Recognising and understanding collective resilience in crowds of survivors

No description supplie

‘All together now’: Facilitators and barriers to engagement in mutual aid during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown

Despite undeniable hardship, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic also saw an outpour of community solidarity and mutual aid towards those in need. This study explored why people participated in mutual aid during the pandemic as well as the factors that contributed to continued involvement and/or its decline. We conducted remote interviews with 17 people in South-east England who had been involved in volunteering and local community mutual aid support groups during the first UK lockdown from March to May 2020. Using thematic analysis, we identified two themes: 1) The emergence of social groups and their psychosocial effects, and 2) Enduring connections and barriers to continued participation. Participants often reported an emergent shared identity, preferring the localised nature of these groups and the associated mutual nature of support. They also reported intentions to continue providing such support, should the need arise again, and any barriers to continued involvement in mutual aid were better explained by structural and systemic issues, rather than individual motivational factors

The role of meat in the European diet: current state of knowledge on dietary recommendations, intakes and contribution to energy and nutrient intakes and status

The role of meat in the diet has come under scrutiny recently due to an increased public emphasis on providing healthy diets from sustainable food systems and due to health concerns relating to the consumption of red and processed meat. The present review aimed to summarise dietary guidelines relating to meat, actual meat intakes and the contribution of meat to energy and nutrient intakes of children, teenagers and adults in Europe. The available literature has shown that food-based dietary guidelines for most countries recommend consuming lean meat in moderation and many recommend limiting red and processed meat consumption. Mean intakes of total meat in Europe range from 40 to 160 g/d in children and teenagers and from 75 to 233 g/d in adults. Meat contributes to important nutrients such as protein, PUFA, B vitamins, vitamin D and essential minerals such as Fe and Zn; however, processed meat contributes to significant proportions of saturated fat and Na across population groups. While few data are available on diaggregated intakes of red and processed meat, where data are available, mean intakes in adults are higher than the upper limits recommended by the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (70 g/d) and the World Cancer Research Fund (500 g/week). While there are no recommendations for red and processed meat consumption in children and teenagers, intakes currently range from 30 to 76 g/d. The present review provides a comprehensive overview of the role of meat in the European diet which may be of use to stakeholders including researchers, policy makers and the agri-food sector

Tracking the nature and trajectory of social support in Facebook mutual aid groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, thousands of mutual aid groups were established on social media and operated as platforms through which people could offer or request social support. Considering the importance of Facebook mutual aid groups during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom but also the lack of empirical research regarding the trajectories and types of social support rendered available through the groups, our aims in this paper are threefold; first, to examine the trajectory of social support-related activity during the period between March-December 2020; second, to compare offers and requests of support during the peaks of the first and second waves; third to provide a rich analysis of the types of social support that were offered or requested through the online mutual aid groups. Quantitative findings suggest that online social support activity declined soon after the peak of the first pandemic wave and, at least in Facebook mutual aid groups, did not reach the levels observed during the first wave. Also, the number of offers of support during the first wave was higher compared to offers during the second wave, and similar was the case for requests for support. Additionally, offers for support were higher compared to requests for support during both the first and second waves. Finally, qualitative analysis showed that people used the Facebook mutual aid groups to offer and request various types of practical, emotional, and informational support. Limitations as well as implications of our study are considered. [Abstract copyright: © 2022 The Authors.

A directly comparative two-gate case–control diagnostic accuracy study of the pure tone screen and HearCheck screener tests for identifying hearing impairment in school children

Objectives: This study directly compared the accuracy of two audiometry-based tests for screening school children for hearing impairment: the currently used test, pure tone screen and a device newly applied to children, HearCheck Screener. Design: Two-gate case–control diagnostic test accuracy study. Setting and participants: Hearing impaired children (‘intended cases’) aged 4–6 years were recruited between February 2013 and August 2014 from collaborating audiology services. Children with no previously identified impairment (‘intended controls’) were recruited from Foundation and Year 1 of schools between February 2013 and June 2014 in central England. The reference standard was pure tone audiometry. Tests were administered at Nottingham Hearing Biomedical Research Unit or, for some intended cases only, in the participant’s home. Main outcome measures: Sensitivity and specificity of the pure tone screen and HearCheck tests based on pure tone audiometry result as reference standard. Results: 315 children (630 ears) were recruited; 75 from audiology services and 240 from schools. Full test and reference standard data were obtained for 600 ears; 155 ears were classified as truly impaired and 445 as truly hearing based on the pure tone audiometry assessment. Sensitivity was estimated to be 94.2% (95% CI 89.0% to 97.0%) for pure tone screen and 89.0% (95% CI 82.9% to 93.1%) for HearCheck (difference=5.2% favouring pure tone screen; 95% CI 0.2% to 10.1%; p=0.02). Estimates for specificity were 82.2% (95% CI 77.7% to 86.0%) for pure tone screen and 86.5% (95% CI 82.5% to 89.8%) for HearCheck (difference=4.3% favouring HearCheck; 95% CI0.4% to 8.2%; p=0.02). Conclusion: Pure tone screen was better than HearCheck with respect to sensitivity but inferior with respect to specificity. As avoiding missed cases is arguably of greater importance for school entry screening, pure tone screen is probably preferable in this context

PAin SoluTions In the Emergency Setting (PASTIES)—patientcontrolled analgesia versus routine care in emergency department patients with pain from traumatic injuries: Randomised trial

