Using Empirical Information in the Era of HIV/AIDS to Inform Mitigation and Rural Development Strategies: Selected Results from African Country Studies

Community/Rural/Urban Development, Health Economics and Policy, Downloads July 2008-March 2009: 7,

A Cross-Country Analysis of Household Response to Adult Mortality in Rural Sub-Saharan Africa: Implications for HIV/AIDS Mitigation and Rural Development Policies

Community/Rural/Urban Development, Consumer/Household Economics, Downloads November 2008 - July 2007: 6,

A Cross-Country Analysis of Household Responses to Adult Mortality in Rural Sub-Saharan Africa: Implications For HIV/AIDS Mitigation And Rural Development Policies.

This paper summarizes and synthesizes across the results of a set of country studies on the effects of prime-age adult mortality on rural households in Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, and Zambia. Each study is based on large representative rural household surveys. These findings have implications for the design of efforts to mitigate some of the most important effects of rural adult mortality, and for key development policies and priorities.HIV/AIDS, sub-Saharan Africa, mortality, Community/Rural/Urban Development, Health Economics and Policy, Downloads July 2008 - July 2009: 21, I11,

'Overnight, things changed. Suddenly, we were in it': a qualitative study exploring how surgical teams mitigated risks of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 presents a risk of infection and transmission for operating theatre teams. Guidelines to protect patients and staff emerged and changed rapidly based on expert opinion and limited evidence. This paper presents the experiences and innovations developed by international surgical teams during the early stages of the pandemic to attempt to mitigate risk. DESIGN: In-depth, semistructured interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using methods of constant comparison. PARTICIPANTS: 43 participants, including surgeons from a range of specialties (primarily general surgery, otolaryngology, neurosurgery, cardiothoracic and ophthalmology), anaesthetists and those in nursing roles. SETTING: The UK, Italy, Spain, the USA, China and New Zealand between March and May 2020. RESULTS: Surgical teams sought to mitigate COVID-19 risks by modifying their current practice with an abundance of strategies and innovations. Communication and teamwork played an integral role in how teams adapted, although participants reflected on the challenges of having to improvise in real time. Uncertainties remained about optimal surgical practice and there were significant tensions where teams were forced to balance what was best for patients while contemplating their own safety. CONCLUSIONS: The perceptions of risks during a pandemic such as COVID-19 can be complex and context dependent. Management of these risks in surgery must be driven by evidence-based practice resulting from a pragmatic and novel approach to collation of global evidence. The context of surgery has changed dramatically, and surgical teams have developed a plethora of innovations. There is an urgent need for high-quality evidence to inform surgical practice that optimises the safety of both patients and healthcare professionals as the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds

Staff training to improve participant recruitment into surgical randomised controlled trials : A feasibility study within a trial (SWAT) across four host trials simultaneously

The PROMoting THE Use of SWATs (PROMETHEUS) programme was funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) [grant number MR/R013748/1]. The DISC host trial is funded by the Health Technology Assessment Programme (Grant Ref: 15/102/04). IntAct is funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, an MRC and NIHR partnership (Grant Ref: 14/150/62). The EME Programme is funded by the MRC and NIHR, with contributions from the CSO in Scotland and Health and Care Research Wales and the HSC R&D Division, Public Health Agency in Northern Ireland. PROFHER-2 is funded by the Health Technology Assessment Programme (Grant Ref: 16/73/03). START: REACTS is funded by the NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Co-ordinating Centre (NETSCC); Grant Codes: 16/61/18. The development of the training intervention was funded by the MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research (MR/L004933/1- R53) and supported by the MRC ConDuCT-II Hub (Collaboration and innovation for Difficult and Complex randomized controlled Trials In Invasive procedures - MR/K025643/1). The online version of the training intervention was funded by the NIHR and is hosted on the NIHR Learn platform (https://learn.nihr.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=385). It is based on the face-to face GRANULE training course funded by the Bowel Disease Research Foundation in collaboration with the University of Birmingham, University of Bristol and former MRC ConDuCT-II Hub. This work was part-funded by the Wellcome Trust [ref: 204829] through the Centre for Future Health (CFH) at the University of York. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the MRC or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the article.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The role of diversity practices and inclusion in promoting trust and employee engagement

