Ensuring consistent reporting of clinical pharmacy services to enhance reproducibility in practice: an improved version of DEPICT

Rationale, aims and objectivesDEPICT (Descriptive Elements of Pharmacist Intervention Characterization Tool) was created in response to the frequently reported issue of poor intervention description across studies assessing the impact of clinical pharmacy activities. The aim of this study was to create an improved version of DEPICT (i.e. DEPICT 2) to better characterize clinical pharmacy services in order to ensure consistent reporting, therefore enhancing reproducibility of interventions in practice.MethodA qualitative approach through a thematic content analysis was performed to identify components of pharmacist interventions described in 269 randomized controlled trials. A preliminary version of DEPICT 2 was applied independently by two authors to a random sample of 85 of the 269 RCTs and reliability determined by the prevalence‐adjusted bias‐adjusted kappa (PABAK) or the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The final version of DEPICT 2 was compared against DEPICT 1.ResultsThe final version of DEPICT 2 comprised 146 items and 11 domains. The inter‐rater agreement analysis showed that DEPICT presented good to optimal reproducibility, with a mean PABAK value of 0.87 (95% CI 0.85–0.89) and a mean ICC value of 0.88 (95% CI 0.62–1.14). The mean difference between items checked in the two versions (DEPICT 2 – DEPICT 1) was 10.58 (95% CI 9.55–11.61), meaning that approximately 11 more components were identified in the new version of DEPICT.ConclusionsDEPICT 2 is a reliable tool to characterize components of clinical pharmacy services, which should be used to ensure consistent reporting of interventions to allow their reproducibility in practice.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/112225/1/jep12339.pd

Engaging with community researchers for exposure science: lessons learned from a pesticide biomonitoring study

A major challenge in biomonitoring studies with members of the general public is ensuring their continued involvement throughout the necessary length of the research. The paper presents evidence on the use of community researchers, recruited from local study areas, as a mechanism for ensuring effective recruitment and retention of farmer and resident participants for a pesticides biomonitoring study. The evidence presented suggests that community researchers' abilities to build and sustain trusting relationships with participants enhanced the rigour of the study as a result of their on-the-ground responsiveness and flexibility resulting in data collection beyond targets expected

SPECIAL ARTICLES Benchmarking in Academic Pharmacy Departments

Benchmarking in academic pharmacy, and recommendations for the potential uses of benchmarking in academic pharmacy departments are discussed in this paper. Benchmarking is the process by which practices, procedures, and performance metrics are compared to an established standard or best practice. Many businesses and industries use benchmarking to compare processes and outcomes, and ultimately plan for improvement. Institutions of higher learning have embraced benchmarking practices to facilitate measuring the quality of their educational and research programs. Benchmarking is used internally as well to justify the allocation of institutional resources or to mediate among competing demands for additional program staff or space. Surveying all chairs of academic pharmacy departments to explore benchmarking issues such as department size and composition, as well as faculty teaching, scholarly, and service productivity, could provide valuable information. To date, attempts to gather this data have had limited success. We believe this information is potentially important, urge that efforts to gather it should be continued, and offer suggestions to achieve full participation

Acceptance of Recommendations by Inpatient Pharmacy Case Managers: Unintended Consequences of Hospitalist and Specialist Care

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96369/1/phar1164.pd

Mary's Powers of Imagination

One common response to the knowledge argument is the ability hypothesis. Proponents of the ability hypothesis accept that Mary learns what seeing red is like when she exits her black-and-white room, but they deny that the kind of knowledge she gains is propositional in nature. Rather, she acquires a cluster of abilities that she previously lacked, in particular, the abilities to recognize, remember, and imagine the color red. For proponents of the ability hypothesis, knowing what an experience is like simply consists in the possession of these abilities. Criticisms of the ability hypothesis tend to focus on this last claim. Such critics tend to accept that Mary gains these abilities when she leaves the room, but they deny that such abilities constitute knowledge of what an experience is like. To my mind, however, this critical strategy grants too much. Focusing specifically on imaginative ability, I argue that Mary does not gain this ability when she leaves the room for she already had the ability to imagine red while she was inside it. Moreover, despite what some have thought, the ability hypothesis cannot be easily rescued by recasting it in terms of a more restrictive imaginative ability. My purpose here is not to take sides in the debate about physicalism, i.e., my criticism of the ability hypothesis is not offered in an attempt to defend the anti-physicalist conclusion of the knowledge argument. Rather, my purpose is to redeem the imagination from the misleading picture of it that discussion of the knowledge argument has fostered

Grounding, Analysis, and Russellian Monism

Few these days dispute that the knowledge argument demonstrates an epistemic gap between the physical facts and the facts about experience. It is much more contentious whether that epistemic gap can be used to demonstrate a metaphysical gap of a kind that is inconsistent with physicalism. In this paper I will explore two attempts to block the inference from an epistemic gap to a metaphysical gap – the first from the phenomenal concept strategy, the second from Russellian monism – and suggest how the proponent of the knowledge argument might respond to each of these challenges. In doing so, I will draw on recent discussions of grounding and essence in the metaphysics literature

The DARS (Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke) trial: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of Co-careldopa treatment in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy after stroke

Background: Stroke has a huge impact, leaving more than a third of affected people with lasting disability and rehabilitation remains a cornerstone treatment in the National Health Service (NHS). Recovery of mobility and arm function post-stroke occurs through re-learning to use the affected body parts and/or learning to compensate with the lesser affected side. Promising evidence suggests that the addition of Co-careldopa to physical therapy and occupational therapy may improve the recovery of arm and leg movement and lead to improved function. Methods/design: Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke (DARS) is a multi-centre double-blind, randomised, placebo, controlled clinical trial of Co-careldopa in addition to routine NHS occupational therapy and physical therapy as part of early stroke rehabilitation. Participants will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to either Co-careldopa or placebo. The primary objective of the trial is to determine whether the addition of six weeks of Co-careldopa treatment to rehabilitation therapy can improve the proportion of patients who can walk independently eight weeks post-randomisation. Discussion: The DARS trial will provide evidence as to whether Co-careldopa, in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy, leads to a greater recovery of motor function, a reduction in carer dependency and advance rehabilitation treatments for people with stroke. Trial registration: ISRCTN99643613 assigned on 4 December 2009

Asymmetry in Species Regional Dispersal Ability and the Neutral Theory

The neutral assumption that individuals of either the same or different species share exactly the same birth, death, migration, and speciation probabilities is fundamental yet controversial to the neutral theory. Several theoretical studies have demonstrated that a slight difference in species per capita birth or death rates can have a profound consequence on species coexistence and community structure. Whether asymmetry in migration, a vital demographic parameter in the neutral model, plays an important role in community assembly still remains unknown. In this paper, we relaxed the ecological equivalence assumption of the neutral model by introducing differences into species regional dispersal ability. We investigated the effect of asymmetric dispersal on the neutral local community structure. We found that per capita asymmetric dispersal among species could reduce species richness of the local community and result in deviations of species abundance distributions from those predicted by the neutral model. But the effect was moderate compared with that of asymmetries in birth or death rates, unless very large asymmetries in dispersal were assumed. A large difference in species dispersal ability, if there is, can overwhelm the role of random drift and make local community dynamics deterministic. In this case, species with higher regional dispersal abilities tended to dominate in the local community. However, the species abundance distribution of the local community under asymmetric dispersal could be well fitted by the neutral model, but the neutral model generally underestimated the fundamental biodiversity number but overestimated the migration rate in such communities