Habitat suitablity modelling in the New Forest National Park.

The New Forest National Park is a unique semi-natural landscape which contains many species and habitats which are rare and/or threatened. In order to effectively aid in the conservation of these species, particularly in the face of climate change, there is a requirement to know their habitat requirements and distributions within the New Forest. However, due to limited resources there are gaps in knowledge about this for many of these species. Habitat suitability modelling was carried out to suggest unsurveyed sites of potentially suitable habitat (and consequently higher likelihood of species occurrence) for selected species of high conservation concern (Chamaemelum nobile, Galium constrictum, Gladiolus illyricus, Hipparchia semele, Nemobius sylvestris, Pilularia globulifera, Plebejus argus and Poronia punctata). The performance of several modelling approaches was compared. Of the models based on the use of GIS spatial data, an approach requiring only species presence data (Ecological Niche Factor Analysis (ENFA)) was compared to approaches additionally requiring absence or pseudo-absence data (Generalised Linear Models (GLMs) and Generalised Additive Models (GAMs)). An additional approach that did not require GIS data, Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) modelling, was also used to incorporate finer-scale variables not available in GIS format. This relatively new approach to habitat suitability modelling was also used to predict the potential impact of climate change on the suitability of the habitats for the selected species. The evaluation results showed that the presence-absence GLM and GAM models out-performed the presence-only ENFA method, and that the use of pseudo-absences and automated stepwise variable selection proved effective for developing these models. Species with specialist habitat requirements tended to be modelled more accurately than more generalist species. The BBN models also achieved high evaluation values, and were particularly valuable in being able to provide a quantitative assessment of the potential impact of climate change on the selected species. Habitat suitability modelling at the scale of an individual predicted area of the size of the New Forest has so far been rare, as have predictions of climate change on specific species at this scale. However, the results of this research show that this can be a valuable approach to aid in management and conservation of species and their habitats in protected areas

Habitat suitablity modelling in the New Forest National Park

The New Forest National Park is a unique semi-natural landscape which contains many species and habitats which are rare and/or threatened. In order to effectively aid in the conservation of these species, particularly in the face of climate change, there is a requirement to know their habitat requirements and distributions within the New Forest. However, due to limited resources there are gaps in knowledge about this for many of these species. Habitat suitability modelling was carried out to suggest unsurveyed sites of potentially suitable habitat (and consequently higher likelihood of species occurrence) for selected species of high conservation concern (Chamaemelum nobile, Galium constrictum, Gladiolus illyricus, Hipparchia semele, Nemobius sylvestris, Pilularia globulifera, Plebejus argus and Poronia punctata). The performance of several modelling approaches was compared. Of the models based on the use of GIS spatial data, an approach requiring only species presence data (Ecological Niche Factor Analysis (ENFA)) was compared to approaches additionally requiring absence or pseudo-absence data (Generalised Linear Models (GLMs) and Generalised Additive Models (GAMs)). An additional approach that did not require GIS data, Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) modelling, was also used to incorporate finer-scale variables not available in GIS format. This relatively new approach to habitat suitability modelling was also used to predict the potential impact of climate change on the suitability of the habitats for the selected species. The evaluation results showed that the presence-absence GLM and GAM models out-performed the presence-only ENFA method, and that the use of pseudo-absences and automated stepwise variable selection proved effective for developing these models. Species with specialist habitat requirements tended to be modelled more accurately than more generalist species. The BBN models also achieved high evaluation values, and were particularly valuable in being able to provide a quantitative assessment of the potential impact of climate change on the selected species. Habitat suitability modelling at the scale of an individual predicted area of the size of the New Forest has so far been rare, as have predictions of climate change on specific species at this scale. However, the results of this research show that this can be a valuable approach to aid in management and conservation of species and their habitats in protected areas.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Unclaimed Children Revisited: The Status of Children's Mental Health Policy in the United States

The needs of children and youth who experience mental health difficulties, as well as the needs of their families, cannot be addressed adequately without solid policy foundations at both state and federal levels. Unclaimed Children Revisited: The Status of Children's Mental Health Policy in the United States aims to document and assess how well child mental health policies across the 50 states and three territories respond to the needs of children and youth with mental health problems, those at risk, and their families. Comprising a national study and four sub-studies, this report presents a range of data collected from service users, providers, family members, youth advocates, and state and county system leaders across the child serving spectrum. The report then uses these data to identify state- and federal-level policy implications and recommendations with the goal of promoting improved mental health service delivery through policy reform

Parodie et carnavalisation : l’exemple de Hubert Aquin

One of the defining features of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) is the emphasis on reporting outcomes that are meaningful to patients. Accelerating progress toward this objective could be achieved through increased development and uptake of core outcome sets (COS), which are intended to represent a standardized minimum set of outcomes that should bemeasured and reported in all clinical trials in a specific condition. The level of activity around COS has increased significantly over recent years, however there are many important clinical conditions for which high quality COS havenot been developed. We believe that meaningful progress toward the goals behind the significant investments in PCOR will depend on sustained attention to the challenges of COS development and uptake

