Creative rural places: A study of cultural industries in Stroud, UK

This thesis explores how different geographical places and space shape the way cultural industries work. In a departure from much of the existing literature, this study focuses on rurally based industries. In particular, it seeks to identify the ways in which and the extent to which a rural setting shapes the workings of rurally based cultural industries. A rural focus will help to broaden the intellectual knowledge base and adds to an emerging body of economic geography inspired study that is looking to refocus the cultural industries research agenda away from a pre-occupation with cities. The rural dimension is examined through a study of visual arts and crafts industries in the Stroud District, Gloucestershire, UK. The empirical phase was steered by the notion of the production system and the analytical lenses of spatial organisation, relationships and place. Mixed methods were used to generate qualitative and quantitative data and in the case of the latter, included personal network data. The empirical phase was sequential, leading with an on-line questionnaire for individual practitioners, followed by a set of semi-structured interviews with actors from the range of processes that comprise the visual arts and crafts production system.The Stroud study challenges the notion that cultural industries are quintessentially city phenomena. Of the three analytical lenses, the place dimension proved particularly potent for understanding the Stroud Case. The findings show a place based community of practitioners and a number of art businesses, some of national repute, and an active cultural infrastructure - networked principally through inter-personal relationships. A rural dimension was evident in terms of the scale of activity, the functioning of the local milieu and particular perceptions towards cultural products produced by rurally based practitioners. The impact of the rural setting was not experienced uniformly but was contingent on the status of the practitioner and the visual arts and crafts discipline practised. The analysis has practical implications for policy developers particularly at a local authority level

Did the evidence-based intervention (EBI) programme reduce inappropriate procedures, lessen unwarranted variation or lead to spill-over effects in the National Health Service?

Background Health systems are under pressure to maintain services within limited resources. The Evidence-Based Interventions (EBI) programme published a first list of guidelines in 2019, which aimed to reduce inappropriate use of interventions within the NHS in England, reducing potential harm and optimising the use of limited resources. Seventeen procedures were selected in the first round, published in April 2019. Methods We evaluated changes in the trends for each procedure after its inclusion in the EBI’s first list of guidelines using interrupted time series analysis. We explored whether there was any evidence of spill-over effects onto related or substitute procedures, as well as exploring changes in geographical variation following the publication of national guidance. Results Most procedures were experiencing downward trends in the years prior to the launch of EBI. We found no evidence of a trend change in any of the 17 procedures following the introduction of the guidance. No evidence of spill-over increases in substitute or related procedures was found. Geographic variation in the number of procedures performed across English CCGs remained at similar levels before and after EBI. Conclusions The EBI programme had little success in its aim to further reduce the use of the 17 procedures it deemed inappropriate in all or certain circumstances. Most procedure rates were already decreasing before EBI and all continued with a similar trend afterwards. Geographical variation in the number of procedures remained at a similar level post EBI. De-adoption of inappropriate care is essential in maintaining health systems across the world. However, further research is needed to explore context specific enablers and barriers to effective identification and de-adoption of such inappropriate health care to support future de-adoption endeavours

Did the evidence-based intervention (EBI) programme reduce inappropriate procedures, lessen unwarranted variation or lead to spill-over effects in the National Health Service?

Background: Health systems are under pressure to maintain services within limited resources. The Evidence-Based Interventions (EBI) programme published a first list of guidelines in 2019, which aimed to reduce inappropriate use of interventions within the NHS in England, reducing potential harm and optimising the use of limited resources. Seventeen procedures were selected in the first round, published in April 2019. Methods: We evaluated changes in the trends for each procedure after its inclusion in the EBI’s first list of guidelines using interrupted time series analysis. We explored whether there was any evidence of spill-over effects onto related or substitute procedures, as well as exploring changes in geographical variation following the publication of national guidance. Results: Most procedures were experiencing downward trends in the years prior to the launch of EBI. We found no evidence of a trend change in any of the 17 procedures following the introduction of the guidance. No evidence of spill-over increases in substitute or related procedures was found. Geographic variation in the number of procedures performed across English CCGs remained at similar levels before and after EBI. Conclusions: The EBI programme had little success in its aim to further reduce the use of the 17 procedures it deemed inappropriate in all or certain circumstances. Most procedure rates were already decreasing before EBI and all continued with a similar trend afterwards. Geographical variation in the number of procedures remained at a similar level post EBI. De-adoption of inappropriate care is essential in maintaining health systems across the world. However, further research is needed to explore context specific enablers and barriers to effective identification and de-adoption of such inappropriate health care to support future de-adoption endeavours

Strategies to Improve Recruitment to a De-escalation Trial:a Mixed-methods Study of the OPTIMA Prelim Trial in Early Breast Cancer

Aims: De-escalation trials are challenging and sometimes may fail due to poor recruitment. The OPTIMA Prelim randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN42400492) randomised patients with early stage breast cancer to chemotherapy versus ‘test-directed’ chemotherapy, with a possible outcome of no chemotherapy, which could confer less treatment relative to routine practice. Despite encountering challenges, OPTIMA Prelim reached its recruitment target ahead of schedule. This study reports the root causes of recruitment challenges and the strategies used to successfully overcome them. Materials and methods: A mixed-methods recruitment intervention (QuinteT Recruitment Intervention) was used to investigate the recruitment difficulties and feedback findings to inform interventions and optimise ongoing recruitment. Quantitative site-level recruitment data, audio-recorded recruitment appointments (n = 46), qualitative interviews (n = 22) with trialists/recruiting staff (oncologists/nurses) and patient-facing documentation were analysed using descriptive, thematic and conversation analyses. Findings were triangulated to inform a ‘plan of action’ to optimise recruitment. Results: Despite best intentions, oncologists' routine practices complicated recruitment. Discomfort about deviating from the usual practice of recommending chemotherapy according to tumour clinicopathological features meant that not all eligible patients were approached. Audio-recorded recruitment appointments revealed how routine practices undermined recruitment. A tendency to justify chemotherapy provision before presenting the randomised controlled trial and subtly indicating that chemotherapy would be more/less beneficial undermined equipoise and made it difficult for patients to engage with OPTIMA Prelim. To tackle these challenges, individual and group recruiter feedback focussed on communication issues and vignettes of eligible patients were discussed to address discomforts around approaching patients. ‘Tips’ documents concerning structuring discussions and conveying equipoise were disseminated across sites, together with revisions to the Patient Information Sheet. Conclusions: This is the first study illuminating the tension between oncologists' routine practices and recruitment to de-escalation trials. Although time and resources are required, these challenges can be addressed through specific feedback and training as the trial is underway

OPTIMA: A prospective randomized trial to validate the predictive utility and cost-effectiveness of gene expression test-directed chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer

Background: Multi-parameter gene expression assays (MPAs) are widely used to estimate individual patient residual risk in hormone-sensitive HER2-negative node-negative early breast cancer, allowing patients with low risk to safely avoid chemotherapy. Evidence for MPA use in node-positive breast cancer is limited. OPTIMA (Optimal Personalised Treatment of early breast cancer usIng Multi-parameter Analysis) aims to validate MPA’s as predictors of chemotherapy sensitivity in a largely node-positive breast cancer population