Une Rose Des Vents Politique: The Southern Winds of Jean Genet’s Poetic Compass

Iconoclastic French dissident, Jean Genet, notoriously channelled his hatred of the West as a way to discover the South. This article reads Genet’s admiration for the Palestinians as more than just a foil to the imperialist hegemony of a French homeland he reviled; but as a relation of equality that debunks the oppression of North-South dialectics. Tackling Éric Marty and Ivan Jablonka’s accusations of anti-Semitism, as well as criticisms of Orientalism, I use Genet’s 1982 essay ‘Quatre heures à Chatila’ to argue that his Palestinian texts radically re-orient the political compass where the North constructs and reifies a one-dimensional South

Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To quantify the effect of strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.<p></p> Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.<p></p> Data sources Sources searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, DARE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, C2-SPECTR, ERIC, PreMEDLINE, Cochrane Methodology Register, Current Controlled Trials metaRegister, WHO trials platform, Society for Clinical Trials (SCT) conference proceedings and a survey of all UK clinical trial research units.<p></p> Review: methods Included trials were randomised evaluations of strategies to improve retention embedded within host randomised trials. The primary outcome was retention of trial participants. Data from trials were pooled using the fixed-effect model. Subgroup analyses were used to explore the heterogeneity and to determine whether there were any differences in effect by the type of strategy.<p></p> Results: 38 retention trials were identified. Six broad types of strategies were evaluated. Strategies that increased postal questionnaire responses were: adding, that is, giving a monetary incentive (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.28) and higher valued incentives (RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.22). Offering a monetary incentive, that is, an incentive given on receipt of a completed questionnaire, also increased electronic questionnaire response (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.38). The evidence for shorter questionnaires (RR 1.04; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08) and questionnaires relevant to the disease/condition (RR 1.07; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.14) is less clear. On the basis of the results of single trials, the following strategies appeared effective at increasing questionnaire response: recorded delivery of questionnaires (RR 2.08; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.87); a ‘package’ of postal communication strategies (RR 1.43; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.67) and an open trial design (RR 1.37; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.63). There is no good evidence that the following strategies impact on trial response/retention: adding a non-monetary incentive (RR=1.00; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02); offering a non-monetary incentive (RR=0.99; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03); ‘enhanced’ letters (RR=1.01; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05); monetary incentives compared with offering prize draw entry (RR=1.04; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.19); priority postal delivery (RR=1.02; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09); behavioural motivational strategies (RR=1.08; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.24); additional reminders to participants (RR=1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06) and questionnaire question order (RR=1.00, 0.97 to 1.02). Also based on single trials, these strategies do not appear effective: a telephone survey compared with a monetary incentive plus questionnaire (RR=1.08; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.24); offering a charity donation (RR=1.02, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.32); sending sites reminders (RR=0.96; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.11); sending questionnaires early (RR=1.10; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.26); longer and clearer questionnaires (RR=1.01, 0.95 to 1.07) and participant case management by trial assistants (RR=1.00; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04).<p></p> Conclusions: Most of the trials evaluated questionnaire response rather than ways to improve participants return to site for follow-up. Monetary incentives and offers of monetary incentives increase postal and electronic questionnaire response. Some strategies need further evaluation. Application of these results would depend on trial context and follow-up procedures.<p></p&gt

Post 16 English and maths skills – 20 years ago, the Moser report was going to solve the Post 16 English and maths problem: what impact has Moser had?

This thesis is looking at The Moser report – ‘A Fresh Start, Improving Literacy and Numeracy’. This report, written in 1999 was a major report commissioned by government to highlight the quality of the English and maths skills of adults in England. The report provided a range of recommendations, such as a skilled teaching workforce, a new curriculum, qualification standards and a new range of transferable qualifications, many of which were implemented. Skills for Life became a new curriculum area developed directly as a result of Moser. Twelve years later, Professor Alison Wolf published The Wolf Report – ‘A Review of Vocational Education’. The Wolf Report looked again at the English and maths skills of adults in England and made further recommendations, the main one being that all students should achieve a GCSE grade A* - C in English and maths. She stated that if they have not achieved this at school, then they would need to retake these qualifications alongside their vocational or academic programme within Post 16 education. The thesis looks at the impact of the Moser report over the last twenty years, what has happened to Post 16 English and maths as a result of Moser and where we are now with English and maths skills as we celebrate the 20thanniversary of the Moser Report. What has become apparent during this thesis is that the Moser recommendations from 1999 were accepted and implemented. Twelve years later Professor Wolf’s recommendations were also accepted and implemented. Both Moser and Wolf were intended to dramatically change the English and maths skills of adults in England. 2015 onwards however, is a very different story, where very little has continued to be carried out in the way of moving Moser forward and ultimately, twenty years later, although we now have standardised qualifications, curriculums and qualified teachers, we still have millions of people in England with poor English and maths skills

