo Giordano, Michelle Girvan, Valérie Gissot, Gezy Giwangkancana, Daniel Glikman, Petr Glybochko, Eric Gnall, Geraldine Goco, François Goehringer, Siri Goepel, Jean-Christophe Goffard, Jin Yi Goh, Brigitta Golács, Jonathan Golob, Kyle Gomez, Joan Gómez-Junyent, Marie Gominet, Alicia Gonzalez, Patricia Gordon, Isabelle Gorenne, Laure Goubert, Cécile Goujard, Tiphaine Goulenok, Margarite Grable, Jeronimo Graf, Edward Wilson Grandin, Pascal Granier, Giacomo Grasselli, Lorenzo Grazioli, Christopher A. Green, Courtney Greene, William Greenhalf, Segolène Greffe, Domenico Luca Grieco, Matthew Griffee, Fiona Griffiths, Ioana Grigoras, Albert Groenendijk, Fassou Mathias Grovogui, Heidi Gruner, Yusing Gu, Jérémie Guedj, Martin Guego, Anne-Marie Guerguerian, Daniela Guerreiro, Romain Guery, Anne Guillaumot, Laurent Guilleminault, Maisa Guimarães de Castro, Thomas Guimard, Marieke Haalboom, Daniel Haber, Ali Hachemi, Abdurrahman Haddud, Nadir Hadri, Wael Hafez, Fakhir Raza Haidri, Fatima Mhd Rida Hajij, Sheeba Hakak, Adam Hall, Sophie Halpin, Shaher Hamdan, Abdelhafeez Hamdi, Jawad Hameed, Ansley Hamer, Raph L. Hamers, Rebecca Hamidfar, Bato Hammarström, Naomi Hammond, Terese Hammond, Lim Yuen Han, Matly Hanan, Rashan Haniffa, Kok Wei Hao, Hayley Hardwick, Ewen M. Harrison, Janet Harrison, Samuel Bernard Ekow Harrison, Alan Hartman, Sulieman Hasan, Mohammad Ali Nabil Hasan, Mohd Shahnaz Hasan, Junaid Hashmi, Madiha Hashmi, Amoni Hassan, Ebtisam Hassanin, Muhammad Hayat, Ailbhe Hayes, Leanne Hays, Jan Heerman, Lars Heggelund, Ahmed Helmi, Ross Hendry, Martina Hennessy, Aquiles Rodrigo Henriquez-Trujillo, Maxime Hentzien, Diana Hernandez, Andrew Hershey, Liv Hesstvedt, Astarini Hidayah, Eibhlin Higgins, Rupert Higgins, Samuel Hinton, Hiroaki Hiraiwa, Haider Hirkani, Hikombo Hitoto, Antonia Ho, Yi Bin Ho, Alexandre Hoctin, Isabelle Hoffmann, Wei Han Hoh, Oscar Hoiting, Rebecca Holt, Jan Cato Holter, Juan Pablo Horcajada, Ikram Houas, Mabrouka Houderi, Catherine L. Hough, Stuart Houltham, Jimmy Ming-Yang Hsu, Jean-Sébastien Hulot, Abby Hurd, Iqbal Hussain, Aliae Mohamed Hussein, Mahmood Hussein, Fatima Ibrahim, Bashir Ibran, Samreen Ijaz, M. Arfan Ikram, Carlos Cañada Illana, Patrick Imbert, Muhammad Imran Ansari, Rana Imran Sikander, Hugo Inácio, Carmen Infante Dominguez, Yun Sii Ing, Mariachiara Ippolito, Vera Irawany, Sarah Isgett, Tiago Isidoro, Nadiah Ismail, Margaux Isnard, Mette Stausland Istre, Junji Itai, Daniel Ivulich, Danielle Jaafar, Salma Jaafoura, Hamza Jaber, Julien Jabot, Clare Jackson, Abubacarr Jagne, Stéphane Jaureguiberry, Denise Jaworsky, Florence Jego, Anilawati Mat Jelani, Synne Jenum, Ruth Jimbo-Sotomayor, Ong Yiaw Joe, Ruth Noemí Jorge García, Silje Bakken Jørgensen, Cédric Joseph, Mark Joseph, Swosti Joshi, Mercé Jourdain, Philippe Jouvet, Anna Jung, Hanna Jung, Dafsah Juzar, Ouifiya Kafif, Florentia Kaguelidou, Neerusha Kaisbain, Thavamany Kaleesvran, Sabina Kali, Karl Trygve Kalleberg, Smaragdi Kalomoiri, Muhammad Aisar Ayadi Kamaluddin, Armand Saloun Kamano, Zul Amali Che Kamaruddin, Nadiah Kamarudin, Kavita Kamineni, Darshana Hewa Kandamby, Kong Yeow Kang, Darakhshan Kanwal, Dyah Kanyawati, Mohamed Karghul, Pratap Karpayah, Todd Karsies, Daisuke Kasugai, Kevin Katz, Christy Kay, Lamees Kayyali, Seán Keating, Pulak Kedia, Andrea Kelly, Aoife Kelly, Claire Kelly, Niamh Kelly, Sadie Kelly, Yvelynne Kelly, Maeve Kelsey, Kalynn Kennon, Sommay Keomany, Maeve Kernan, Younes Kerroumi, Sharma Keshav, Shams Khail, Sarah Khaled, Imrana Khalid, Antoine Khalil, Irfan Khan, Quratul Ain Khan, Sushil Khanal, Abid Khatak, Krish Kherajani, Michelle E. Kho, Denisa Khoo, Ryan Khoo, Saye Khoo, Muhammad Nasir Khoso, Amin Khuwaja, Khor How Kiat, Yuri Kida, Peter Kiiza, Beathe Kiland Granerud, Anders Benjamin Kildal, Jae Burm Kim, Antoine Kimmoun, Detlef Kindgen-Milles, Nobuya Kitamura, Eyrun Floerecke Kjetland Kjetland, Paul Klenerman, Rob Klont, Gry Kloumann Bekken, Stephen R. Knight, Robin Kobbe, Paa Kobina Forson, Chamira