This paper investigates the association of diversity practices with an important aspect of workplace well-being, engagement. It was hypothesized that the association of diversity practices would be mediated by trust climate and that this mediation relationship would be stronger when employees experienced feelings of inclusion in the workplace. Using a sample of 4,597 health sector employees, results indicated that diversity practices are associated with a trusting climate that, in turn, is positively related to employee engagement. Furthermore, the relationship between diversity practices and trust climate was moderated by inclusion. Theoretical and practical implications of the study are discussed along with recommendations for future research

Substance use and dietary practices among students attending alternative high schools: results from a pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Substance use and poor dietary practices are prevalent among adolescents. The purpose of this study was to examine frequency of substance use and associations between cigarette, alcohol and marijuana use and selected dietary practices, such as sugar-sweetened beverages, high-fat foods, fruits and vegetables, and frequency of fast food restaurant use among alternative high school students. Associations between multi-substance use and the same dietary practices were also examined.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A convenience sample of adolescents (n = 145; 61% minority, 52% male) attending six alternative high schools in the St Paul/Minneapolis metropolitan area completed baseline surveys. Students were participants in the Team COOL (Controlling Overweight and Obesity for Life) pilot study, a group randomized obesity prevention pilot trial. Mixed model multivariate analyses procedures were used to assess associations of interest.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Daily cigarette smoking was reported by 36% of students. Cigarette smoking was positively associated with consumption of regular soda (p = 0.019), high-fat foods (p = 0.037), and fast food restaurant use (p = 0.002). Alcohol (p = 0.005) and marijuana use (p = 0.035) were positively associated with high-fat food intake. With increasing numbers of substances, a positive trend was observed in high-fat food intake (p = 0.0003). There were no significant associations between substance use and fruit and vegetable intake.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Alternative high school students who use individual substances as well as multiple substances may be at high risk of unhealthful dietary practices. Comprehensive health interventions in alternative high schools have the potential of reducing health-compromising behaviors that are prevalent among this group of students. This study adds to the limited research examining substance use and diet among at-risk youth.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01315743">NCT01315743</a></p

The practice of 'doing' evaluation: Lessons learned from nine complex intervention trials in action

Background: There is increasing recognition among trialists of the challenges in understanding how particular 'real-life' contexts influence the delivery and receipt of complex health interventions. Evaluations of interventions to change health worker and/or patient behaviours in health service settings exemplify these challenges. When interpreting evaluation data, deviation from intended intervention implementation is accounted for through process evaluations of fidelity, reach, and intensity. However, no such systematic approach has been proposed to account for the way evaluation activities may deviate in practice from assumptions made when data are interpreted.Methods: A collective case study was conducted to explore experiences of undertaking evaluation activities in the real-life contexts of nine complex intervention trials seeking to improve appropriate diagnosis and treatment of malaria in varied health service settings. Multiple sources of data were used, including in-depth interviews with investigators, participant-observation of studies, and rounds of discussion and reflection.Results and discussion: From our experiences of the realities of conducting these evaluations, we identified six key 'lessons learned' about ways to become aware of and manage aspects of the fabric of trials involving the interface of researchers, fieldworkers, participants and data collection tools that may affect the intended production of data and interpretation of findings. These lessons included: foster a shared understanding across the study team of how individual practices contribute to the study goals; promote and facilitate within-team communications for ongoing reflection on the progress of the evaluation; establish processes for ongoing collaboration and dialogue between sub-study teams; the importance of a field research coordinator bridging everyday project management with scientific oversight; collect and review reflective field notes on the progress of the evaluation to aid interpretation of outcomes; and these approaches should help the identification of and reflection on possible overlaps between the evaluation and intervention.Conclusion: The lessons we have drawn point to the principle of reflexivity that, we argue, needs to become part of standard practice in the conduct of evaluations of complex interventions to promote more meaningful interpretations of the effects of an intervention and to better inform future implementation and decision-making. © 2014 Reynolds et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd