Collaborating to Liberate

Presentation about a collaborative initiative at UAL London College of Communication between academics, librarians and students to liberate the curriculum

Decolonising the Arts Curriculum: Perspectives on Higher Education

LCC library staged the Decolonising the Arts Curriculum exhibition, in collaboration with the creators of Decolonising the Arts Curriculum: Perspectives on Higher Education zine. The exhibition launched a series of events across UAL libraries in 2018-19. The exhibition was co-curated by UAL Associate Lecturer Rahul Patel, LCC special collection librarians Ruth Collingwood and Monica-Carmela Sajeva, and LCC Academic staff. Content from the zine was displayed alongside items from LCC library special collections. Items were chosen in order to explore the ways in which representation of certain dominant voices is higher in our collections and the ways in which this can be challenged through critical librarianship. The library’s Printing Historical Collection charts the history and art of the Western book 15th to 21st centuries, and so is historical and can be problematic in that representation of certain voices is higher in printing history and mainstream published works; namely, the voice of the white, middle-class, European male. Collingwood and Sajeva created Practice: Special Collections and Decolonisation, a document which explores the ways in which we can challenge this through collection development, provocations and other practice. The library window hosted a series of displays curated by academic staff Karl Foster, Maureen Salmon and Mo-Ling Chui in which they explored their own identity through personal and library collections. The exhibition was supported by a series of Thursday evening events which included the Opening night, where talks by contributors to the zine and a tour of the exhibition by Collingwood and Sajeva took place, as well as two panel events: Decolonising the Locale and Decolonising the Disciplines. The library ran a Zine as Decoloniser’ Critical Production Event aimed at providing Gurnham Singh’s ‘creative space to facilitate the production of culture informed by indigenous thinking and doing’*. It proved to be thought-provoking and empowering to many who attended though actual physical production proved to be elusive within the workshop’s 2 hour frame. Library staff created a Spotify playlist to accompany the exhibition, which visitors contributed to in person or via social media. More information about the zine, exhibition and events can be found on the Decolonising the Arts Curriculum blog. Ruth Collingwood (Academic Support Librarian) and Monica-carmela Sajeva (Assistant Academic Support Librarian) *Singh, G. (2018) ‘What is decolonisation really about?’ in Decolonising the Arts Curriculum: Perspectives on Higher Education, pp. 1

Parents’/caregivers’ fears and concerns about their child’s epilepsy: A scoping review

Background: Childhood epilepsy is a serious and common neurological condition and can have life-long consequences and its impact can pervade all aspects of family life. Whilst the medical management of seizures is important, much of the day-to-day home management of epilepsy is invisible to people external to the family, including health care professionals, and parents’/caregivers’ fears and concerns can go unacknowledged and unaddressed by health care professionals. Objective: This objective of this review was to examine parents’/caregivers’ fears and concerns regarding their child’s epilepsy, the impact of these fears and concerns on family life, the social and emotional well-being of parents/caregivers and any factors which mitigate these fears and concerns. Design: Scoping review using a modified version of Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. Data sources: Relevant studies were identified using key search terms in Scopus, Medline, CINAHL and PsychInfo databases in March 2021 with hand checking of reference lists. Search terms were developed using population (parents/caregivers of children aged ≤ 18 years with epilepsy, families); concept (parents’/caregivers’ fears, concerns, anxiety about their child’s epilepsy); and context (any setting). A further search was run in April 2022. Other inclusion criteria: English language empirical studies, 2010–2021. Study appraisal methods: A minimum of two reviewers independently screened articles and undertook data extraction and decisions were consensually made. Methodological quality appraisal was undertaken using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool v2018. A data extraction table was created to chart all studies. The conduct and reporting of this study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (S1 Table). There is no published copy of the review protocol. Main findings: The search identified a total of 4077 papers (after duplicates were removed) of which 110 were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-four papers published between 2010–2021 were included in the review and each paper was treated as a separate study. The review findings indicate that parents’/caregivers’ fears and concerns stem from more than their child’s seizures and relate to many wider aspects of family life. These fears and concerns had far-reaching influences on their parenting/caregiving, and on the lifestyle and activities of their child and their family. What was less evident was what parents/caregivers wanted in terms of support or how they thought health professionals could acknowledge and/or allay their fears and concerns. The discussion is framed within the compassion-focused therapy model as a basis for generating new thinking about the impact of these fears and concerns and the need for a new agenda for clinical consultations in childhood epilepsy. Conclusions: The review concludes with a proposal that a more compassionate agenda underpins the dialogue between parents/caregivers and clinicians to encompass and mitigate the wider emotional, psychosocial, and societal threats that impact on the parent/caregivers of children with epilepsy

Development and evaluation of low-volume tests to detect and characterize antibodies to SARS-CoV-2

Low-volume antibody assays can be used to track SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in settings where active testing for virus is limited and remote sampling is optimal. We developed 12 ELISAs detecting total or antibody isotypes to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid, spike protein or its receptor binding domain (RBD), 3 anti-RBD isotype specific luciferase immunoprecipitation system (LIPS) assays and a novel Spike-RBD bridging LIPS total-antibody assay. We utilized pre-pandemic (n=984) and confirmed/suspected recent COVID-19 sera taken pre-vaccination rollout in 2020 (n=269). Assays measuring total antibody discriminated best between pre-pandemic and COVID-19 sera and were selected for diagnostic evaluation. In the blind evaluation, two of these assays (Spike Pan ELISA and Spike-RBD Bridging LIPS assay) demonstrated >97% specificity and >92% sensitivity for samples from COVID-19 patients taken >21 days post symptom onset or PCR test. These assays offered better sensitivity for the detection of COVID-19 cases than a commercial assay which requires 100-fold larger serum volumes. This study demonstrates that low-volume in-house antibody assays can provide good diagnostic performance, and highlights the importance of using well-characterized samples and controls for all stages of assay development and evaluation. These cost-effective assays may be particularly useful for seroprevalence studies in low and middle-income countries