Strategies to Improve Retention: Effectiveness and Use in Randomised Trials

Background Loss to follow-up from randomised trials (RCTs) can affect the reliability of results. Objectives To quantify the effect of strategies to improve retention in RCTs, explore their use, and develop best practice guidance. Methods Systematic review: including retention RCTs nested in RCTs. Qualitative study: in-depth interviews with RCT personnel. Consensus development: workshops with RCT personnel. Results Systematic review: 38 RCTs evaluated RCT retention strategies. Most aimed to improve questionnaire response. Questionnaire response was improved by: adding monetary incentives (RR 1.18;1.09-1.28), higher value monetary incentives (RR 1.12;1.04-1.22) and offering monetary incentives (RR 1.25;1.14-1.38). There is some evidence that recorded delivery (RR 2.08;1.11-3.87), a specialised postal strategy (RR 1.43;1.22-1.67) and an open RCT design (RR 1.37;1.16-1.63) also improve questionnaire response. There is no clear evidence that, when compared to usual follow-up procedures, questionnaire response / retention is improved by: sending questionnaires early, more disease-relevant questionnaires, shorter, or long and clear questionnaires, offering charity donations, giving or offering gifts, "enhanced" letters, priority post, additional reminders, questionnaire order, reminders to sites, behavioural or case management strategies. There was no clear effect for monetary incentives when compared to offering entry into a prize draw, or telephone surveys when compared to a monetary incentive with a questionnaire. Qualitative study: Communication and incentive strategies are routinely used to improve retention / response. There was uncertainty about their effectiveness. Non-monetary incentives, although used, were not thought to be effective. Efforts are made to improve questionnaire layout. Other strategies are seldom used. Factors thought to impact upon retention were identified. Consensus development: Best practice guidance was agreed for monetary incentives and postage. Conclusion Giving and offering small monetary incentives can be used to improve questionnaire response in RCTs. Second class postage can also be used. Application of the results would depend on RCT context and follow-up procedures

Identifying additional studies for a systematic review of retention strategies in randomised controlled trials: making contact with trials units and trial methodologists

BACKGROUND: Search strategies for systematic reviews aim to identify all evidence relevant to the research question posed. Reports of methodological research can be difficult to find leading to biased results in systematic reviews of research methodology. Evidence suggests that contact with investigators can help to identify unpublished research. To identify additional eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for a Cochrane systematic review of strategies to improve retention in RCTs, we conducted a survey of UK clinical trials units (CTUs) and made contact with RCT methodologists. METHODS: Key contacts for all UK CTUs were sent a personalised email with a short questionnaire and summary protocol of the Cochrane methodology review. The questionnaire asked whether a RCT evaluating strategies to improve retention embedded in a RCT had ever been conducted by the CTU. Questions about the stage of completion and publication of such RCTs were included. The summary protocol outlined the aims, eligibility criteria, examples of types of retention strategies, and the primary outcome for the systematic review. Personal communication with RCT methodologists and presentations of preliminary results of the review at conferences were also used to identify additional eligible RCTs. We checked the results of our standard searches to see if eligible studies identified through these additional methods were also found using our standard searches. RESULTS: We identified 14 of the 38 RCTs included in the Cochrane methodology review by contacting trials units and methodologists. Eleven of the 14 RCTs identified by these methods were either published in grey literature, in press or unpublished. Three remaining RCTs were fully published at the time. Six of the RCTs identified were not found through any other searches. The RCTs identified represented data for 6 of 14 RCTs of incentive strategies (52% of randomised participants included in the review), and 6 of 14 RCTs of communication strategies (52% of randomised participants included in the Cochrane review). Data were unavailable for two of the RCTs identified. CONCLUSIONS: Methodological evaluations embedded in RCTs may be unpublished, published in the grey literature or where published, poorly indexed in bibliographic databases. To identify such studies and minimise selection bias in systematic reviews of methodological evaluations, reviewers should consider contacting CTUs and trial methodologists

Best practice guidance for the use of strategies improved retention in randomised trials developed from two consensus workshops

OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice guidance for the use of retention strategies in randomised clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Consensus development workshops. SETTING: Two UK Clinical Trials Units. PARTICIPANTS: 66 statisticians, clinicians, RCT coordinators, research scientists, research assistants, and data managers associated with RCTs. METHODS: The consensus development workshops were based on the consensus development conference method used to develop best practice for treatment of medical conditions. Workshops commenced with a presentation of the evidence for: incentives, communication, questionnaire format, behavioural, case management and methodological retention strategies identified by a Cochrane review and associated qualitative study. Three simultaneous group discussions followed, focused on: a) how convinced the workshop participants were by the evidence for retention strategies, b) barriers to the use of effective retention strategies, c) types of RCT follow-up that retention strategies could be used for, and d) strategies for future research. Summaries of each group discussion were fed back to the workshop. Coded content for both workshops were compared for agreement and disagreement. Agreed consensus on best practice guidance for retention was identified. RESULTS: Workshop participants agreed best practice guidance for the use of small financial incentives to improve response to postal questionnaires in RCTs. Use of 2nd class post was thought to be adequate for postal communication with RCT participants. The most relevant validated questionnaire was considered best practice for collecting RCT data. Barriers identified for the use of effective retention strategies were: the small improvements seen in questionnaire response for the addition of monetary incentives, and perceptions among trialists that some communication strategies are outdated. Furthermore, there was resistance to change existing retention practices thought to be effective. Face to face and electronic follow-up technologies were identified as retention strategies for further research. CONCLUSIONS: We developed best practice guidance for the use of retention strategies in RCTs and identified potential barriers to the use of effective strategies. The extent of agreement on best practice is limited by the variability in the currently available evidence. This guidance will need updating as new retention strategies are developed and evaluated

