552 research outputs found

    Dear Martlet

    Get PDF

    Dear Martlet

    Full text link

    Rationale, Design, and Baseline Characteristics of a Community-based Comparative Effectiveness Trial to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes in Economically Disadvantaged Adults: The RAPID Study

    Get PDF
    Reaching Out and Preventing Increases in Diabetes (RAPID) is a community-based randomized trial evaluating the comparative costs and effectiveness of a group-based adaption of the DPP lifestyle intervention developed and implemented in partnership with the YMCA. RAPID enrolled adult primary care patients, with BMI 24 kg/m2 or higher and abnormal glucose metabolism (HbA1c 5.7–6.9% or fasting plasma glucose 100–125 mg/dL). 509 participants were enrolled and randomized to one of two groups: standard clinical advice plus free-of-charge access to a group-based adaption of the DPP offered by the Y, versus standard clinical advice alone. Key outcomes for future analysis will include differences in body weight and other cardiovascular risk factors over a 24-month intervention period. At baseline, RAPID participants had a mean (SD) age of 51 ± 12.1 years, weight of 225.1 ± 56.2 lbs, and BMI of 36.9 ± 8.6 kg/m2. 70.7% were women, 57.2% were African American, 35.4% were non-Hispanic White, and 3.2% were Hispanic. Mean HbA1c was 6.05 ± 0.34%. Additionally, 55.4% of participants had a baseline systolic blood pressure of ≥ 130 mm Hg, 33.1% had a total blood cholesterol exceeding 200 mg/dL, and 74% reported a household income of < $25,000. The RAPID Study successfully randomized a large cohort of participants with a wide distribution of age, body weight, and race who are at high risk for developing type 2 diabetes

    “Could You Work in My Team?”: Exploring How Professional Clinical Role Expectations Influence Decision-Making of Assessors During Exit-Level Medical School OSCEs

    Get PDF
    Decision-making in clinical assessment, such as exit-level medical school Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), is complex. This study utilized an empirical phenomenological qualitative approach with thematic analysis to explore OSCE assessors' perceptions of the concept of a “prototypical intern” expressed during focus group discussions. Topics discussed included the concept of a prototypical intern, qualities to be assessed, and approaches to clinical assessment decision-making. The thematic analysis was then applied to a theoretical framework (Cultural Historical Activity Theory—CHAT) that explored the complexity of making assessment decisions amidst potentially contradicting pressures from academic and clinical perspectives. Ten Australasian medical schools were involved with 15 experienced and five less experienced assessors participating. Thematic analysis of the data revealed four major themes in relation to how the prototypical intern concept influences clinical assessors' judgements: (a) Suitability of marking rubric based on assessor characteristics and expectations; (b) Competence as final year student vs. performance as a prototypical intern; (c) Safety, trustworthiness and reliability as constructs requiring assessment and (d) Contradictions in decision making process due to assessor differences. These themes mapped well within the interaction between two proposed activity systems in the CHAT model: academic and clinical. More clinically engaged and more experienced assessors tend to fall back on a heuristic, mental construct of a “prototypical intern,” to calibrate judgements, particularly, in difficult situations. Further research is needed to explore whether consensus on desirable intern qualities and their inclusion into OSCE marksheets decreases the cognitive load and increases the validity of assessor decision making
    • …
    corecore