Kodippily, Malte Kohns Vasconcelos, Sabin Koirala, Mamoru Komatsu, Franklina Korkor Abebrese, Volkan Korten, Stephanie Kouba, Mohamed Lamine Kourouma, Karifa Kourouma, Arsène Kpangon, Karolina Krawczyk, Ali Kredan, Vinothini Krishnan, Sudhir Krishnan, Oksana Kruglova, Anneli Krund, Pei Xuan Kuan, Ashok Kumar, Deepali Kumar, Ganesh Kumar, Mukesh Kumar, Dinesh Kuriakose, Ethan Kurtzman, Demetrios Kutsogiannis, Galyna Kutsyna, Ama Kwakyewaa Bedu-Addo, Sylvie Kwedi, Konstantinos Kyriakoulis, Marie Lachatre, Marie Lacoste, John G. Laffey, Nadhem Lafhej, Marie Lagrange, Fabrice Laine, Olivier Lairez, Sanjay Lakhey, Marc Lambert, François Lamontagne, Marie Langelot-Richard, Vincent Langlois, Eka Yudha Lantang, Marina Lanza, Cédric Laouénan, Samira Laribi, Delphine Lariviere, Stéphane Lasry, Sakshi Lath, Naveed Latif, Youssef Latifeh, Odile Launay, Didier Laureillard, Yoan Lavie-Badie, Andy Law, Cassie Lawrence, Teresa Lawrence, Minh Le, Clément Le Bihan, Cyril Le Bris, Georges Le Falher, Lucie Le Fevre, Quentin Le Hingrat, Marion Le Maréchal, Soizic Le Mestre, Gwenaël Le Moal, Vincent Le Moing, Hervé Le Nagard, Ema Leal, Marta Leal Santos, Biing Horng Lee, Heng Gee Lee, Su Hwan Lee, Jennifer Lee, Todd C. Lee, Yi Lin Lee, Gary Leeming, Bénédicte Lefebvre, Laurent Lefebvre, Benjamin Lefèvre, Sylvie LeGac, Merili-Helen Lehiste, Jean-Daniel Lelievre, François Lellouche, Adrien Lemaignen, Véronique Lemee, Anthony Lemeur, Gretchen Lemmink, Ha Sha Lene, Jenny Lennon, Rafael León, Marc Leone, Tanel Lepik, Quentin Lepiller, François-Xavier Lescure, Olivier Lesens, Mathieu Lesouhaitier, Amy Lester-Grant, Andrew Letizia, Sophie Letrou, Bruno Levy, Yves Levy, Claire Levy-Marchal, Katarzyna Lewandowska, Erwan L'Her, Gianluigi Li Bassi, Janet Liang, Ali Liaquat, Geoffrey Liegeon, Kah Chuan Lim, Wei Shen Lim, Chantre Lima, Bruno Lina, Lim Lina, Andreas Lind, Maja Katherine Lingad, Guillaume Lingas, Sylvie Lion-Daolio, Keibun Liu, Marine Livrozet, Patricia Lizotte, Antonio Loforte, Navy Lolong, Leong Chee Loon, Diogo Lopes, Dalia Lopez-Colon, Anthony L. Loschner, Paul Loubet, Bouchra Loufti, Guillame Louis, Silvia Lourenco, Lara Lovelace-Macon, Lee Lee Low, Marije Lowik, Jia Shyi Loy, Jean Christophe Lucet, Carlos M. Luna, Olguta Lungu, Miles Lunn, Liem Luong, Nestor Luque, Dominique Luton, Olavi Maasikas, Moïse Machado, Sara Machado, Gabriel Macheda, Mustafa Magzoub, Rafael Mahieu, Sophie Mahy, Ana Raquel Maia, Lars S. Maier, Oumou Maiga Ascofare, Mylène Maillet, Thomas Maitre, Nimisha Abdul Majeed, Maximilian Malfertheiner, Nadia Malik, Paddy Mallon, Fernando Maltez, Denis Malvy, Victoria Manda, Laurent Mandelbrot, Frank Manetta, Julie Mankikian, Edmund Manning, Aldric Manuel, Veronika Maráczi, Ceila Maria Sant′Ana Malaque, Flávio Marino, Samuel Markowicz, Ana Marques, Catherine Marquis, Laura Marsh, Brian Marsh, Megan Marshal, John Marshall, Celina Turchi Martelli, Dori-Ann Martin, Emily Martin, Guillaume Martin-Blondel, Alessandra Martinelli, F. Eduardo Martinez, Martin Martinot, Alejandro Martín-Quiros, Ana Martins, João Martins, Nuno Martins, Caroline Martins Rego, Gennaro Martucci, Olga Martynenko, Eva Miranda Marwali, Marsilla Marzukie, David Maslove, Sabina Mason, Sobia Masood, Fatma Masoud, Moise Massoma, Palmer Masumbe, Mohd Basri Mat Nor, Moshe Matan, Henrique Mateus Fernandes, Meghena Mathew, Christina Mathew, Mathieu Mattei, Laurence Maulin, Juergen May, Javier Maynar, Mayfong Mayxay, Thierry Mazzoni, Lisa Mc Sweeney, Colin McArthur, Naina McCann, Peter McCanny, Aine McCarthy, Anne McCarthy, Colin McCloskey, Rachael McConnochie, Sherry McDermott, Sarah E. McDonald, Aine McElroy, Samuel McElwee, Natalie McEvoy, Allison McGeer, Kenneth A. McLean, Paul McNally, Bairbre McNicholas, Edel Meaney, Cécile Mear-Passard, Maggie Mechlin, Nastia Medombou, Omar Mehkri, Ferruccio Mele, Luis Melo, Kashif Ali Memon, João João Mendes, Ogechukwu Menkiti, Kusum Menon, France Mentré, Alexander J. Mentzer, Emmanuelle Mercier, Noémie