Objective To determine whether patient controlled analgesia (PCA) is better than routine care in patients presenting to emergency departments with moderate to severe pain from traumatic injuries.Design Pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial.Setting Five English hospitals.Participants 200 adults (71% (n=142) male), aged 18 to 75 years, who presented to the emergency department requiring intravenous opioid analgesia for the treatment of moderate to severe pain from traumatic injuries and were expected to be admitted to hospital for at least 12 hours.Interventions PCA (n=99) or nurse titrated analgesia (treatment as usual; n=101).Main outcome measures The primary outcome was total pain experienced over the 12 hour study period, derived by standardised area under the curve (scaled from 0 to 100) of each participant’s hourly pain scores, captured using a visual analogue scale. Pre-specified secondary outcomes included total morphine use, percentage of study period in moderate/severe pain, percentage of study period asleep, length of hospital stay, and satisfaction with pain management.Results 200 participants were included in the primary analyses. Mean total pain experienced was 47.2 (SD 21.9) for the treatment as usual group and 44.0 (24.0) for the PCA group. Adjusted analyses indicated slightly (but not statistically significantly) lower total pain experienced in the PCA group than in the routine care group (mean difference 2.7, 95% confidence interval −2.4 to 7.8). Participants allocated to PCA used more morphine in total than did participants in the treatment as usual group (mean 44.3 (23.2) v 27.2 (18.2) mg; mean difference 17.0, 11.3 to 22.7). PCA participants spent, on average, less time in moderate/severe pain (36.2% (31.0) v 44.1% (31.6)), but the difference was not statistically significant. A higher proportion of PCA participants reported being perfectly or very satisfied compared with the treatment as usual group (86% (78/91) v 76% (74/98)), but this was also not statistically significant.Conclusions PCA provided no statistically significant reduction in pain compared with routine care for emergency department patients with traumatic injuries.Trial registration European Clinical Trials Database EudraCT2011-000194-31; Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25343280

Can group-based strategies increase community resilience? Longitudinal predictors of sustained participation in Covid-19 mutual aid and community support groups

Mutual aid groups have been a critical part of the coronavirus disease-2019 (Covid-19) response and continue to address the needs of people in their communities. To understand how mutual aid and similar community support groups can be sustained over time, we test the idea that using group-based strategies initiates psychological trajectories that shape future participation. We conducted a preregistered longitudinal survey among Covid-19 mutual aid and community support volunteers in the United Kingdom (nWave 1 = 600, May 2021; nWave 2 = 299, July–August 2021) who were registered panelists of an independent research organization. Assessments included measures of group-based strategies, collective participation predictors, participation experience, and sustained participation. Volunteers engaged in a wide range of support activities including shopping, emotional support provision, and deliveries. Two group-based strategies—group alliances and group horizontality—longitudinally predicted sustained participation. In addition, sense of community responsibility and burnout were longitudinal predictors of sustained participation. Importantly, predictors of sustained participation diverged for volunteers with different levels of volunteering experience. Our findings highlight group-based strategies as a potential resource for organizers seeking to sustain participation. Use can be tailored depending on the profiles of individual Covid-19 mutual aid volunteers. These findings have significance beyond Covid-19 as they are relevant to sustaining community resilience more generally

More than a COVID-19 response: sustaining mutual aid groups during and beyond the pandemic

Mutual aid groups have been an indispensable part of the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. They have provided many forms of support, in particular grocery shopping which has enabled people to self-isolate if required. While community solidarity during emergencies and disasters is common, previous studies have shown that such solidarity behaviours tend to decline over time, even when needs remain high. In this study, we address how mutual aid groups can be sustained over time in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted 32 interviews with organisers of COVID-19 mutual aid and community support groups in the UK between September 2020 and January 2021. Based on a reflexive thematic analysis, we identified several community and group level experiences and strategies that were related to sustained participation in COVID-19 mutual aid groups. Meeting community needs over time with localised action and resources and building trust and community-based alliances were foundational elements in the COVID-19 mutual aid groups. Group processes strategies, such as a culture of care and support and regular group meetings, were used to help to sustain involvement. Some experiences resulting from participation in COVID-19 mutual aid groups were also related to sustained participation, including positive emotions (e.g., joy, pride), well-being and sense of efficacy, and an increasing sense of local community belonging and cohesion. Based on these findings, we propose four practical recommendations for sustaining mutual aid groups to assist public engagement with protective behaviours in the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. We recommend providing practical and financial support to COVID-19 mutual aid groups; to mobilise the knowledge and the experiences acquired by COVID-19 mutual aid groups for developing programmes and interventions for addressing the medium and long-term impacts of COVID-19; to prioritise community-level interventions; and to recognise the role of group processes as these have the potential to lead to long-term community responses. These approaches will be key for ensuring that communities effectively recover from the COVID-19 pandemic

Using VR in Learning and Teaching

This paper investigates the use of a Virtual Reality (VR) simulation (The Underground Station Evacuation Simulator- USES) that was initially developed to explore mass emergency behaviour experimentally (see Drury & Cocking, 2007). However, since January 2009, I have been using the USES to teach Research Methods to 1st year Undergraduate Psychology Students, and realised that it can also be useful in teaching students about theories relating to the psychology of crowd behaviour. Therefore, I investigated the effectiveness of the USES as a teaching tool to explore its potential educational benefits

Fostering deep learning through workshops : a re-design of a first-year psychology module

This paper discusses the redesign of a module on 'Personality and Social Psychology' (PY1003) that is compulsory for first-year Psychology undergraduates at London Metropolitan University