The Concerto Concept: A Compositional Exploration of Conflict and Cooperation

Part A: Portfolio of Compositions -- Part B: Recordings -- Part C: ExegesisThis submission for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Elder Conservatorium of Music, University of Adelaide, is a creative, compositional exploration of conflict and cooperation in the concerto genre. It consists of a portfolio of four original compositions and an exegesis. Since the early days of the concerto genre, there has been a duality at its heart between the concepts of conflict and cooperation. This duality can be seen most saliently in the relationship between the soloist and accompanying ensemble and can be affected by the composer’s use of form, harmony, rhythm, and orchestration. It can even be found in the etymology of the word concerto, which either means to be in conflict, or to cooperate. This project takes insights from music history and analysis to develop an individual approach to concerto composition. Its originality lies primarily in this individual application of conflict and cooperation in the portfolio and is supported in the exegesis by an analytical and historical essay exploring how these concepts have evolved over time and how they have been applied by other composers in their work, as well as a review of selected repertoire. The remainder of the exegesis explores how these concepts were applied in the portfolio works. The portfolio contains four works: a Concerto for Clarinet and Wind Orchestra (21 minutes), a Concerto for Orchestra (27 minutes), a Concerto for Oboe and Wind Orchestra (15 minutes), and a Concerto Grosso for String Quartet and String Orchestra (and an arrangement for string quartet and double wind quintet) (12 minutes). Each work explores the concerto genre in a different way, alternating the type and number of soloists and type of ensemble. Three of the four works have received premiere performances. The Clarinet Concerto was performed in 2020 by the Elder Conservatorium Wind Orchestra, conducted by Luke Dollman, with clarinet soloist, Bailey Coates; the Concerto for Orchestra was performed in 2021 by the Elder Conservatorium Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Luke Dollman; and the Oboe Concerto was performed in 2022 by and the Adelaide Wind Orchestra, conducted by Bryan Griffiths, with oboe soloist Celia Craig.Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, Elder Conservatorium of Music, 202

G'aim'ing to be a rural teacher?: Improving pre-service teachers’ learning experiences in an online rural and remote teacher preparation course

Many Australian teachers will spend part of their careers working in small rural schools and communities, yet specific preparation for rural and remote teaching contexts during preservice teacher education remains very limited. While recent government reports recommend the use of innovative and engaging teacher education approaches to enhance the classroom readiness of pre-service teachers, the use of such approaches to the contextualised preparation of rural and remote teachers has not been specifically addressed. In a teacher education program, offered by the University of Southern Queensland, an innovative place-based pedagogy has been utilized to redesign an online preservice teacher rural education course. A gamified, case-based approach was applied to increase student engagement and motivation. The development of game-based curriculum design has progressed since the mid 1980s to enhance engagement and collaboration, based on cascading information theory. Preservice teachers are immersed in a simulated rural context, where they navigate the experience of appointment to a rural school. This paper describes the rationale for the course redevelopment and outlines the design process. Student course feedback pre and post development were quantitatively and qualitatively analysed to evaluate the outcomes achieved from the course redevelopment. The findings indicate that student engagement within the course rose after the redevelopment, and critical reflection from the course team indicated that students were more effectively able to connect with course themes and project themselves into the position of a beginning teacher in a rural or remote location. While the development of the course is a continuing work in progress, the gamification strategy has enabled preservice teachers to improve their classroom and community readiness for appointment to rural and remote schools, while modelling effective and contemporary use of technology and pedagogy which can be applied to their future classroom contexts