Mercier, Antoine Merckx, Mayka Mergeay-Fabre, Blake Mergler, António Mesquita, Roberta Meta, Osama Metwally, Agnès Meybeck, Dan Meyer, Alison M. Meynert, Vanina Meysonnier, Mehdi Mezidi, Céline Michelanglei, Isabelle Michelet, Efstathia Mihelis, Vladislav Mihnovit, Duha Milad Abdullah, Jennene Miller, Hugo Miranda-Maldonado, Nor Arisah Misnan, Nik Nur Eliza Mohamed, Nouralsabah Mohamed, Tahira Jamal Mohamed, Alaa Mohamed Ads, Ahmed Reda Mohamed Elsayed Abdelhalim, Libya Mohammed, Shrouk Fawze Mohammed Mostafa, Manahil Omer Abdelrahman Mohammedahmed, Omer Abdullah Mohammedelhassan, Asma Moin, Walaa Mokhtar, Elena Molinos, Brenda Molloy, Mary Mone, Agostinho Monteiro, Claudia Montes, Giorgia Montrucchio, Sarah Moore, Shona C. Moore, Lina Morales Cely, Marwa Morgom, Lucia Moro, Catherine Motherway, Ana Motos, Hugo Mouquet, Clara Mouton Perrot, Julien Moyet, Suleiman Haitham Mualla, Mohamed Muftah, Aisha Kalsoom Mufti, Ng Yong Muh, Mo'nes Muhaisen, Dzawani Muhamad, Jimmy Mullaert, Fredrik Müller, Karl Erik Müller, Daniel Munblit, Syed Muneeb Ali, Nadeem Munir, Laveena Munshi, Aisling Murphy, Patrick Murray, Marlène Murris, Srinivas Murthy, Himed Musaab, Alamin Mustafa, Mus'ab Mustafa, Dana Mustafa, Himasha Muvindi, Dimitra Melia Myrodia, Farah Nadia Mohd-Hanafiah, Behzad Nadjm, Dave Nagpal, Alex Nagrebetsky, Blanka Nagybányai-Nagy, Herwin Nanda Boudoin, Mangala Narasimhan, Nageswaran Narayanan, Prashant Nasa, Rashid Nasim Khan, Ahmad Nasrallah, Adel Gerges Nassif Metri, Alasdair Nazerali-Maitland, Nadège Neant, Holger Neb, Nikita Nekliudov, Matthew Nelder, Erni Nelwan, Raul Neto, Emily Neumann, Wing Yiu Ng, Pauline Yeung Ng, Anthony Nghi, Duc Nguyen, Orna Ni Choileain, Niamh Ni Leathlobhair, Nerissa Niba, Alistair D. Nichol, Prompak Nitayavardhana, Stephanie Nonas, Nurul Amani Mohd Noordin, Nurul Faten Izzati Norharizam, Anita North, Alessandra Notari, Mahdad Noursadeghi, Adam Nowinski, Saad Nseir, Leonard Numfor, Nurnaningsih Nurnaningsih, Dwi Utomo Nusantara, Elsa Nyamankolly, Anders Benteson Nygaard, Fionnuala O. Brien, Annmarie O. Callaghan, Annmarie O'Callaghan, Giovanna Occhipinti, Derbrenn OConnor, Max O'Donnell, Lawrence Ofori-Boadu, Tawnya Ogston, Takayuki Ogura, Tak-Hyuk Oh, Sophie O'Halloran, Katie O'Hearn, Sally-Ann Ohene, João Oliveira, Larissa Oliveira, Piero L. Olliaro, Cinderella Omar Rageh Elnaggar, Alsarrah Ali Mohammed Omer, Pierre Ondobo, David S.Y. Ong, Jee Yan Ong, Wilna Oosthuyzen, Anne Opavsky, Peter Openshaw, Saijad Orakzai, Claudia Milena Orozco-Chamorro, Jamel Ortoleva, Mohamed Osama Elsayed Soliman, Javier Osatnik, Linda O'Shea, Miriam O'Sullivan, Eman Othman, Siti Zubaidah Othman, Nadia Ouamara, Rachida Ouissa, Micheal Owusu, Ama Akyampomaa Owusu-Asare, Eric Oziol, Maïder Pagadoy, Justine Pages, Amanda Palacios, Massimo Palmarini, Giovanna Panarello, Hem Paneru, Lai Hui Pang, Mauro Panigada, Nathalie Pansu, Aurélie Papadopoulos, Rachael Parke, Melissa Parker, Jérémie Pasquier, Bruno Pastene, Fabian Patauner, Drashti Patel, Mohan Dass Pathmanathan, Luís Patrão, Patricia Patricio, Lisa Patterson, Rajyabardhan Pattnaik, Christelle Paul, Mical Paul, Jorge Paulos, William A. Paxton, Jean-François Payen, Sandra L. Peake, Kalaiarasu Peariasamy, Giles J. Peek, Florent Peelman, Nathan Peiffer-Smadja, Vincent Peigne, Mare Pejkovska, Paolo Pelosi, Ithan D. Peltan, Rui Pereira, Daniel Perez, Thomas Perpoint, Antonio Pesenti, Vincent Pestre, Lenka Petrou, Michele Petrovic, Ventzislava Petrov-Sanchez, Frank Olav Pettersen, Gilles Peytavin, Richard Odame Philips, Ooyanong Phonemixay, Soulichanya Phoutthavong, Michael Piagnerelli, Walter Picard, Olivier Picone, Maria de Piero, Djura Piersma, Carlos Pimentel, Raquel Pinto, Catarina Pires, Lionel Piroth, Ayodhia Pitaloka, Chiara Piubelli, Riinu Pius, Simone Piva, Laurent Plantier, Hon Shen Png, Julien Poissy, Ryadh Pokeerbux, Sergio Poli, Georgios Pollakis, Diane Ponscarme, Diego Bastos Porto, Andra-Maris Post, Douwe F. Postma, Pedro Povoa, Diana