8 research outputs found

    Perceptions of malaria and acceptance of rapid diagnostic tests and related treatment practises among community members and health care providers in Greater Garissa, North Eastern Province, Kenya.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Conventional diagnosis of malaria has relied upon either clinical diagnosis or microscopic examination of peripheral blood smears. These methods, if not carried out exactly, easily result in the over- or under-diagnosis of malaria. The reliability and accuracy of malaria RDTs, even in extremely challenging health care settings, have made them a staple in malaria control programmes. Using the setting of a pilot introduction of malaria RDTs in Greater Garissa, North Eastern Province, Kenya, this study aims to identify and understand perceptions regarding malaria diagnosis, with a particular focus on RDTs, and treatment among community members and health care workers (HCWs). METHODS: The study was conducted in five districts of Garissa County. Focus group discussions (FGD) were performed with community members that were recruited from health facilities (HFs) supported by the MENTOR Initiative. In-depth interviews (IDIs) and FGDs with HCWs were also carried out. Interview transcripts were then coded and analysed for major themes. Two researchers reviewed all codes, first separately and then together, discussed the specific categories, and finally characterized, described, and agreed upon major important themes. RESULTS: Thirty-four FGDs were carried out with a range of two to eight participants (median of four). Of 157 community members, 103 (65.6%) were women. The majority of participants were illiterate and the highest level of education was secondary school. Some 76% of participants were of Somali ethnicity. Whilst community members and HCWs demonstrated knowledge of aspects of malaria transmission, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment, gaps and misconceptions were identified. Poor adherence to negative RDT results, unfamiliarity and distrust of RDTs, and an inconsistent RDT supply were the main challenges to become apparent in FGDs and IDIs. CONCLUSION: Gaps in knowledge or incorrect beliefs exist in Greater Garissa and have the potential to act as barriers to complete and correct malaria case management. Addressing these knowledge gaps requires comprehensive education campaigns and a reliable and constant RDT supply. The results of this study highlight education and supply chain as key factors to be addressed in order to make large scale roll out of RDTs as successful and effective as possible

    CATALISE: A multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study. Identifying language impairments in children

    Get PDF
    © 2016 Bishop et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet there is little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments in children. Children\u27s language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicine and the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them. Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possible to achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying children who might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representing ten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatrics and child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46 statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing on this topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a sevenpoint scale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the first two authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus. The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation (round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting \u27agree\u27 or \u27strongly agree\u27) was at least 80 percent for 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their response with written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resulting consensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and a concluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base

    CATALISE: A multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study. Identifying language impairments in children

    Get PDF
    Delayed or impaired language development is a common developmental concern, yet thereis little agreement about the criteria used to identify and classify language impairments inchildren. Children's language difficulties are at the interface between education, medicineand the allied professions, who may all adopt different approaches to conceptualising them.Our goal in this study was to use an online Delphi technique to see whether it was possibleto achieve consensus among professionals on appropriate criteria for identifying childrenwho might benefit from specialist services. We recruited a panel of 59 experts representingten disciplines (including education, psychology, speech-language therapy/pathology, paediatricsand child psychiatry) from English-speaking countries (Australia, Canada, Ireland,New Zealand, United Kingdom and USA). The starting point for round 1 was a set of 46statements based on articles and commentaries in a special issue of a journal focusing onthis topic. Panel members rated each statement for both relevance and validity on a sevenpointscale, and added free text comments. These responses were synthesised by the firsttwo authors, who then removed, combined or modified items with a view to improving consensus.The resulting set of statements was returned to the panel for a second evaluation(round 2). Consensus (percentage reporting 'agree' or 'strongly agree') was at least 80 percentfor 24 of 27 round 2 statements, though many respondents qualified their responsewith written comments. These were again synthesised by the first two authors. The resultingconsensus statement is reported here, with additional summary of relevant evidence, and aconcluding commentary on residual disagreements and gaps in the evidence base.</p

    Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology.

    Get PDF
    Background: Lack of agreement about criteria and terminology for children’s language problems affects access to services as well as hindering research and practice. We report the second phase of a study using an online Delphi method to address these issues. In the first phase, we focused on criteria for language disorder. Here we consider terminology.Methods: The Delphi method is an iterative process in which an initial set of statements is rated by a panel of experts, who then have the opportunity to view anonymised ratings from other panel members. On this basis they can either revise their views or make a case for their position. The statements are then revised based on panel feedback, and again rated by and commented on by the panel. In this study, feedback from a second round was used to prepare a final set of statements in narrative form. The panel included 57 individuals representing a range of professions and nationalities. Results: We achieved at least 78% agreement for 19 of 21 statements within two rounds of ratings. These were collapsed into 12 statements for the final consensus reported here. The term ‘Language Disorder’ is recommended to refer to a profile of difficulties that causes functional impairment in everyday life and is associated with poor prognosis. The term, ‘Developmental Language Disorder’ (DLD) was endorsed for use when the language disorder was not associated with a known biomedical aetiology. It was also agreed that (a) presence of risk factors (neurobiological or environmental) does not preclude a diagnosis of DLD, (b) DLD can co-occur with other neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g. ADHD) and (c) DLD does not require a mismatch between verbal and nonverbal ability. Conclusions: This Delphi exercise highlights reasons for disagreements about terminology for language disorders and proposes standard definitions and nomenclature. </p