Inequity in access to transplantation in the UK

Background and objectives Despite the presence of a universal health care system, it is unclear if there is intercenter variation in access to kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom. This study aims to assess whether equity exists in access to kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom after adjustment for patient-specific factors and center practice patterns. Design, setting, participants, & measurements In this prospective, observational cohort study including all 71 United Kingdom kidney centers, incident RRT patients recruited between November 2011 and March 2013 as part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures study were analyzed to assess preemptive listing (n=2676) and listing within 2 years of starting dialysis (n=1970) by center. Results Seven hundred and six participants (26%) were listed preemptively, whereas 585 (30%) were listed within 2 years of commencing dialysis. The interquartile range across centers was 6%–33% for preemptive listing and 25%–40% for listing after starting dialysis. Patient factors, including increasing age, most comorbidities, body mass index >35 kg/m2, and lower socioeconomic status, were associated with a lower likelihood of being listed and accounted for 89% and 97% of measured intercenter variation for preemptive listing and listing within 2 years of starting dialysis, respectively. Asian (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.72) and Black (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.71) participants were both associated with reduced access to preemptive listing; however Asian participants were associated with a higher likelihood of being listed after starting dialysis (odds ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 1.79). As for center factors, being registered at a transplanting center (odds ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.36 to 4.07) and a universal approach to discussing transplantation (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 1.78) were associated with higher preemptive listing, whereas using a written protocol was associated negatively with listing within 2 years of starting dialysis (odds ratio, 0.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.9). Conclusions Patient case mix accounts for most of the intercenter variation seen in access to transplantation in the United Kingdom, with practice patterns also contributing some variation. Socioeconomic inequity exists despite having a universal health care system

Understanding cost of care for patients on renal replacement therapy: looking beyond fixed tariffs.

BACKGROUND: In a number of countries, reimbursement to hospitals providing renal dialysis services is set according to a fixed tariff. While the cost of maintenance dialysis and transplant surgery are amenable to a system of fixed tariffs, patients with established renal failure commonly present with comorbid conditions that can lead to variations in the need for hospitalization beyond the provision of renal replacement therapy. METHODS: Patient-level cost data for incident renal replacement therapy patients in England were obtained as a result of linkage of the Hospital Episodes Statistics dataset to UK Renal Registry data. Regression models were developed to explore variations in hospital costs in relation to treatment modality, number of years on treatment and factors such as age and comorbidities. The final models were then used to predict annual costs for patients with different sets of characteristics. RESULTS: Excluding the cost of renal replacement therapy itself, inpatient costs generally decreased with number of years on treatment for haemodialysis and transplant patients, whereas costs for patients receiving peritoneal dialysis remained constant. Diabetes was associated with higher mean annual costs for all patients irrespective of treatment modality and hospital setting. Age did not have a consistent effect on costs. CONCLUSIONS: Combining predicted hospital costs with the fixed costs of renal replacement therapy showed that the total cost differential for a patient continuing on dialysis rather than receiving a transplant is considerable following the first year of renal replacement therapy, thus reinforcing the longer-term economic advantage of transplantation over dialysis for the health service.<br/

Barriers to living donor kidney transplantation in the United Kingdom: a national observational study.

BACKGROUND: Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) provides more timely access to transplantation and better clinical outcomes than deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). This study investigated disparities in the utilization of LDKT in the UK. METHODS: A total of 2055 adults undergoing kidney transplantation between November 2011 and March 2013 were prospectively recruited from all 23 UK transplant centres as part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures (ATTOM) study. Recipient variables independently associated with receipt of LDKT versus DDKT were identified. RESULTS: Of the 2055 patients, 807 (39.3%) received LDKT and 1248 (60.7%) received DDKT. Multivariable modelling demonstrated a significant reduction in the likelihood of LDKT for older age {odds ratio [OR] 0.11 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.17], P < 0.0001 for 65-75 years versus 18-34 years}; Asian ethnicity [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.39-0.77), P = 0.0006 versus White]; Black ethnicity [OR 0.64 (95% CI 0.42-0.99), P = 0.047 versus White]; divorced, separated or widowed [OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.46-0.88), P = 0.030 versus married]; no qualifications [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.42-0.74), P < 0.0001 versus higher education qualifications]; no car ownership [OR 0.51 (95% CI 0.37-0.72), P = 0.0001] and no home ownership [OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.85-0.79), P = 0.002]. The odds of LDKT varied significantly between countries in the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing kidney transplantation in the UK, there are significant age, ethnic, socio-economic and geographic disparities in the utilization of LDKT. Further work is needed to explore the potential for targeted interventions to improve equity in living donor transplantation

Limited health literacy is associated with reduced access to kidney transplantation