Barbarians at the British Museum: Anglo-Saxon Art, Race and Religion

A critical historiographical overview of art historical approaches to early medieval material culture, with a focus on the British Museum collections and their connections to religion

V10 The role of surgical trainees in recruiting to multicentre RCTs: an example from the Sunflower Study

Abstract BackgroundThe Sunflower Study aims to compare the effectiveness of expectant management and MRCP prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients at low or moderate risk of common bile duct stones. This is the largest surgical randomised controlled trial (RCT) in the UK and a secondary aim is to describe trainees’ contributions.MethodsParticipants are randomised to receive expectant management or MRCP in a 2:1 ratio. Over 13,500 patients from more than 50 UK hospitals are required over five years. Trainees’ contributions are documented as follows: total number signed up to the study; number enrolled in the NIHR associate PI scheme; and the number of patients approached and recruited. The proportion of ‘emergency’ and ‘elective’ patients recruited was also recorded.Sunflower has been open since February 2019 and 48 centres are currently participating. A total of 104 trainees have been actively involved and 34 are/have been enrolled in the associate PI scheme. To date, 3992 patients have been screened, by trainees (n = 719,18%), consultants (n = 439,11%) and research nurses (n = 2214,71%). 1996 patients have been recruited, 359(18%) of which by trainees, 319(16%) consultants and 1318(66%) research nurses. Of the recruited patients, 423 (21%) presented as emergencies, recruited by trainees (n = 169,40%), consultants (n = 59,14%) and research nurses (n = 195,46%).Conclusions Trainees have an important role to play in recruiting patients to multicentre surgical RCTs, in particular in emergency settings, which can help improve studies’ generalisability. The associate PI scheme seems to provide an extra incentive for trainees to be involved in an RCT

The impact of parent treatment preference and other factors on recruitment : lessons learned from a paediatric epilepsy randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In paediatric epilepsy, the evidence of effectiveness of antiseizure treatment is inconclusive for some types of epilepsy. As with other paediatric clinical trials, researchers undertaking paediatric epilepsy clinical trials face a range of challenges that may compromise external validity MAIN BODY: In this paper, we critically reflect upon the factors which impacted recruitment to the pilot phase of a phase IV unblinded, randomised controlled 3×2 factorial trial examining the effectiveness of two antiseizure medications (ASMs) and a sleep behaviour intervention in children with Rolandic epilepsy. We consider the processes established to support recruitment, public and patient involvement and engagement (PPIE), site induction, our oversight of recruitment targets and figures, and the actions we took to help us understand why we failed to recruit sufficient children to continue to the substantive trial phase. The key lessons learned were about parent preference, children’s involvement and collaboration in decision-making, potential and alternative trial designs, and elicitation of stated preferences pre-trial design. Despite pre-funding PPIE during the trial design phase, we failed to anticipate the scale of parental treatment preference for or against antiseizure medication (ASMs) and consequent unwillingness to be randomised. Future studies should ensure more detailed and in-depth consultation to ascertain parent and/or patient preferences. More intense engagement with parents and children exploring their ideas about treatment preferences could, perhaps, have helped predict some recruitment issues. Infrequent seizures or screening children close to natural remission were possible explanations for non-consent. It is possible some clinicians were unintentionally unable to convey clinical equipoise influencing parental decision against participation. We wanted children to be involved in decisions about trial participation. However, despite having tailored written and video information to explain the trial to children we do not know whether these materials were viewed in each consent conversation or how much input children had towards parents’ decisions to participate. Novel methods such as parent/patient preference trials and/or discrete choice experiments may be the way forward. CONCLUSION: The importance of diligent consultation, the consideration of novel methods such as parent/patient preference trials and/or discrete choice experiments in studies examining the effectiveness of ASMs versus no-ASMs cannot be overemphasised even in the presence of widespread clinician equipoise. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-023-07091-9

Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial to establish the clinical and cost effectiveness of expectant management versus pre-operative imaging with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with symptomatic gallbladder disease undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at low or moderate risk of common bile duct stones (The Sunflower Study)

Introduction Surgery to remove the gallbladder (laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)) is the standard treatment for symptomatic gallbladder disease. One potential complication of gallbladder disease is that gallstones can pass into the common bile duct (CBD) where they may remain dormant, pass spontaneously into the bowel or cause problems such as obstructive jaundice or pancreatitis. Patients requiring LC are assessed preoperatively for their risk of CBD stones using liver function tests and imaging. If the risk is high, guidelines recommend further investigation and treatment. Further investigation of patients at low or moderate risk of CBD stones is not standardised, and the practice of imaging the CBD using magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in these patients varies across the UK. The consequences of these decisions may lead to overtreatment or undertreatment of patients.Methods and analysis We are conducting a UK multicentre, pragmatic, open, randomised controlled trial with internal pilot phase to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preoperative imaging with MRCP versus expectant management (ie, no preoperative imaging) in adult patients with symptomatic gallbladder disease undergoing urgent or elective LC who are at low or moderate risk of CBD stones. We aim to recruit 13 680 patients over 48 months. The primary outcome is any hospital admission within 18 months of randomisation for a complication of gallstones. This includes complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the treatment of gallstones and complications of LC. This will be determined using routine data sources, for example, National Health Service Digital Hospital Episode Statistics for participants in England. Secondary outcomes include cost-effectiveness and patient-reported quality of life, with participants followed up for a median of 18 months.Ethics and dissemination This study received approval from Yorkshire & The Humber – South Yorkshire Research Ethics Committee. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration number ISRCTN10378861