Wikis in Micro-Communities: A Collaborative and Relational Learning Tool for Health Promotion

No description supplie

Describing methods and interventions : a protocol for the systematic analysis of the perioperative quality improvement literature

Background: Quality improvement (QI) methods are widely used in surgery in an effort to improve care, often using techniques such as Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to implement specific interventions. Explicit definition of both the QI method and quality intervention is necessary to enable the accurate replication of effective interventions in practice, facilitate cumulative learning, reduce research waste and optimise benefits to patients. This systematic review aims to assess quality of reporting of QI methods and quality interventions in perioperative care. Methods: Studies reporting on quality interventions implemented in perioperative care settings will be identified. Searches will be conducted in the Ovid SP version of Medline, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care database and the related articles function of PubMed. The journal BMJ Quality will be searched separately. Search strategy terms will relate to (i) surgery, (ii) QI and (iii) evaluation methods. Explicit exclusion and inclusion criteria will be applied. Data from studies will be extracted using a data extraction form. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist will be used to evaluate quality of reporting, together with additional items aimed at assessing QI methods specifically

Comparison of <i>R</i>.<i>conorii</i> average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification with Repeated Sampling and Endpoint Methods.

Comparison of R.conorii average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification with Repeated Sampling and Endpoint Methods.</p

Comparison of average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification time course between SFGR strains.

Comparison of average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification time course between SFGR strains.</p

Summary of supernatant and cellular doubling time (<i>dt</i>).

The averaged data is represented as average dt ± standard deviation. Rco dt reported as starting on day 2 for T25 supernatant, however consistent sampling occurred on day 3. (DOCX)</p

Summary of clinical samples.

Summary of clinical samples.</p

Summary of isolate doubling time (<i>dt</i>).

Data represented as average dt ± standard deviation. Days of log growth at p1 indicated dt was determined by data from growth confirmation in 25 cm2 culture flask at isolate passage 1. (DOCX)</p

Supplemental Material, Appendix_A._Fellows_QI_Curriculum - A Curriculum in Quality Improvement for Interprofessional Palliative Care Trainees

Supplemental Material, Appendix_A._Fellows_QI_Curriculum for A Curriculum in Quality Improvement for Interprofessional Palliative Care Trainees by Joshua R. Lakin, Elise N. Brannen, Rachelle E. Bernacki and Emma Jones in American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®</p

Clinical Isolation Method Comparison.

Clinical Isolation Method Comparison.</p

Endpoint method comparison of average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification time course between SFGR strains.

Endpoint method comparison of average total copy number in supernatant accumulation and cellular amplification time course between SFGR strains.</p