26 research outputs found
What utility scores do mental health service users, healthcare professionals and members of the general public attribute to different health states? A co-produced mixed methods online survey
Utility scores are integral to health economics decision-making. Typically, utility scores have not been scored or developed with mental health service users. The aims of this study were to i) collaborate with service users to develop descriptions of five mental health states (psychosis, depression, eating disorder, medication side effects and self-harm); ii) explore feasibility and acceptability of using scenario-based health states in an e-survey; iii) evaluate which utility measures (standard gamble (SG), time trade off (TTO) and rating scale (RS)) are preferred; and iv) determine how different participant groups discriminate between the health scenarios and rank them
Stakeholder views on a recovery-oriented psychiatric rehabilitation art therapy program in a rural Australian mental health service: a qualitative description
Attitudes of clinical staff toward the causes and management of aggression in acute old age psychiatry inpatient units
Towards a contemporary social care âprevention narrativeâ of principled complexity: An integrative literature review
Prevention has become increasingly central in social care policy and commissioning strategies within the United Kingdom (UK). Commonly there is reliance on understandings borrowed from the sphere of public health, leaning on a prevention discourse characterised by the 'upstream and downstream' metaphor. Whilst framing both structural factors and responses to individual circumstances, the public health approach nonetheless suggests linearity in a cause and effect relationship. Social care and illness follow many trajectories and this conceptualisation of prevention may limit its effectiveness and scope in social care. Undertaken as part of a commissioned evaluation of the Social Services and Wellbeing Act (2014) Wales, a systematic integrative review was conducted to establish the key current debates within prevention work, and how prevention is conceptually framed, implemented and evaluated within the social care context. The databases Scopus, ASSIA, CINAHL and Social Care Online were initially searched in September 2019 resulting in 52 documents being incorporated for analysis. A further re-run of searches was run in March 2021, identifying a further 14 documents, thereby creating a total of 66. Predominantly, these were journal articles or research reports (n = 53), with the remainder guidance or strategy documents, briefings or process evaluations (n = 13). These were categorised by their primary theme and focus, as well as document format and research method before undergoing thematic analysis. This highlighted the continued prominence of three-tiered, linear public health narratives in the framing of prevention for social care, with prevention work often categorised and enacted with inconsistency. Common drivers for prevention activity continue to be cost reduction and reduced dependence on the care system in the future. Through exploring prevention for older people and caregivers, we argue for an approach to prevention aligning with the complexities of the social world surrounding it. Building on developments in complexity theory in social science and healthcare, we offer an alternative view of social care prevention guided by principles rooted in the everyday realities of communities, service users and caregivers
Indoor off-body channel measurements using miniaturized antennas with pattern diversity
International audienceIn this paper, off-body channel measurements are proposed using miniaturized chip antennas (dimension: 7 x 2 x 1.20 mm 3 ) under pattern diversity configuration at 2.2-2.3 GHz. The measurements were carried out in a multipath indoor laboratory environment using two sensors as transmitter and receiver deployed on-body and free-space, respectively where each sensor comprises two miniature chip antennas offering pattern diversity. The resulting radio channels have been recorded while varying the inter-sensor distance. Radio channel parameters such as link budget, power delay profile and capacity were extracted from the measured data. Results show that pattern diversity can offer improvement in perspective of link budget and channel capacity compared to single-input single-output system for off-body channels proving the suitability of miniaturized chip antennas for smart, low power body area networks
Recommended from our members
Foothills Parkway Section 8B Final Environmental Report, Volume 5, Appendices J-M
In 1994, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare an Environmental Report (ER) for Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Section 8B represents 27.7 km (14.2 miles) of a total of 115 km (72 miles) of the planned Foothills Parkway and would connect the Cosby community on the east to the incorporated town of Pittman Center to the west. The major deliverables for the project are listed. From August 1995 through October 1996, NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff interacted with Federal Highway Administration staff to develop a conceptual design plan for Section 8B with the intent of protecting critical resources identified during the ER process to the extent possible. In addition, ORNL arranged for bioengineering experts to discuss techniques that might be employed on Section 8B with NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff during September 1996. For the purposes of this ER, there are two basic alternatives under consideration: (1) a build alternative and (2) a no-build alternative. Within the build alternative are a number of options including constructing Section 8B with no interchanges, constructing Section 8B with an interchange at SR 416 or U.S. 321, constructing Section 8B with a spur road on Webb Mountain, and considering operation of Section 8B both before and after the operation of Section 8C. The no-build alternative is considered the no-action alternative and is not to construct Section 8B. This volume of the ER consists of Appendices J through M, which describe potential impacts regarding traffic, noise, and aesthetics. The results of the traffic studies described in these appendices resulted in the following conclusions: Unacceptable levels of service will occur on numerous roads within and outside of the park increasingly in the Mure based upon current and future regional growth. However, the results of the traffic assessment indicated that there would be no significant or cumulative impact from the addition of Section 8B or the, completion of the Foothills Parkway as a whole within the study area by 2026. The results of the noise studies described in these appendices resulted in the following four-step plan regarding noise impacts of construction
Recommended from our members
Foothills Parkway Section 8B Final Environmental Report, Volume 3, Appendix D
