Recent Saccadic Eye Movement Research Uncovers Patterns of Cognitive Dysfunction in Schizophrenia.

The frontal cortex and the subcortical areas of the brain play a major role in the control of thought and action. Eye movements are increasingly used in neuropsychological research to explore the executive and sensorimotor functions of such neural networks. This interface links the control of action, at the fundamental levels of neurophysiological and neurochemical processes, with the high-level cognitive operations that underlie visual orienting. Patients with schizophrenia have neurocognitive impairments that can be readily investigated with novel saccadic eye movement paradigms. Animal, human lesion, and neuroimaging studies have identified the cerebral centers that underlie saccadic eye movements. The areas of the prefrontal cortex include the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the frontal eye fields, the supplementary eye fields, and the anterior cingulate gyrus. Pathology of saccadic eye movements therefore provides information on the functional status of the underlying neural circuitry in brain disorders such as schizophrenia

Towards the reflective science communication practitioner

The practice of science communication is fundamentally changing. This requires science communication practitioners to continuously adapt their practice to an ever-changing ecosystem and highlights the importance of reflective practice for science communication. In this study, we supported 21 science communication practitioners in developing a reflective practice. Our study shows that reflective practice enabled practitioners in becoming aware of their own stance towards science or assumptions regarding audiences (single-loop learning), underlying and sometimes conflicting values or worldviews present in science communication situations (double-loop learning), and facilitated practitioners to adapt their practice accordingly. Triple-loop learning, allowing practitioners to fundamentally rethink and transform their mode of science communication, was less observed. We argue that reflective practice contributes to opening-up public conversations on science — including a conversation on underlying values, worldviews, and emotions, next to communicating scientific facts

Creating room for citizen perspectives in ‘smart city’ Amsterdam through interactive theatre

The ‘smart city’ vision is popular, but it lacks citizen perspectives. The aim of this study was to gain insight into whether and how art-based citizen engagement can create more room for citizen perspectives in smart cities by developing and testing an art-based citizen engagement project in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. To that end, a combination of interactive theatre, interaction design and social research methods was used to bring together diverse publics and innovation professionals for joint exploration of increased dataveillance in cities. The events were studied through observations, and through interviews with participants and organisers. Data analysis was guided by the outcomes, processes and challenges of the responsible innovation dimensions: inclusion, reflexivity, anticipation and responsiveness (Stilgoe et al., 2013). The most important achievements of art-based citizen engagement were: engaging people who would not have engaged with the topic otherwise, encouraging participants to question common phrases and assumptions, exploring future social implications of technologies, and staging meaningful interactions between citizens and professionals. The most significant challenge was to involve citizens in a way that could influence innovation trajectories

Juggling roles, experiencing dilemmas: the challenges of SSH scholars in public engagement

The progressive introduction of emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology, has created a true testing ground for public engagement initiatives. Widespread experimentation has taken place with public and stakeholder dialogue and inclusive approaches to research and innovation (R&I) more generally. Against this backdrop, Social Science and Humanities (SSH) scholars have started to manifest themselves differently. They have taken on new roles in the public engagement field, including more practical and policy-oriented ones that seek to actively open the R&I system to wider public scrutiny. With public engagement gaining prominence, there has been a call for increased reflexivity among SSH scholars about their role in this field. In this paper, we study our own roles and stakes as SSH scholars in a European-funded public engagement project on responsible nanotechnology. We introduce a general role landscape and outline five distinct roles (engaged academic, deliberative practitioner, change agent, dialogue capacity builder, and project worker) that we-as SSH scholars-inhabited throughout the project. We discuss the synergistic potential of combining these five roles and elaborate on several tensions within the roles that we needed to navigate. We argue that balancing many roles requires explicit role awareness, reflexivity, and new competencies that have not been examined much in the public engagement literature so far. Our role landscape and exemplification of how it can be used to reflexively study one's own practices may be a useful starting point for scholars who are seeking to better understand, assess, or communicate about their position in the public engagement field.Science Communication and Societ

PLoS One

Introduction Patient-centered care (PCC) is an approach to involve patients in health care delivery, to contribute to quality of care, and to strengthen health systems responsiveness. This article aims to highlight patient perspectives by showcasing their perceptions of their experience of PCC at primary health facilities in two districts in Uganda. Methods A mixed methods cross-sectional study was conducted in three public and two private primary health care facilities in rural eastern Uganda. In total, 300 patient exit survey questionnaires, 31 semi-structured Interviews (SSIs), 5 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and 5 feedback meetings were conducted. Data analysis was guided by a conceptual framework focusing on (1) understanding patients’ health needs, preferences and expectations, (2) describing patients perceptions of their care experience according to five distinct PCC dimensions, and (3) reporting patient reported outcomes and their recommendations on how to improve quality of care. Results Patient expectations were shaped by their access to the facility, costs incurred and perceived quality of care. Patients using public facilities reported doing so because of their proximity (78.3% in public PHCs versus 23.3% in private PHCs) and because of the free services availed. On the other hand, patients attending private facilities did so because of their perception of better quality of care (84.2% in private PHCs versus 21.7% in public PHCs). Patients expectations of quality care were expressed as the availability of medication, shorter waiting times, flexible facility opening hours and courteous health workers. Analysis of the 300 responses from patients interviewed on their perception of the care they received, pointed to higher normalized scores for two out of the five PCC dimensions considered: namely, exploration of the patient’s health and illness experience, and the quality of the relationship between patient and health worker (range 62.1–78.4 out of 100). The qualitative analysis indicated that patients felt that communication with health workers was enhanced where there was trust and in case of positive past experiences. Patients however felt uncomfortable discussing psychological or family matters with health workers and found it difficult to make decisions when they did not fully understand the care provided. In terms of outcomes, our findings suggest that patient enablement was more sensitive than patient satisfaction in measuring the effect of interpersonal patient experience on patient reported outcomes. Discussion and conclusion Our findings show that Ugandan patients have some understanding of PCC related concepts and express a demand for it. The results offer a starting point for small scale PCC interventions. However, we need to be cognizant of the challenges PCC implementation faces in resource constrained settings. Patients’ expectations in terms of quality health care are still largely driven by biomedical and technical aspects. In addition, patients are largely unaware of their right to participate in the evaluation of health care. To mitigate these challenges, targeted health education focusing on patients’ responsibilities and patient’s rights are essential. Last but not least, all stakeholders must be involved in developing and validating methods to measure PCC