Arduous implementation: Does the Normalisation Process Model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice

Background: decision support technologies (DSTs, also known as decision aids) help patients and professionals take part in collaborative decision-making processes. Trials have shown favorable impacts on patient knowledge, satisfaction, decisional conflict and confidence. However, they have not become routinely embedded in health care settings. Few studies have approached this issue using a theoretical framework. We explained problems of implementing DSTs using the Normalization Process Model, a conceptual model that focuses attention on how complex interventions become routinely embedded in practice.Methods: the Normalization Process Model was used as the basis of conceptual analysis of the outcomes of previous primary research and reviews. Using a virtual working environment we applied the model and its main concepts to examine: the 'workability' of DSTs in professional-patient interactions; how DSTs affect knowledge relations between their users; how DSTs impact on users' skills and performance; and the impact of DSTs on the allocation of organizational resources.Results: conceptual analysis using the Normalization Process Model provided insight on implementation problems for DSTs in routine settings. Current research focuses mainly on the interactional workability of these technologies, but factors related to divisions of labor and health care, and the organizational contexts in which DSTs are used, are poorly described and understood.Conclusion: the model successfully provided a framework for helping to identify factors that promote and inhibit the implementation of DSTs in healthcare and gave us insights into factors influencing the introduction of new technologies into contexts where negotiations are characterized by asymmetries of power and knowledge. Future research and development on the deployment of DSTs needs to take a more holistic approach and give emphasis to the structural conditions and social norms in which these technologies are enacte

Sex-biased parental care and sexual size dimorphism in a provisioning arthropod

The diverse selection pressures driving the evolution of sexual size dimorphism (SSD) have long been debated. While the balance between fecundity selection and sexual selection has received much attention, explanations based on sex-specific ecology have proven harder to test. In ectotherms, females are typically larger than males, and this is frequently thought to be because size constrains female fecundity more than it constrains male mating success. However, SSD could additionally reflect maternal care strategies. Under this hypothesis, females are relatively larger where reproduction requires greater maximum maternal effort – for example where mothers transport heavy provisions to nests. To test this hypothesis we focussed on digger wasps (Hymenoptera: Ammophilini), a relatively homogeneous group in which only females provision offspring. In some species, a single large prey item, up to 10 times the mother’s weight, must be carried to each burrow on foot; other species provide many small prey, each flown individually to the nest. We found more pronounced female-biased SSD in species where females carry single, heavy prey. More generally, SSD was negatively correlated with numbers of prey provided per offspring. Females provisioning multiple small items had longer wings and thoraxes, probably because smaller prey are carried in flight. Despite much theorising, few empirical studies have tested how sex-biased parental care can affect SSD. Our study reveals that such costs can be associated with the evolution of dimorphism, and this should be investigated in other clades where parental care costs differ between sexes and species

Observations on the mating habits of Halictid bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Volume: 26Start Page: 34End Page: 3

A synopsis of the gonus Micralictoides (Hymenoptora, Apoidea)

Volume: 18Start Page: 119End Page: 12

The opposition of Conopid flies upon smaller Andrenid bees

Volume: 17Start Page: 95End Page: 9

Notes on Triepeolus remigatus (Fabricius), a \u27cuckoo bee\u27 parasite of the squash bee, Xenoglossa strenua (Cresson) (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)

Volume: 42Start Page: 255End Page: 26

New species of Osmia (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) from the Southwestern United States

Volume: 97Start Page: 147End Page: 15