The construction of masculinities and femininities in the Church of England:the case of the male clergy spouse

The ordination of women to the priesthood in the Church of England in 1994 signified great change. The impact of the new priests was well documented, and their integration became the focus of much research in the following years. One important area of change was the altered dynamics of gender identity. New roles had opened up for women, but new identities had also emerged for men. While women priests were a new historical emergence, so too were clergy husbands. This paper will consider the historical construction of masculinities and femininities within the church and will go on to look at this in the context of clergy spouses, specifically focusing on men occupying this role. Some provisional findings, acting as work in progress, will be considered

Perceptions of an assessment literacy module to improve academic judgement – a pilot study

Expectation differences between assessors and students regarding assignment marking often results in student dissatisfaction accompanied by student complaints, indicating that despite following assignment task briefs and marking criteria, students’ desired grades were not achieved. The Assessment Literacy Module (ALM) is an online grading tool designed to promote student development of evaluative judgement. The ALM allows evaluation of sample assignments – with students being the assessor – guided by assignment marking standards that convey how assessment criteria relate to the assignment outcome; a process that often highlights discrepancies in student academic judgement. Our pilot study surveyed staff (N = 13) and students (N = 105) to gauge perceptions of the impact of the ALM on the student learning experience. Students from eight subjects in Bioscience, Science and Biomedicine, across all three undergraduate levels, indicated that they now have a better understanding of their assessment criteria (85.7%), that they found the ALM helpful in preparing their assignments (87.6%), and that they are more confident with their assessment quality (78.1%). Staff indicated that they perceived students were able to use the feedback comments on the sample assignments to better understand assignment rubrics (69.2%), and that students who used the ALM had better comprehension of assessment expectations (84.6%)

Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting The COS-STAR Statement

Background Core outcome sets (COS) can enhance the relevance of research by ensuring that outcomes of importance to health service users and other people making choices about health care in a particular topic area are measured routinely. Over 200 COS to date have been developed, but the clarity of these reports is suboptimal. COS studies will not achieve their goal if reports of COS are not complete and transparent. Methods and Findings In recognition of these issues, an international group that included experienced COS developers, methodologists, journal editors, potential users of COS (clinical trialists, systematic reviewers, and clinical guideline developers), and patient representatives developed the Core Outcome Set–STAndards for Reporting (COS-STAR) Statement as a reporting guideline for COS studies. The developmental process consisted of an initial reporting item generation stage and a two-round Delphi survey involving nearly 200 participants representing key stakeholder groups, followed by a consensus meeting. The COS-STAR Statement consists of a checklist of 18 items considered essential for transparent and complete reporting in all COS studies. The checklist items focus on the introduction, methods, results, and discussion section of a manuscript describing the development of a particular COS. A limitation of the COS-STAR Statement is that it was developed without representative views of low- and middle-income countries. COS have equal relevance to studies conducted in these areas, and, subsequently, this guideline may need to evolve over time to encompass any additional challenges from developing COS in these areas. Conclusions With many ongoing COS studies underway, the COS-STAR Statement should be a helpful resource to improve the reporting of COS studies for the benefit of all COS users

Primary Care Physicians’ Views on Medical Error and Disclosure in Cancer Care

Introduction: Effective physician-patient communication is critical in cancer care. Breakdowns in communication may follow an actual or suspected medical error because of various professional or medicolegal concerns about those events. We examined views of primary care physicians (PCPs) regarding two hypothetical medical errors, their perceptions of responsibility and intent to communicate these events to patients. Objectives: To describe PCPs views on medical errors, perceived responsibility and communication after errors during cancer care. Methods: We surveyed 630 PCPs at 3 healthcare organizations participating in the Cancer Research Network. Questionnaires included two vignettes describing possible medical errors: a delayed diagnosis of breast cancer and; preventable complications of colon cancer treatment. Questions assessed perceived responsibility and intent to communicate with the patient after the event. Results: A total of 333 PCPs responded (response rate =53%). Eighty-one percent felt that the delayed diagnosis vignette described a serious error; (60%) believed that the preventable complications of colon cancer treatment vignette represented a serious medical error. Few would offer no apology at all for the delayed diagnosis (4%) or the colon cancer complications complications (7%). The most common expression of regret was “I am sorry about what happened to you” without elaboration (48% delayed diagnosis; 56% complications). Just over half (51%) would not volunteer the cause of the delayed diagnosis; compared to 25% in the complications vignette. Perception of the error as serious, and of greater personal responsibility were both predictive of being more forthcoming when communicating to patient after the event; perceived self-efficacy in communication and the belief that one’s organization values good communication were not. Conclusion: PCPs vary in their attitudes towards medical errors, and their perceptions of responsibility. These attitudes and perceptions are predictive of how physicians intend to communicate with patients after such events, at least in response to two hypothetical cases