Use of strategies to improve retention in primary care randomised trials: a qualitative study with in-depth interviews

Objective To explore the strategies used to improve retention in primary care randomised trials.<p></p> Design Qualitative in-depth interviews and thematic analysis.<p></p> Participants 29 UK primary care chief and principal investigators, trial managers and research nurses.<p></p> Methods In-depth face-to-face interviews.<p></p> Results Primary care researchers use incentive and communication strategies to improve retention in trials, but were unsure of their effect. Small monetary incentives were used to increase response to postal questionnaires. Non-monetary incentives were used although there was scepticism about the impact of these on retention. Nurses routinely used telephone communication to encourage participants to return for trial follow-up. Trial managers used first class post, shorter questionnaires and improved questionnaire designs with the aim of improving questionnaire response. Interviewees thought an open trial design could lead to biased results and were negative about using behavioural strategies to improve retention. There was consensus among the interviewees that effective communication and rapport with participants, participant altruism, respect for participant's time, flexibility of trial personnel and appointment schedules and trial information improve retention. Interviewees noted particular challenges with retention in mental health trials and those involving teenagers.<p></p> Conclusions The findings of this qualitative study have allowed us to reflect on research practice around retention and highlight a gap between such practice and current evidence. Interviewees describe acting from experience without evidence from the literature, which supports the use of small monetary incentives to improve the questionnaire response. No such evidence exists for non-monetary incentives or first class post, use of which may need reconsideration. An exploration of barriers and facilitators to retention in other research contexts may be justified.<p></p&gt

Post 16 English and maths skills – 20 years ago, the Moser report was going to solve the Post 16 English and maths problem: what impact has Moser had?

This thesis is looking at The Moser report – ‘A Fresh Start, Improving Literacy and Numeracy’. This report, written in 1999 was a major report commissioned by government to highlight the quality of the English and maths skills of adults in England. The report provided a range of recommendations, such as a skilled teaching workforce, a new curriculum, qualification standards and a new range of transferable qualifications, many of which were implemented. Skills for Life became a new curriculum area developed directly as a result of Moser. Twelve years later, Professor Alison Wolf published The Wolf Report – ‘A Review of Vocational Education’. The Wolf Report looked again at the English and maths skills of adults in England and made further recommendations, the main one being that all students should achieve a GCSE grade A* - C in English and maths. She stated that if they have not achieved this at school, then they would need to retake these qualifications alongside their vocational or academic programme within Post 16 education. The thesis looks at the impact of the Moser report over the last twenty years, what has happened to Post 16 English and maths as a result of Moser and where we are now with English and maths skills as we celebrate the 20thanniversary of the Moser Report. What has become apparent during this thesis is that the Moser recommendations from 1999 were accepted and implemented. Twelve years later Professor Wolf’s recommendations were also accepted and implemented. Both Moser and Wolf were intended to dramatically change the English and maths skills of adults in England. 2015 onwards however, is a very different story, where very little has continued to be carried out in the way of moving Moser forward and ultimately, twenty years later, although we now have standardised qualifications, curriculums and qualified teachers, we still have millions of people in England with poor English and maths skills

Measuring the impact of methodological research

Providing evidence of impact highlights the benefits of medical research to society. Such evidence is increasingly requested by research funders and commonly relies on citation analysis. However, other indicators may be more informative. Although frameworks to demonstrate the impact of clinical research have been reported, no complementary framework exists for methodological research. Therefore, we assessed the impact of methodological research projects conducted or completed between 2009 and 2012 at the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research Hub, with a view to developing an appropriate framework

Advantages and disadvantages of reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing

© 2020 The Author(s). All rights reserved. Originally published in Social Research Practice Volume 10: Winter 2021: https://the-sra.org.uk/common/Uploaded%20files/Social%20Research%20Practice%20Journal/social-research-practice-journal-issue-10-winter-2021.pdfThe advantages and disadvantages of reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing as a data collection approachare presented in this paper. Reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing is a research technique whereparticipants interview each other rather than a member of a research team. Reciprocal peer-to-peerinterviewing was undertaken in a small qualitative study between healthcare practitioners to reflect onwhether, and how, their breastfeeding experiences had influenced their professional practice. Four pairsof healthcare practitioners were recruited from an online Parenting Science Gang group. They interviewedeach other via online teleconferencing which also recorded the interviews. The interviews were analysedby volunteers from the same sub-group. Benefits of the technique included: ease of building rapportand finding common ground; open discussion of difficult topics; and freeing up research organiser time.Disadvantages were: difficulties clarifying unclear interview content; an inability to redirect the interview ifit goes off-topic; and unawareness of technology failure. Social researchers are advised to weigh up thebenefits of the technique against the risks, and possibly adapt the method.Peer reviewe