Limited health literacy is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and has been variably associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The prevalence of limited health literacy is lower in kidney transplant recipients than in individuals starting dialysis, suggesting selection of patients with higher health literacy for transplantation. We investigated the relationship between limited health literacy and clinical outcomes, including access to kidney transplantation, in a prospective UK cohort study of 2,274 incident dialysis patients aged 18-75 years. Limited health literacy was defined by a validated Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS). Multivariable regression was used to test for association with outcomes after adjusting for age, sex, socioeconomic status (educational level and car ownership), ethnicity, first language, primary renal diagnosis, and comorbidity. In fully adjusted analyses, limited health literacy was not associated with mortality, late presentation to nephrology, dialysis modality, haemodialysis vascular access, or pre-emptive kidney transplant listing, but was associated with reduced likelihood of listing for a deceased-donor transplant (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.90), receiving a living-donor transplant (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.88), or receiving a transplant from any donor type (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.96). Limited health literacy is associated with reduced access to kidney transplantation, independent of patient demographics, socioeconomic status, and comorbidity. Interventions to ameliorate the effects of low health literacy may improve access to kidney transplantation

Assessing Consensus Between UK Renal Clinicians on Listing for Kidney Transplantation: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: It is well recognized that there is significant variation between centers in access to kidney transplantation. In the absence of high-grade evidence, it is unclear whether variation is due to patient case mix, other center factors, or individual clinician decisions. This study sought consensus between UK clinicians on factors that should influence access to kidney transplantation. METHODS: As part of the Access to Transplantation and Transplant Outcome Measures project, consultant nephrologists and transplant surgeons in 71 centers were invited to participate in a Delphi study involving 2 rounds. During rounds 1 and 2, participants rated their agreement to 29 statements covering 8 topics regarding kidney transplantation. A stakeholder meeting was used to discuss statements of interest after the 2 rounds. RESULTS: In total, 122 nephrologists and 16 transplant surgeons from 45 units participated in rounds 1 and 2. After 2 rounds, 12 of 29 statements reached consensus. Fifty people participated in the stakeholder meeting. After the stakeholder meeting, a further 4 statements reached agreement. Of the 8 topics covered, consensus was reached in 6: use of a transplant protocol, patient age, body mass index, patient compliance with treatment, cardiac workup, and use of multidisciplinary meetings. Consensus was not reached on screening for malignancy and use of peripheral Doppler studies. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process identified factors upon which clinicians agreed and areas where consensus could not be achieved. The findings should inform national guidelines to support decision making in the absence of high quality evidence and to guide areas that warrant future research

Patient preferences, knowledge and beliefs about kidney allocation: qualitative findings from the UK-wide ATTOM programme.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how patients who are wait-listed for or who have received a kidney transplant understand the current UK kidney allocation system, and their views on ways to allocate kidneys in the future. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis based on a pragmatic approach. PARTICIPANTS: 10 deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients, 10 live-donor kidney transplant recipients, 12 participants currently wait-listed for a kidney transplant and 4 participants whose kidney transplant failed. SETTING: Semistructured telephone interviews conducted with participants in their own homes across the UK. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: uncertainty of knowledge of the allocation scheme; evaluation of the system and participant suggestions for future allocation schemes. Most participants identified human leucocyte anitgen matching as a factor in determining kidney allocation, but were often uncertain of the accuracy of their knowledge. In the absence of information that would allow a full assessment, the majority of participants consider that the current system is effective. A minority of participants were concerned about the perceived lack of transparency of the general decision-making processes within the scheme. Most participants felt that people who are younger and those better matched to the donor kidney should be prioritised for kidney allocation, but in contrast to the current scheme, less priority was considered appropriate for longer waiting patients. Some non-medical themes were also discussed, such as whether parents of dependent children should be prioritised for allocation, and whether patients with substance abuse problems be deprioritised. CONCLUSIONS: Our participants held differing views about the most important factors for kidney allocation, some of which were in contrast to the current scheme. Patient participation in reviewing future allocation policies will provide insight as to what is considered acceptable to patients and inform healthcare staff of the kinds of information patients would find most useful

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome