Developing standards for reporting implementation studies of complex interventions (StaRI): a systematic review and e-Delphi

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited

Social determinants and maternal exposure to intimate partner violence of obstetric patients with severe maternal morbidity in the intensive care unit: a systematic review protocol

Introduction: Maternal mortality is a potentially preventable public health issue. Maternal morbidity is increasingly of interest to aid the reduction of maternal mortality. Obstetric patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are an important part of the global burden of maternal morbidity. Social determinants influence health outcomes of pregnant women. Additionally, intimate partner violence has a great negative impact on women's health and pregnancy outcome. However, little is known about the contextual and social aspects of obstetric patients treated in the ICU. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the social determinants and exposure to intimate partner violence of obstetric patients admitted to an ICU. Methods and analysis: A systematic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest, LILACS and SciELO from 2000 to 2016. Studies published in English and Spanish will be identified in relation to data reporting on social determinants of health and/or exposure to intimate partner violence of obstetric women, treated in the ICU during pregnancy, childbirth or within 42 days of the end of pregnancy. Two reviewers will independently screen for study eligibility and data extraction. Risk of bias and assessment of the quality of the included studies will be performed by using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Data will be analysed and summarised using a narrative description of the available evidence across studies. This systematic review protocol will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Ethics and dissemination: Since this systematic review will be based on published studies, ethical approval is not required. Findings will be presented at La Trobe University, in Conferences and Congresses, and published in a peer-reviewed journal

Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap : systematic reviews of reviews

Acknowledgements The Evidence to Practice Project (SPCR FR4 project number: 122) is funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR). KD is part-funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Research and Care West Midlands and by a Knowledge Mobilisation Research Fellowship (KMRF-2014-03-002) from the NIHR. This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Funding This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Reprint of “The Single-Case Reporting Guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016: explanation and elaboration”

There is substantial evidence that research studies reported in the scientific literature do not provide adequate information so that readers know exactly what was done and what was found. This problem has been addressed by the development of reporting guidelines which tell authors what should be reported and how it should be described. Many reporting guidelines are now available for different types of research designs. There is no such guideline for one type of research design commonly used in the behavioral sciences, the single-case experimental design (SCED). The present study addressed this gap. This report describes the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural interventions (SCRIBE) 2016, which is a set of 26 items that authors need to address when writing about SCED research for publication in a scientific journal. Each item is described, a rationale for its inclusion is provided, and examples of adequate reporting taken from the literature are quoted. It is recommended that the SCRIBE 2016 is used by authors preparing manuscripts describing SCED research for publication, as well as journal reviewers and editors who are evaluating such manuscripts.Published versio

Committed to Safety: Ten Case Studies on Reducing Harm to Patients

Presents case studies of healthcare organizations, clinical teams, and learning collaborations to illustrate successful innovations for improving patient safety nationwide. Includes actions taken, results achieved, lessons learned, and recommendations

REFORMS: Reporting Standards for Machine Learning Based Science

Machine learning (ML) methods are proliferating in scientific research. However, the adoption of these methods has been accompanied by failures of validity, reproducibility, and generalizability. These failures can hinder scientific progress, lead to false consensus around invalid claims, and undermine the credibility of ML-based science. ML methods are often applied and fail in similar ways across disciplines. Motivated by this observation, our goal is to provide clear reporting standards for ML-based science. Drawing from an extensive review of past literature, we present the REFORMS checklist ($\textbf{Re}$porting Standards $\textbf{For}$ $\textbf{M}$achine Learning Based $\textbf{S}$cience). It consists of 32 questions and a paired set of guidelines. REFORMS was developed based on a consensus of 19 researchers across computer science, data science, mathematics, social sciences, and biomedical sciences. REFORMS can serve as a resource for researchers when designing and implementing a study, for referees when reviewing papers, and for journals when enforcing standards for transparency and reproducibility

The Effects of a Systematic Training Package on Secondary Special Education Teachers to Teach Self-Determination Skills to Students with High Incidence Disabilites