Póvoas, Jeff Powis, Sofia Prapa, Viladeth Praphasiri, Sébastien Preau, Christian Prebensen, Jean-Charles Preiser, Anton Prinssen, Gamage Dona Dilanthi Priyadarshani, Lucia Proença, Sravya Pudota, Bambang Pujo Semedi, Mathew Pulicken, Peter Puplampu, Gregory Purcell, Luisa Quesada, Vilmaris Quinones-Cardona, Else Quist-Paulsen, Mohammed Quraishi, Fadi Qutishat, Maia Rabaa, Christian Rabaud, Ebenezer Rabindrarajan, Aldo Rafael, Marie Rafiq, Abdelrahman Ragab, Mutia Rahardjani, Arslan Rahat Ullah, Ahmad Kashfi Haji Ab Rahman, Rozanah Abd Rahman, Fernando Rainieri, Giri Shan Rajahram, Pratheema Ramachandran, Nagarajan Ramakrishnan, José Ramalho, Ahmad Afiq Ramli, Blandine Rammaert, Grazielle Viana Ramos, Asim Rana, Rajavardhan Rangappa, Ritika Ranjan, Christophe Rapp, Aasiyah Rashan, Thalha Rashan, Ghulam Rasheed, Menaldi Rasmin, Indrek Rätsep, Cornelius Rau, Tharmini Ravi, Ali Raza, Andre Real, Stanislas Rebaudet, Sarah Redl, Brenda Reeve, Attaur Rehman, Muhammad Osama Rehman Khalid, Dag Henrik Reikvam, Renato Reis, Jonathan Remppis, Martine Remy, Hongru Ren, Hanna Renk, Anne-Sophie Resseguier, Matthieu Revest, Oleksa Rewa, Maria Ines Ribeiro, Antonia Ricchiuto, David Richardson, Denise Richardson, Laurent Richier, Siti Nurul Atikah Ahmad Ridzuan, Ana L. Rios, Asgar Rishu, Patrick Rispal, Karine Risso, Maria Angelica Rivera Nuñez, Chiara Robba, André Roberto, Stephanie Roberts, Charles Roberts, David L. Robertson, Olivier Robineau, Anna Roca, Ferran Roche-Campo, Paola Rodari, Simão Rodeia, Bernhard Roessler, Claire Roger, Pierre-Marie Roger, Roberto Roncon-Albuquerque, Jr., Mélanie Roriz, Manuel Rosa-Calatrava, Michael Rose, Dorothea Rosenberger, Andrea Rossanese, Matteo Rossetti, Patrick Rossignol, Carine Roy, Benoît Roze, Desy Rusmawatiningtyas, Clark D. Russell, Maeve Ryan, Steffi Ryckaert, Aleksander Rygh Holten, Isabela Saba, Sairah Sadaf, Musharaf Sadat, Valla Sahraei, Abdurraouf Said, Nadia Saidani, Pranya Sakiyalak, Fodé Bangaly Sako, Moamen Salah, Ali Alaa Salah Eldin Mohamed Abbas, Nawal Salahuddin, Leonardo Salazar, Jodat Saleem, Mohammed Saleh Alyasiri, Talat Ahmed Abu Salem, Gabriele Sales, Charlotte Salmon Gandonniere, Hélène Salvator, Dana Samardali, Shaden Samardali, Yehia Samir Shaaban Aly Orabi, Emely Sanchez, Olivier Sanchez, Kizy Sanchez de Oliveira, Angel Sanchez-Miralles, Vanessa Sancho-Shimizu, Gyan Sandhu, Zulfiqar Sandhu, Pierre-François Sandrine, Oana Săndulescu, Marlene Santos, Shirley Sarfo-Mensah, Bruno Sarmento Banheiro, Iam Claire E. Sarmiento, Benjamine Sarton, Ankana Satya, Sree Satyapriya, Rumaisah Satyawati, Egle Saviciute, Yen Tsen Saw, Justin Schaffer, Tjard Schermer, Arnaud Scherpereel, Marion Schneider, János Schnur, Stephan Schroll, Michael Schwameis, Gary Schwartz, Janet T. Scott, James Scott-Brown, Nicholas Sedillot, Tamara Seitz, Jaganathan Selvanayagam, Mageswari Selvarajoo, Malcolm G. Semple, Rasidah Bt Senian, Eric Senneville, Claudia Sepulveda, Filipa Sequeira, Tânia Sequeira, Ary Serpa Neto, Ellen Shadowitz, Syamin Asyraf Shahidan, Hamza Shahla, Laila Shalabi, Haitam Shames, Anuraj Shankar, Shaikh Sharjeel, Pratima Sharma, Catherine A. Shaw, Victoria Shaw, John Robert Sheenan, Dr. Rajesh Mohan Shetty, Rohan Shetty, Mohiuddin Shiekh, Nobuaki Shime, Keiki Shimizu, Sally Shrapnel, Shubha Kalyan Shrestha, Pramesh Sundar Shrestha, Hoi Ping Shum, Nassima Si Mohammed, Ng Yong Siang, Moses Siaw-Frimpong, Jeanne Sibiude, Bountoy Sibounheuang, Nidhal Siddig, Atif Siddiqui, Maqsood Ahmed Siddiqui, Louise Sigfrid, Fatoumata Sillah, Piret Sillaots, Catarina Silva, Maria Joao Silva, Rogério Silva, Benedict Sim Lim Heng, Wai Ching Sin, Dario Sinatti, Mahendra Singh, Punam Singh, Pompini Agustina Sitompul, Karisha Sivam, Vegard Skogen, Sue Smith, Benjamin Smood, Coilin Smyth, Morgane Snacken, Dominic So, Tze Vee Soh, Lene Bergendal Solberg, Joshua Solomon, Tom Solomon, Emily Somers, Agnès Sommet, Myung Jin Song, Rima Song, Tae Song, Jack Song Chia, Arne Søraas, Albert Sotto, Edouard