11 research outputs found

    Citizenship education in England 2001-2010 : young people's practices and prospects for the future : the eighth and final report from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study (CELS)

    Get PDF
    On the one hand, there has been a marked and steady increase in young people’s civic and political participation and indications that these young people will continue to participate as adult citizens. In contrast, there has been a hardening of attitudes toward equality and society, a weakening of attachment to communities and fluctuating levels of engagement, efficacy and trust in the political arena. The factors that shape young people’s citizenship outcomes include age and life-stage, background factors, prior citizenship outcomes, as well as levels of ‘received’ citizenship education

    Retrofit to the Rescue: environmental upgrading of multi-storey estates

    Get PDF
    'Retrofit to the Rescue' looks at the ambitious refurbishment of Wilmcote House in Portsmouth for a new study on the social impact of retrofit works. In 2010 LSE Housing and Communities were asked to conduct interviews with 50 tenants on the Edward Woods Estate, to assess the community and social impact of retrofitting three high rise towers (23 storeys) in Hammersmith and Fulham. The resulting report - High Rise Hope - found that residents liked their community and area, expressed support for it to be saved and were happy to stay put during the works. In spite of many delays and hiccups, the final outcomes were generally extremely positive

    Physiological Correlates of Volunteering

    Get PDF
    We review research on physiological correlates of volunteering, a neglected but promising research field. Some of these correlates seem to be causal factors influencing volunteering. Volunteers tend to have better physical health, both self-reported and expert-assessed, better mental health, and perform better on cognitive tasks. Research thus far has rarely examined neurological, neurochemical, hormonal, and genetic correlates of volunteering to any significant extent, especially controlling for other factors as potential confounds. Evolutionary theory and behavioral genetic research suggest the importance of such physiological factors in humans. Basically, many aspects of social relationships and social activities have effects on health (e.g., Newman and Roberts 2013; Uchino 2004), as the widely used biopsychosocial (BPS) model suggests (Institute of Medicine 2001). Studies of formal volunteering (FV), charitable giving, and altruistic behavior suggest that physiological characteristics are related to volunteering, including specific genes (such as oxytocin receptor [OXTR] genes, Arginine vasopressin receptor [AVPR] genes, dopamine D4 receptor [DRD4] genes, and 5-HTTLPR). We recommend that future research on physiological factors be extended to non-Western populations, focusing specifically on volunteering, and differentiating between different forms and types of volunteering and civic participation

    Community prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in England from April to November, 2020: results from the ONS Coronavirus Infection Survey

    Get PDF
    Background: Decisions about the continued need for control measures to contain the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rely on accurate and up-to-date information about the number of people testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and risk factors for testing positive. Existing surveillance systems are generally not based on population samples and are not longitudinal in design. Methods: Samples were collected from individuals aged 2 years and older living in private households in England that were randomly selected from address lists and previous Office for National Statistics surveys in repeated crosssectional household surveys with additional serial sampling and longitudinal follow-up. Participants completed a questionnaire and did nose and throat self-swabs. The percentage of individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA was estimated over time by use of dynamic multilevel regression and poststratification, to account for potential residual non-representativeness. Potential changes in risk factors for testing positive over time were also assessed. The study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN21086382. Findings: Between April 26 and Nov 1, 2020, results were available from 1 191 170 samples from 280327 individuals; 5231 samples were positive overall, from 3923 individuals. The percentage of people testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 changed substantially over time, with an initial decrease between April 26 and June 28, 2020, from 0·40% (95% credible interval 0·29–0·54) to 0·06% (0·04–0·07), followed by low levels during July and August, 2020, before substantial increases at the end of August, 2020, with percentages testing positive above 1% from the end of October, 2020. Having a patient facing role and working outside your home were important risk factors for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the end of the first wave (April 26 to June 28, 2020), but not in the second wave (from the end of August to Nov 1, 2020). Age (young adults, particularly those aged 17–24 years) was an important initial driver of increased positivity rates in the second wave. For example, the estimated percentage of individuals testing positive was more than six times higher in those aged 17–24 years than in those aged 70 years or older at the end of September, 2020. A substantial proportion of infections were in individuals not reporting symptoms around their positive test (45–68%, dependent on calendar time. Interpretation: Important risk factors for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 varied substantially between the part of the first wave that was captured by the study (April to June, 2020) and the first part of the second wave of increased positivity rates (end of August to Nov 1, 2020), and a substantial proportion of infections were in individuals not reporting symptoms, indicating that continued monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 in the community will be important for managing the COVID-19 pandemic moving forwards

    Large walking and wellbeing behaviour benefits of co-designed sustainable park improvements: A natural experimental study in a UK deprived urban area

    No full text
    There is little robust evidence of how sustainable park interventions impact on physical activity and other behaviours important for wellbeing. This controlled natural experimental study aimed to examine the effects of co-designing a sustainable park intervention, in a deprived UK urban area, on walking and other wellbeing behaviours.Behaviour observations were conducted at two intervention sites and two matched comparison sites (n = 4,783). Walking observations (primary outcome), wellbeing behaviours (vigorous, sedentary, social and take notice activities) and demographic characteristics were assessed at pre-intervention, and post-intervention (3 and 15 months). Outcomes were compared between intervention and comparison groups, controlling for pre-intervention using multilevel negative binomial regression models. Additional behaviour observations were conducted in two unchanged nearby sites to assess changes in general local activity. Intercept surveys (n = 623) assessed change in self-reported outdoor space usage at intervention and control areas.Post-intervention, walking increased 203 % at 3 months (IRR 2·03, 95 % CI 1·01-4·09) and 351 % at 15 months (IRR 3·51, 95 % CI 2·07-5·93), for intervention sites relative to comparison sites. Large increases for other wellbeing behaviours were also observed. The proportion of non-white persons increased substantially post-intervention, compared to comparison sites. Nearby unchanged sites showed little evidence of general increased activity. Self-reported outdoor usage increased more in the intervention sites (p=<0·001).Sustainable solutions can yield large increases in walking and wellbeing in deprived areas, especially where interventions are co-designed with residents. More collaborative and robust natural experimental studies like this are needed to better inform decision-makers how to maximise health and wellbeing outcomes from sustainable interventions

    Management evaluation of metastasis in the brain (MEMBRAIN)—a United Kingdom and Ireland prospective, multicenter observational study

    No full text
    Background: In recent years an increasing number of patients with cerebral metastasis (CM) have been referred to the neuro-oncology multidisciplinary team (NMDT). Our aim was to obtain a national picture of CM referrals to assess referral volume and quality and factors affecting NMDT decision making. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study including all adult patients referred to NMDT with 1 or more CM was conducted. Data were collected in neurosurgical units from November 2017 to February 2018. Demographics, primary disease, KPS, imaging, and treatment recommendation were entered into an online database. Results: A total of 1048 patients were analyzed from 24 neurosurgical units. Median age was 65 years (range, 21-93 years) with a median number of 3 referrals (range, 1-17 referrals) per NMDT. The most common primary malignancies were lung (36.5%, n = 383), breast (18.4%, n = 193), and melanoma (12.0%, n = 126). A total of 51.6% (n = 541) of the referrals were for a solitary metastasis and resulted in specialist intervention being offered in 67.5% (n = 365) of cases. A total of 38.2% (n = 186) of patients being referred with multiple CMs were offered specialist treatment. NMDT decision making was associated with number of CMs, age, KPS, primary disease status, and extent of extracranial disease (univariate logistic regression, P < .001) as well as sentinel location and tumor histology (P < .05). A delay in reaching an NMDT decision was identified in 18.6% (n = 195) of cases. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a changing landscape of metastasis management in the United Kingdom and Ireland, including a trend away from adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy and specialist intervention being offered to a significant proportion of patients with multiple CMs. Poor quality or incomplete referrals cause delay in NMDT decision making
    corecore