Disciplining Generosity

Since 2017 we have taught a graduate course on Advising Donors within the MA Philanthropic Studies programme at the University of Kent in the UK. Whilst designing and delivering that course it became clear how little robust research or best practice information was available on this topic, so we decided to write a book to fill that gap. Advising Philanthropists: Principles and Practice draws together the knowledge and practical insights that we have gained during our combined 48 years working in fundraising and studying philanthropy (Beth) and working in grant-making and as a philanthropy advisor (Emma). This material is enhanced by interviews with 40 philanthropy advisors across 15 countries who kindly shared with us their motivations for doing this work, what it involves, the challenges they face, the highlights that make it worthwhile, and their hopes for the impact of this work. Shining a spotlight on philanthropy advisors - who they are, how they work and to what effect - has been a pleasurable task. It has also been an important step in making this part of social change work more transparent. We hope the insights in our book help to attract more people into this profession, enable colleagues to better understand their work, and lead to greater understanding that philanthropic funding of successful social innovation rarely happens by accident

Evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the NHS Health Check programme: a prospective analysis in the Genetics and Vascular Health Check (GENVASC) study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of the national cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention programme-National Health Service Health Check (NHSHC) in reduction of CVD risk. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: 147 primary care practices in Leicestershire and Northamptonshire in England, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 27 888 individuals undergoing NHSHC with a minimum of 18 months of follow-up data. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were NHSHC attributed detection of CVD risk factors, prescription of medications, changes in values of individual risk factors and frequency of follow-up. RESULTS: At recruitment, 18% of participants had high CVD risk (10%-20% 10-year risk) and 4% very high CVD risk (>20% 10-year risk). New diagnoses or hypertension (HTN) was made in 2.3% participants, hypercholesterolaemia in 0.25% and diabetes mellitus in 0.9%. New prescription of stains and antihypertensive medications was observed in 5.4% and 5.4% of participants, respectively. Total cholesterol was decreased on average by 0.38 mmol/L (95% CI -0.34 to -0.41) and 1.71 mmol/L (-1.48 to -1.94) in patients with initial cholesterol >5 mmol/L and >7.5 mmol/L, respectively. Systolic blood pressure was decreased on average by 2.9 mm Hg (-2.3 to -3.7), 15.7 mm Hg (-14.1 to -17.5) and 33.4 mm Hg (-29.4 to -37.7), in patients with grade 1, 2 and 3 HTN, respectively. About one out of three patients with increased CVD risk had no record of follow-up or treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Majority of patients identified with increased CVD risk through the NHSHC were followed up and received effective clinical interventions. However, one-third of high CVD risk patients had no follow-up and therefore did not receive any treatment. Our study highlights areas of focus which could improve the effectiveness of the programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04417387

Advising Philanthropists: Principles and Practice

Philanthropy advice is an emerging and important profession fuelled by demand from donors for support with their charitable giving. Advising Philanthropists explores what the role of the philanthropy advisor entails, the practicalities involved and the wide range of skills and knowledge needed to start and excel at working with donors. As well as explaining the key concepts, this accessible overview considers the challenges that can be encountered in the role and the ethical dilemmas to be weighed. It is illuminated by interviews with 40 philanthropy advisors from around the globe offering unique and authentic accounts of this unsung profession. This book is a timely addition to the growing body of literature on philanthropy

Cultural Competency and wider Diversity & Inclusion training for healthcare and research professionals: Protocol for a scoping review with narrative synthesis

The objective of this review is to map and synthesise the literature on cultural competency and other diversity and inclusion training for healthcare professionals and researchers working within the field of health and social care. Cultural competency training for healthcare providers is widely available. However, there appears to be little evidence of bespoke cultural competency or other inclusion style training available that focusses specifically on research and research professionals. This scoping review will ascertain what literature exists in relation to healthcare related cultural competency training, how it was designed and delivered, how it was evaluated for effectiveness and how it could be either utilised or adapted for a specific health research professionals training programme. The databases used will be Web of Science, SCOPUS, Medline and CINAHL. The inclusion criteria will be any type of cultural competency, inclusion or diversity training, education or workshop that is available for healthcare professionals or healthcare researchers and has an evaluation or outcome measure included. Systematic reviews, scoping reviews or training that has no outcome measure, is disease specific, or part of a medical or nursing curriculum, will be excluded.</p

Evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the NHS Health Check programme: a prospective analysis in the Genetics and Vascular Health Check (GENVASC) study