Soum, Ana Chora Sousa, Marta Sousa, Maria Sousa Uva, Vicente Souza-Dantas, Mamadou Saliou Sow, Alexandra Sperry, Elisabetta Spinuzza, B. P. Sanka Ruwan Sri Darshana, Shiranee Sriskandan, Sarah Stabler, Thomas Staudinger, Stephanie-Susanne Stecher, Trude Steinsvik, Ymkje Stienstra, Birgitte Stiksrud, Eva Stolz, Amy Stone, Anca Streinu-Cercel, Adrian Streinu-Cercel, Geoff Strong, Ami Stuart, David Stuart, Richa Su, Decy Subekti, Gabriel Suen, Jacky Y. Suen, Prasanth Sukumar, Asfia Sultana, Charlotte Summers, Dubravka Supic, Deepashankari Suppiah, Magdalena Surovcová, Atie Suwarti, Andrey Svistunov, Sarah Syahrin, Augustina Sylverken, Konstantinos Syrigos, Jaques Sztajnbok, Konstanty Szuldrzynski, Shirin Tabrizi, Fabio S. Taccone, Lysa Tagherset, Shahdattul Mawarni Taib, Sara Taleb, Cheikh Talla, Jelmer Talsma, Renaud Tamisier, Maria Lawrensia Tampubolon, Kim Keat Tan, Yan Chyi Tan, Hiroyuki Tanaka, Taku Tanaka, Hayato Taniguchi, Huda Taqdees, Arshad Taqi, Coralie Tardivon, Yousef Tarek Kamal Mostafa, Ali Tarhabat, Pierre Tattevin, M Azhari Taufik, Hassan Tawfik, Tze Yuan Tee, João Teixeira, Sofia Tejada, Marie-Capucine Tellier, Sze Kye Teoh, Vanessa Teotonio, François Téoulé, Olivier Terrier, Nicolas Terzi, Hubert Tessier-Grenier, Adrian Tey, Alif Adlan Mohd Thabit, Anand Thakur, Zhang Duan Tham, Suvintheran Thangavelu, Elmi Theron, Vincent Thibault, Simon-Djamel Thiberville, Benoît Thill, Jananee Thirumanickam, Niamh Thompson, Shaun Thompson, Emma C. Thomson, David Thomson, Mathew Thorpe, Surain Raaj Thanga Thurai, Ryan S. Thwaites, Paul Tierney, Vadim Tieroshyn, Peter S. Timashev, Jean-François Timsit, Noémie Tissot, Fiona Toal, Jordan Zhien Yang Toh, Maria Toki, Kristian Tonby, Sia Loong Tonnii, Marta Torre, Antoni Torres, Margarida Torres, Rosario Maria Torres Santos-Olmo, Hernando Torres-Zevallos, Aboubacar Tounkara, Michael Towers, Fodé Amara Traoré, Tony Trapani, Cécile Tromeur, Ioannis Trontzas, Tiffany Trouillon, Jeanne Truong, Christelle Tual, Sarah Tubiana, Helen Tuite, Alexis F. Turgeon, Jean-Marie Turmel, Lance C.W. Turtle, Anders Tveita, Pawel Twardowski, Makoto Uchiyama, PG Ishara Udayanga, Andrew Udy, Roman Ullrich, Alberto Uribe, Asad Usman, Effua Usuf, Timothy M. Uyeki, Cristinava Vajdovics, Piero Valentini, Luís Val-Flores, Stijn Van de Velde, Marcel van den Berge, Machteld van der Feltz, Job van der Palen, Paul van der Valk, Nicky Van Der Vekens, Peter Van der Voort, Sylvie Van Der Werf, Laura van Gulik, Jarne Van Hattem, Carolien van Netten, Ilonka van Veen, Noémie Vanel, Henk Vanoverschelde, Michael Varrone, Shoban Raj Vasudayan, Charline Vauchy, Pavan Kumar Vecham, Shaminee Veeran, Aurélie Veislinger, Sebastian Vencken, Sara Ventura, Annelies Verbon, José Ernesto Vidal, César Vieira, Deepak Vijayan, Judit Villar, Pierre-Marc Villeneuve, Andrea Villoldo, Gayatri Vishwanathan, Benoit Visseaux, Hannah Visser, Chiara Vitiello, Manivanh Vongsouvath, Harald Vonkeman, Fanny Vuotto, Suhaila Abdul Wahab, Noor Hidayu Wahab, Nadirah Abdul Wahid, Marina Wainstein, Laura Walsh, Wan Fadzlina Wan Muhd Shukeri, Chih-Hsien Wang, Steve Webb, Katharina Weil, Tan Pei Wen, Hassi Wesam, Sanne Wesselius, T. Eoin West, Murray Wham, Bryan Whelan, Nicole White, Paul Henri Wicky, Aurélie Wiedemann, Surya Otto Wijaya, Keith Wille, Sue Willems, Bailey Williams, Patricia J. Williams, Virginie Williams, Jessica Wittman, Calvin Wong, Xin Ci Wong, Yew Sing Wong, Teck Fung Wong, Natalie Wright, Lim Saio Xian, Ioannis Xynogalas, Siti Rohani Binti Mohd Yakop, Masaki Yamazaki, Elizabeth Yarad, Yazdan Yazdanpanah, Nicholas Yee Liang Hing, Abdelrahman Yehia Mahmoud Abdelaal, Cécile Yelnik, Chian Hui Yeoh, Stephanie Yerkovich, Touxiong Yiaye, Toshiki Yokoyama, Hodane Yonis, Obada Yousif, Saptadi Yuliarto, Akram Zaaqoq, Marion Zabbe, Gustavo E. Zabert, Kai Zacharowski, Masliza Zahid, Maram Zahran, Nor Zaila Binti Zaidan, Maria Zambon, Miguel Zambrano, Alberto Zanella, Nurul Zaynah, Hiba Zayyad, Alexander Zoufaly, and David Zucman

Subjects
COVID-19, Non-respiratory symptoms, Respiratory symptoms, Risk factors, Mortality, Science (General), Q1-390, Social sciences (General), H1-99
Abstract

Background: COVID-19 is primarily known as a respiratory illness; however, many patients present to hospital without respiratory symptoms. The association between non-respiratory presentations of COVID-19 and outcomes remains unclear. We investigated risk factors and clinical outcomes in patients with no respiratory symptoms (NRS) and respiratory symptoms (RS) at hospital admission. Methods: This study describes clinical features, physiological parameters, and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients, stratified by the presence or absence of respiratory symptoms at hospital admission. RS patients had one or more of: cough, shortness of breath, sore throat, runny nose or wheezing; while NRS patients did not. Results: Of 178,640 patients in the study, 86.4 % presented with RS, while 13.6 % had NRS. NRS patients were older (median age: NRS: 74 vs RS: 65) and less likely to be admitted to the ICU (NRS: 36.7 % vs RS: 37.5 %). NRS patients had a higher crude in-hospital case-fatality ratio (NRS 41.1 % vs. RS 32.0 %), but a lower risk of death after adjusting for confounders (HR 0.88 [0.83–0.93]). Conclusion: Approximately one in seven COVID-19 patients presented at hospital admission without respiratory symptoms. These patients were older, had lower ICU admission rates, and had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality after adjusting for confounders.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