In 1994, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare an Environmental Report (ER) for Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Section 8B represents 27.7 km (14.2 miles) of a total of 115 km (72 miles) of the planned Foothills Parkway and would connect the Cosby community on the east to the incorporated town of Pittman Center to the west. The major deliverables for the project are listed. From August 1995 through October 1996, NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff interacted with Federal Highway Administration staff to develop a conceptual design plan for Section 8B with the intent of protecting critical resources identified during the ER process to the extent possible. In addition, ORNL arranged for bioengineering experts to discuss techniques that might be employed on Section 8B with NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff during September 1996. For the purposes of this ER, there are two basic alternatives under consideration: (1) a build alternative and (2) a no-build alternative. Within the build alternative are a number of options including constructing Section 8B with no interchanges, constructing Section 8B with an interchange at SR416 or U.S. 321, constructing Section 8B with a spur road on Webb Mountain, and considering operation of Section 8B both before and after the operation of Section 8C. The no-build alternative is considered the no-action alternative and is not to construct Section 8B. This volume of the ER inventories the fishes and benthic macroinvertebrates inhabiting the aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the proposed construction of Section 8B. Stream biological surveys were completed at 31 stream sites during the Fall of 1994. The sampling strategy for both invertebrates and fish was to survey the different taxa from all available habitats. For benthic invertebrates, a standardized qualitative manual collection technique was employed for all 31 stations. For fish, all streams of sufficient water were sampled using various methods of electroshocking. Two listed species were identified during the surveys: the Allegheny snaketail dragonfly (formerly a C2 federal candidate species found at six of the stream survey sites) and the tangerine darter (a Tennessee state special concern species found at two of the stream survey sites)
Recommended from our members
Foothills Parkway Section 8B Final Environmental Report, Volume 4, Appendices E-I
In 1994, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare an Environmental Report (ER) for Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Section 8B represents 27.7 km (14.2 miles) of a total of 115 km (72 miles) of the planned Foothills Parkway and would connect the Cosby community on the east to the incorporated town of Pittman Center to the west. The major deliverables for the project are listed. From August 1995 through October 1996, NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff interacted with Federal Highway Administration staff to develop a conceptual design plan for Section 8B with the intent of protecting critical, resources identified during the ER process to the extent possible. In addition, ORNL arranged for bioengineering experts to discuss techniques that might be employed on Section 8B with NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff during September 1996. For the purposes of this ER, there are two basic alternatives under consideration: (1) a build alternative and (2) a no-build alternative. Within the build alternative are a number of options including constructing Section 8B with no interchanges, constructing Section 8B with an interchange at SR 416 or U.S. 321, constructing Section 8B with a spur road on Webb Mountain, and considering operation of Section 8B both before and after the operation of Section 8C. The no-build alternative is considered the no-action alternative and is not to construct Section 8B. This volume of the ER consists of Appendices E through I (all ecological survey reports), which are summarized individually in the sections that follow. The following conclusions result from the completion of these surveys and the ER impact analysis: (1) Forest clearing should be limited as much as possible; (2) Disturbed areas should be replanted with native trees; (3) Drainages should be bridged rather than leveled with cut and fill; (4) For areas of steep slopes and potential erosion, bioengineering techniques should be implemented; (5) The Webb Mt. spur road is not recommended. If the spur road is built no grass shoulders should be used (to minimize forest fragmentation impacts); and (6) Transplanting of protected plants should be done when possible. Construction in wetland areas should be avoided and erosion and sedimentation mitigation measures discussed under water resources and aquatic ecology should be implemented
Recommended from our members
Foothills Parkway Section 8B Final Environmental Report, Volume 1
In 1994, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare an Environmental Report (ER) for Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Section 8B represents 27.7 km (14.2 miles) of a total of 115 km (72 miles) of the planned Foothills Parkway and would connect the Cosby community on the east to the incorporated town of Pittman Center to the west
Recommended from our members
Foothills Parkway Section 8B Final Environmental Report, Volume 6, Appendix N
In 1994, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) was tasked by the National Park Service (NPS) to prepare an Environmental Report (ER) for Section 8B of the Foothills Parkway in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). Section 8B represents 27.7 km (14.2 miles) of a total of 115 km (72 miles) of the planned Foothills Parkway and would connect the Cosby community on the east to the incorporated town of Pittman Center to the west. The major deliverables for the project are listed. From August 1995 through October 1996, NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff interacted with Federal Highway Administration staff to develop a conceptual design plan for Section 8B with the intent of protecting critical resources identified during the ER process to the extent possible. In addition, ORNL arranged for bioengineering experts to discuss techniques that might be employed on Section 8B with NPS, GSMNP, and ORNL staff during September 1996. For the purposes of this ER, there are two basic alternatives under consideration: (1) a build alternative and (2) a no-build alternative. Within the build alternative are a number of options including constructing Section 8B with no interchanges, constructing Section 8B with an interchange at SR 416 or U.S. 321, constructing Section 8B with a spur road on Webb Mountain, and considering operation of Section 8B both before and after the operation of Section 8C. The no-build alternative is considered the no-action alternative and is not to construct Section 8B. This volume of the ER documents the results of the architectural, historical, and cultural resources assessment for the entire Section 8B ROW that was completed in May 1995 to document the architectural, historical, and cultural resources located within the project area. The assessment included evaluation of the potential for cultural (i.e., rural historic) landscapes in the area of the ROW. The assessment showed that one National Register-listed property is located 0.3 mile south of the ROW, and seven properties appear to meet National Register criteria. For six of these seven sites, no audible or visual effects were predicted to result from the construction and operation of the build alternatives of Section 8B. Three areas were evaluated to determine if they could be considered rural historic landscapes: the Cosby Valley, Pittman Center, and Rocky Flats. None of these landscapes met National Register criteria for rural historic landscapes