    An emerging income differential for adolescent emotional problems

    No full text
    Background: While there is considerable evidence of income gradients in child and adolescent behaviour problems, evidence relating to children and young people’s emotional difficulties is more mixed. Older studies reported no income differentials, while recent reports suggest that adolescents from lowincome families are more likely to experience emotional difficulties than their more affluent peers. Methods: We compared the association between low- versus medium-/high-family income and parent-reported emotional difficulties in 15- and 16-year-olds in three large nationally representative cohorts studied in 1974, 1986 and 1999/2004. We then examined whether increases in the income differential could be accounted for by changes in the association of a range of sociodemographic factors (family type or size, maternal education or housing tenure) with either family income or emotional difficulties. Finally, in the most recent cohorts, we considered whether the effects of these sociodemographic variables were mediated by more proximal family factors (maternal distress, stressful life events or family dysfunction). Results: An increasing income differential in adolescent emotional problems emerged over the period, with standardized coefficients for associations with low income increasing from .07 in 1974 and 1986 to .30 in 1999/2004. This was due partially (-10%) to sociodemographic risk factors for emotional difficulties becoming more strongly associated with low-income families over time, and partially (-40%) to the increasing impact of these risk factors. In the most recent cohorts, about 40% of the effects of sociodemographic risks appear to have been mediated by more proximal family factors. Conclusions: These findings have implications for our understanding of the health burden of emotional problems, recognition of the health burden associated with inequality and public concern about the consequences of social change

    Hyporesponsive reward anticipation in the basal ganglia following severe institutional deprivation early in life

    No full text
    Severe deprivation in the first few years of life is associated with multiple difficulties in cognition and behavior. However, the brain basis for these difficulties is poorly understood. Structural and functional neuroimaging studies have implicated limbic system structures as dysfunctional, and one functional imaging study in a heterogeneous group of maltreated individuals has confirmed the presence of abnormalities in the basal ganglia. Based on these studies and known dopaminergic abnormalities from studies in experimental animals using social isolation, we used a task of monetary reward anticipation to examine the functional integrity of brain regions previously shown to be implicated in reward processing. Our sample included a group of adolescents (n = 12) who had experienced global deprivation early in their lives in Romania prior to adoption into UK families. In contrast to a nonadopted comparison group (n = 11), the adoptees did not recruit the striatum during reward anticipation despite comparable performance accuracy and latency. These results show, for the first time, an association between early institutional deprivation and brain reward systems in humans and highlight potential neural vulnerabilities resulting from such exposure

    Phase 2 of CATALISE:a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Lack of agreement about criteria and terminology for children's language problems affects access to services as well as hindering research and practice. We report the second phase of a study using an online Delphi method to address these issues. In the first phase, we focused on criteria for language disorder. Here we consider terminology. METHODS: The Delphi method is an iterative process in which an initial set of statements is rated by a panel of experts, who then have the opportunity to view anonymised ratings from other panel members. On this basis they can either revise their views or make a case for their position. The statements are then revised based on panel feedback, and again rated by and commented on by the panel. In this study, feedback from a second round was used to prepare a final set of statements in narrative form. The panel included 57 individuals representing a range of professions and nationalities. RESULTS: We achieved at least 78% agreement for 19 of 21 statements within two rounds of ratings. These were collapsed into 12 statements for the final consensus reported here. The term ‘Language Disorder’ is recommended to refer to a profile of difficulties that causes functional impairment in everyday life and is associated with poor prognosis. The term, ‘Developmental Language Disorder’ (DLD) was endorsed for use when the language disorder was not associated with a known biomedical aetiology. It was also agreed that (a) presence of risk factors (neurobiological or environmental) does not preclude a diagnosis of DLD, (b) DLD can co‐occur with other neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g. ADHD) and (c) DLD does not require a mismatch between verbal and nonverbal ability. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi exercise highlights reasons for disagreements about terminology for language disorders and proposes standard definitions and nomenclature.This work was supported by Wellcome Trust Programme Grant no. 082498/Z/07/Z. The authors thank Holly Thornton and Denise Cripps for their help in running the CATALISE project and Pauline Frizelle, Helen Murrell and Yvonne Wren for comments on an earlier draft. CATALISE stands for Criteria and Terminology Applied to Language Impairments: Synthesising the Evidence. This paper was handled by the Editor-in-Chief and has undergone the normal external peer review. (082498/Z/07/Z - Wellcome Trust Programme)Published versio
    corecore