36. Behavioural ‘nudging’ interventions to reduce low-value care for low back pain in the emergency department (NUDG-ED): protocol for a 2×2 factorial, before-after, cluster randomised trial

Author

Rachelle Buchbinder, Matthew Smith, Ian A Harris, Enrico Coiera, Adrian C Traeger, Chris G Maher, Kirsten Howard, Qiang Li, Jeffrey A Linder, James McAuley, Louise Cullen, Ian Ferguson, Sweekriti Sharma, Elise Tcharkhedian, Janet Harrison, Naren Gunja, Gustavo Machado, Richard McNulty, Mark Salter, Paul M Middleton, Ahilan Parameswaran, Kitty Duong, Andrew Coggins, Zoe Michaleff, Gemma Altinger, Trevor Chan, Karen Tambree, Ajay Varshney, Jeremy Lawrence, Kevin Pile, Richard Cracknell, Kara Goon, Daryn Mitford, Raymond Morgan, James Mallows, Kelly Bivona, Helen Zaouk, Brendon Shapter, Jim Basilakis, Helen Badge, Michael Meller, and Robyn Linder

Subjects
Medicine
Abstract

Introduction Opioids and imaging are considered low-value care for most people with low back pain. Yet around one in three people presenting to the emergency department (ED) will receive imaging, and two in three will receive an opioid. NUDG-ED aims to determine the effectiveness of two different behavioural ‘nudge’ interventions on low-value care for ED patients with low back pain.Methods and analysis NUDG-ED is a 2×2 factorial, open-label, before-after, cluster randomised controlled trial. The trial includes 8 ED sites in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be ED clinicians who manage back pain, and patients who are 18 years or over presenting to ED with musculoskeletal back pain. EDs will be randomly assigned to receive (i) patient nudges, (ii) clinician nudges, (iii) both interventions or (iv) no nudge control. The primary outcome will be the proportion of encounters in ED for musculoskeletal back pain where a person received a non-indicated lumbar imaging test, an opioid at discharge or both. We will require 2416 encounters over a 9-month study period (3-month before period and 6-month after period) to detect an absolute difference of 10% in use of low-value care due to either nudge, with 80% power, alpha set at 0.05 and assuming an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.10, and an intraperiod correlation of 0.09. Patient-reported outcome measures will be collected in a subsample of patients (n≥456) 1 week after their initial ED visit. To estimate effects, we will use a multilevel regression model, with a random effect for cluster and patient, a fixed effect indicating the group assignment of each cluster and a fixed effect of time.Ethics and dissemination This study has ethical approval from Southwestern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00472). We will disseminate the results of this trial via media, presenting at conferences and scientific publications.Trial registration number ACTRN12623001000695.

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

37. Qualitative evidence

Author

Jane Noyes, Andrew Booth, Margaret Cargo, Kate Flemming, Angela Harden, Janet Harris, Ruth Garside, Karin Hannes, Tomás Pantoja, James Thomas, Higgins, J.P.T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M.J., and Welch, V.A.

Published
2019

38. Prescribing fitness apps for people with cancer: a preliminary assessment of content and quality of commercially available apps

Author

Janet Harris, Jenny Harris, Jo Armes, and Rubén Martín-Payo

Subjects
Gerontology, Telemedicine, Oncology (nursing), business.industry, Physical activity, Usability, Positive correlation, Health informatics, Mobile Applications, Help-seeking, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Oncology, Cancer Survivors, Rating scale, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Neoplasms, Medicine, Humans, 030212 general & internal medicine, business, Goal setting, Exercise
Abstract

Purpose The benefits of physical activity for cancer survivors are increasingly recognised and smartphone applications are available to assist them to become more physically active. Cancer clinicians, however, lack confidence about which physical activity apps to recommend as evidence on their quality and content is limited. Therefore, we reviewed freely available commercial physical activity/fitness apps to systematically assess their behavioural change content and quality of their design. Methods Systematic searches of the app stores for Apple and Android operating systems were conducted and apps were screened to identify free apps appropriate for cancer survivors. Quality was assessed using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and behavioural content was evaluated using the Behavioural Change Techniques Taxonomy (BCTT). Results Of 341 apps identified, 67 were judged appropriate for cancer survivors and 46% combined aerobic and strength/stretching content. The overall number of behavioural change techniques (BCT) included was 3.96 (SD = 2.09), with the most frequent being ‘feedback on behaviour’ and ‘goal setting behaviour’. The mean scores for objective and subjective quality were 4.11 (SD = 0.59) and 3.07 (SD = 0.91) respectively (range 0 to 5). Finally, a modest positive correlation was found between the number of BCT and the quality of engagement, awareness and knowledge as assessed by the MARS. Conclusion Only a fifth of retrieved physical activity apps contained potentially suitable content for people affected by cancer. Overall, most apps we reviewed appeared to perform well in terms of their objective quality, but less well at promoting knowledge and awareness or help seeking related to physical activity. Implications for Cancer Survivors Many physical activity apps are available but the combined use of MARS and BCTT suggests that not all of them are suitable to the needs is a promising and feasible approach for assessing the applicability, usability and content of physical activity of apps employed by cancer survivors and this study is a first step toward developing a guide.

Published
2018

39. Quality circles for quality improvement in primary health care: Their origins, spread, effectiveness and lacunae- A scoping review

Author

Kali Tal, Adrian Rohrbasser, Sharon Mickan, Geoff Wong, and Janet Harris

Subjects
Quality management, Economics, Social Sciences, Health Care Sector, Database and Informatics Methods, 0302 clinical medicine, Sociology, Antibiotics, Health care, Medicine and Health Sciences, 030212 general & internal medicine, Database Searching, 610 Medicine & health, Multidisciplinary, Antimicrobials, 030503 health policy & services, Professional development, Drugs, Research Assessment, Infectious Diseases, Systematic review, Medicine, 0305 other medical science, Psychology, Quality circle, 360 Social problems & social services, Research Article, Drug Research and Development, Systematic Reviews, Infectious Disease Control, Science, MEDLINE, Context (language use), Research and Analysis Methods, Microbiology, Education, 03 medical and health sciences, Health Economics, Microbial Control, Humans, Clinical Trials, Quality of Health Care, Pharmacology, Medical education, Primary Health Care, business.industry, Biology and Life Sciences, Popularity, Randomized Controlled Trials, Health Care, Medical Education, Clinical Medicine, business, Medical Humanities, Delivery of Health Care
Abstract