Objective The aim of the study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of the national cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention programme—National Health Service Health Check (NHSHC) in reduction of CVD risk.Design Prospective cohort study.Setting 147 primary care practices in Leicestershire and Northamptonshire in England, UK.Participants 27 888 individuals undergoing NHSHC with a minimum of 18 months of follow-up data.Outcome measures The primary outcomes were NHSHC attributed detection of CVD risk factors, prescription of medications, changes in values of individual risk factors and frequency of follow-up.Results At recruitment, 18% of participants had high CVD risk (10%–20% 10-year risk) and 4% very high CVD risk (&gt;20% 10-year risk). New diagnoses or hypertension (HTN) was made in 2.3% participants, hypercholesterolaemia in 0.25% and diabetes mellitus in 0.9%. New prescription of stains and antihypertensive medications was observed in 5.4% and 5.4% of participants, respectively. Total cholesterol was decreased on average by 0.38 mmol/L (95% CI −0.34 to −0.41) and 1.71 mmol/L (−1.48 to −1.94) in patients with initial cholesterol &gt;5 mmol/L and &gt;7.5 mmol/L, respectively. Systolic blood pressure was decreased on average by 2.9 mm Hg (−2.3 to −3.7), 15.7 mm Hg (−14.1 to −17.5) and 33.4 mm Hg (−29.4 to −37.7), in patients with grade 1, 2 and 3 HTN, respectively. About one out of three patients with increased CVD risk had no record of follow-up or treatment.Conclusions Majority of patients identified with increased CVD risk through the NHSHC were followed up and received effective clinical interventions. However, one-third of high CVD risk patients had no follow-up and therefore did not receive any treatment. Our study highlights areas of focus which could improve the effectiveness of the programme.Trial registration number NCT04417387

Polygenic risk score adds to a clinical risk score in the prediction of cardiovascular disease in a clinical setting

Background and Aims A cardiovascular disease polygenic risk score (CVD-PRS) can stratify individuals into different categories of cardiovascular risk, but whether the addition of a CVD-PRS to clinical risk scores improves the identification of individuals at increased risk in a real-world clinical setting is unknown. Methods The Genetics and the Vascular Health Check Study (GENVASC) was embedded within the UK National Health Service Health Check (NHSHC) programme which invites individuals between 40–74 years of age without known CVD to attend an assessment in a UK general practice where CVD risk factors are measured and a CVD risk score (QRISK2) is calculated. Between 2012–2020, 44,141 individuals (55.7% females, 15.8% non-white) who attended an NHSHC in 147 participating practices across two counties in England were recruited and followed. When 195 individuals (cases) had suffered a major CVD event (CVD death, myocardial infarction or acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularisation, stroke), 396 propensity-matched controls with a similar risk profile were identified, and a nested case-control genetic study undertaken to see if the addition of a CVD-PRS to QRISK2 in the form of an integrated risk tool (IRT) combined with QRISK2 would have identified more individuals at the time of their NHSHC as at high risk (QRISK2 10-year CVD risk of ≥10%), compared with QRISK2 alone. Results The distribution of the standardised CVD-PRS was significantly different in cases compared with controls (cases mean score .32; controls, −.18, P = 8.28×10−9). QRISK2 identified 61.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.3%–68.4%) of individuals who subsequently developed a major CVD event as being at high risk at their NHSHC, while the combination of QRISK2 and IRT identified 68.7% (95% CI: 61.7%–75.2%), a relative increase of 11.7% (P = 1×10−4). The odds ratio (OR) of being up-classified was 2.41 (95% CI: 1.03–5.64, P = .031) for cases compared with controls. In individuals aged 40–54 years, QRISK2 identified 26.0% (95% CI: 16.5%–37.6%) of those who developed a major CVD event, while the combination of QRISK2 and IRT identified 38.4% (95% CI: 27.2%–50.5%), indicating a stronger relative increase of 47.7% in the younger age group (P = .001). The combination of QRISK2 and IRT increased the proportion of additional cases identified similarly in women as in men, and in non-white ethnicities compared with white ethnicity. The findings were similar when the CVD-PRS was added to the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease pooled cohort equations (ASCVD-PCE) or SCORE2 clinical scores. Conclusions In a clinical setting, the addition of genetic information to clinical risk assessment significantly improved the identification of individuals who went on to have a major CVD event as being at high risk, especially among younger individuals. The findings provide important real-world evidence of the potential value of implementing a CVD-PRS into health systems.</p