There has been increased interest in and concern about the level of self-determination with which secondary students with disabilities leave high school. While educators acknowledge the importance of teaching such skills, researchers have documented a lack of self-determination instruction occurring in the secondary school setting. When teaching self-determination skills to students with disabilities, two barriers most frequently cited by educators are they feel unprepared to teach self-determination skills and they are unsure how to prepare students to be active participants in the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process which determines a student's future. The purpose of this study was to determine whether secondary special education teachers could provide self-determination instruction to students with high incidence disabilities having been given systematic training opportunities. A multiple probe single subject design across three special education teachers was used. Teachers were systemically trained on the ChoiceMaker's Self-Directed IEP Curriculum™. Direct observation of self-determination instructional procedures were conducted across baseline, intervention, and maintenance conditions for three teachers during self-contained secondary special education classroom settings. The results of the study confirmed the author's hypothesis that secondary special education teachers can effectively use the ChoiceMaker's Self-Direct IEP Curriculum™ to teach self-determination skills to students of high incidence disabilities after receiving systematic training. Furthermore, IEP committee members, including the students, parents, general educators, special educators, and administrators noted an increase in active student involvement and self-determined behavior at IEP meetings. The results contribute to the self-determination knowledge base addressing teachers' preparation and confidence in teaching self-determination skills to students with high incidence disabilities

Peer Coaching Effects on Targeted Teaching Behaviors and Teacher Self-Efficacy in an Early Field Experience

Abstract This study examined the effect of peer coaching on the development of effective teaching behaviors and teacher self-efficacy of education students in an early field experience. The convenience sample (N = 99) included undergraduate students enrolled in a required foundational course in special education at a large public university in the southern United States. Training methods included online video instruction on targeted effective and ineffective teaching behaviors. The effective behaviors included (a) established student learning objective prior to beginning a lesson, (b) explained and/or modeled how pupil can discover answer or solve a problem, (c) checked for understanding by asking content-related questions or asked pupil to verbally explain/demonstrate answer/concept, (d) academic or behavior specific praise statement. The ineffective behaviors included (a) began activity without stating student learning-objective, (b) ask binary content related question without follow-up probe, and (c) negative comment/feedback considered derogatory. Participants submitted pre-and-post-intervention videos via a web-based storage service. Binomial logistic regression and ANCOVA analyses indicated no statistically significant differences between the treatment and control groups for main effects of peer coaching on the development of the targeted effective teaching behaviors. Additionally, ANOVA analyses indicated no statistically significance between groups on the three subscales of the OSTES. However, frequency of observed effective teaching behaviors increased for both groups in 3 of the 4 targeted effective teaching behaviors. Study participants and public school personnel provided feedback regarding the value and positive impact of the intervention and training on targeted teaching behaviors. Implications and future research are explored

Options for basing Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) on chronic disease endpoints: report from a joint US-/Canadian-sponsored working group.

Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) are used in Canada and the United States in planning and assessing diets of apparently healthy individuals and population groups. The approaches used to establish DRIs on the basis of classical nutrient deficiencies and/or toxicities have worked well. However, it has proved to be more challenging to base DRI values on chronic disease endpoints; deviations from the traditional framework were often required, and in some cases, DRI values were not established for intakes that affected chronic disease outcomes despite evidence that supported a relation. The increasing proportions of elderly citizens, the growing prevalence of chronic diseases, and the persistently high prevalence of overweight and obesity, which predispose to chronic disease, highlight the importance of understanding the impact of nutrition on chronic disease prevention and control. A multidisciplinary working group sponsored by the Canadian and US government DRI steering committees met from November 2014 to April 2016 to identify options for addressing key scientific challenges encountered in the use of chronic disease endpoints to establish reference values. The working group focused on 3 key questions: 1) What are the important evidentiary challenges for selecting and using chronic disease endpoints in future DRI reviews, 2) what intake-response models can future DRI committees consider when using chronic disease endpoints, and 3) what are the arguments for and against continuing to include chronic disease endpoints in future DRI reviews? This report outlines the range of options identified by the working group for answering these key questions, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each option