Quality circles or peer review groups, and similar structured small groups of 6-12 health care professionals meet regularly across Europe to reflect on and improve their standard practice. There is debate over their effectiveness in primary health care, especially over their potential to change practitioners' behaviour. Despite their popularity, we could not identify broad surveys of the literature on quality circles in a primary care context. Our scoping review was intended to identify possible definitions of quality circles, their origins, and reported effectiveness in primary health care, and to identify gaps in our knowledge. We searched appropriate databases and included any relevant paper on quality circles published until December 2017. We then compared information we found in the articles to that we found in books and on websites. Our search returned 7824 citations, from which we identified 82 background papers and 58 papers about quality circles. We found that they originated in manufacturing industry and that many countries adopted them for primary health care to continuously improve medical education, professional development, and quality of care. Quality circles are not standardized and their techniques are complex. We identified 19 papers that described individual studies, one paper that summarized 3 studies, and 1 systematic review that suggested that quality circles can effectively change behaviour, though effect sizes varied, depending on topic and context. Studies also suggested participation may affirm self-esteem and increase professional confidence. Because reports of the effect of quality circles on behaviour are variable, we recommend theory-driven research approaches to analyse and improve the effectiveness of this complex intervention.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

40. Reporting War and Conflict

Author

Janet Harris, Kevin Williams, Janet Harris, and Kevin Williams

Subjects
War--Press coverage, Journalism--Political aspects, Journalists--Crimes against
Abstract

Reporting War and Conflict brings together history, theory and practice to explore the issues and obstacles involved in the reporting of contemporary war and conflict. The book examines the radical changes taking place in the working practices and day-to-day routines of war journalists, arguing that managing risk has become central to modern war correspondence. How individual reporters and news organisations organise their coverage of war and conflict is increasingly shaped by a variety of personal, professional and institutional risks. The book provides an historical and theoretical context to risk culture and the work of war correspondents, paying particular attention to the changing nature of technology, organisational structures and the role of witnessing. The conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria are examined to highlight how risk and the calculations of risk vary according to the type of conflict. The focus is on the relationship between propaganda, censorship, the sourcing of information and the challenges of reporting war in the digital world. The authors then move on to discuss the arguments around risk in relation to gender and war reporting and the coverage of death on the battlefield. Reporting War and Conflict is a guide to the contemporary changes in warfare and the media environment that have influenced war reporting. It offers students and researchers in journalism and media studies an invaluable overview of the life of a modern war correspondent.

Published
2019

41. Voices of American and Israeli Early Childhood Educators on Inclusion

Author

Shelley T. Alexander, David L. Brody, Meir Muller, Haggith Gor Ziv, Sigal Achituv, Chaya R. Gorsetman, Janet Harris, Clodie Tal, Roberta Goodman, Deborah Schein, Ilene Vogelstein, and Lyndall Miller

Subjects
teacher attitudes, inclusion, israeli and american educators, collaborative research, early childhood, lcsh:L7-991, lcsh:Education (General)
Abstract

This study examines Israeli and American teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion in early childhood and specifically explores the problems and opportunities concerning inclusion in the United States and Israel that arise in Jewish education. Through semi-structured interviews, four Israeli and three American educators participating in communities of practice were asked to look at themselves and the beliefs that inform their attitudes towards inclusion. The researchers created a qualitative rubric suitable to analyze the interviews from participants. Results indicate that a majority of the teachers voiced support for inclusion of children with special needs but felt tension in implementing an inclusive classroom due to multiple variables. The most challenging issues for the teachers involve lack of efficacy, lack of support, balancing needs of all stakeholders, and family cooperation. The article concludes with recommendations to leaders and policy makers about the needs of teachers to more effectively achieve high quality inclusive classrooms.

Published
2016

42. Gender, Risk and Journalism

Author

Janet Harris, Nick Mosdell, and James Griffiths

Subjects
Communication, media_common.quotation_subject, 05 social sciences, 050801 communication & media studies, Certainty, 0506 political science, 0508 media and communications, Anticipation (artificial intelligence), H1, HQ, 050602 political science & public administration, Harassment, Journalism, Sociology, Social psychology, media_common
Abstract

Are female journalists more at risk in covering conflict than their male colleagues? \ud Beck states ‘risk is the anticipation of the catastrophe – so it is existent and non-existent’. Is the contention that female journalists are more at risk, knowledge, or a construction of knowledge? Are Editors and journalists who decide that women are more at risk merely anticipating a catastrophe? There is no certainty that women would be more at risk, but the fear that women are more at risk can prevent them from being sent to cover conflict, or force them to decide not to go to dangerous places. It is not possible to say with certainty that women journalists are targeted because they are women or because they are journalists. An IED or rocket fire does not distinguish between sexes. In many situations being female actually helps women journalist in conflict zones. \ud In this paper we conduct a survey of journalists who work in conflict zones and ask whether it is the job or the gender which is the most dangerous. The question of whether it is more dangerous to be a woman might be debatable, but the survey shows that sexual harassment is a concern for female journalists.

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results