The Absurdity of Aspiration within Further Education in England: Where Much is Said but Little is Done?

In the last 20 years, considerable research and ideological focus has been placed on aspiration initiatives in Further Education (FE) in England. Unfortunately, the label of “aspiration” is often misunderstood, and the liberal overuse of the term is largely offered as a panacea for improving the academic and life outcomes of young people, which has resulted in a paucity of studies that examine application of the concept. This discussion paper explores how current aspirational doctrine plays out within FE in England and suggests that, although student aspirations are widely lauded as important, there is a lack of understanding of the practical application of aspirational strategies. We suggest the notion of “raising aspirations” has been condensed to little more than an incitement to action that oversimplifies complexities and ignores the burden of historical social influencers on students. Consequently, we argue that a more sophisticated analysis of aspiration is needed, as well as a wider debate involving relevant stakeholders on the practicalities of what constitutes aspirational strategy

The epistemological chain in action: coaching in high level golf

An epistemological chain, as it relates to sport, may be understood as the sequencing of tacit coaching knowledge that a coach may adopt or impart to a given performer in a given sport. It is a make-up of beliefs and actions that constitutes how they go about coaching. The aim of the study was to explore the nature and application of the epistemological chain (EC) construct in the decision making of high level golf coaches. In particular we were interested in determining whether the EC was evident and operationalized in a coherent manner. Five male high level golf coaches interviewed in an earlier study were observed delivering a coaching session. These observations provided the basis of subsequent semi-structured interviews which explored general behaviours in order to determine the overall implementation of the EC. Data were analysed to identify themes aligned to the core elements of the EC. Results indicate that the EC is indeed present in a coherent fashion and highlights its utility as a guide and framework for coach reflection and learning

What proportion of patients with chronic heart failure are eligible for sacubitril-valsartan?

AIMS: The PARADIGM-HF trial showed that sacubitril-valsartan, an ARB-neprilysin inhibitor, is more effective than enalapril for some patients with heart failure (HF). It is uncertain what proportion of patients with HF would be eligible for sacubitril-valsartan in clinical practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2014, 6131 patients consecutively referred to a community HF clinic with suspected HF were assessed. The criteria required to enter the randomized phase of PARADIGM-HF, including symptoms, NT-proBNP, and current treatment with or without target doses of ACE inhibitors or ARBs, were applied to identify the proportion of patients eligible for sacubitril-valsartan. Recognizing the diversity of clinical opinion and guideline recommendations concerning this issue, entry criteria were applied singly and in combination. Of 1396 patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤40%, HFrEF) and contemporary measurement of NT-proBNP, 379 were on target doses of an ACE inhibitor or ARB at their initial visit and, of these, 172 (45%) fulfilled the key entry criteria for the PARADIGM-HF trial. Lack of symptoms (32%) and NT-proBNP <600 ng/L (49%) were common reasons for failure to fulfil criteria. A further 122 patients became eligible during follow-up (n = 294, 21%). However, if background medication and doses were ignored, then 701 (50%) were eligible initially and a further 137 became eligible during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Of patients with HFrEF referred to a clinic such as ours, only 21% fulfilled the PARADIGM-HF randomization criteria, on which the ESC Guidelines are based; this proportion rises to 60% if background medication is ignored

Viral determinants and vector competence of Zika Virus transmission

Zika virus (ZIKV) has emerged as a new global health threat. Since its first discovery in Zika forest in Uganda, this virus has been isolated from several mosquito species, including Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. The geographical distribution of these mosquito species across tropical and subtropical regions has led to several outbreaks, including the recent pandemic in Brazil, followed by the Pacific islands and other areas of North and South America. This has gained attention of the scientific community to elucidate the epidemiology and transmission of ZIKV. Despite its strong attention on clinical aspects for healthcare professionals, the relationships between ZIKV and its principal vectors, A. aegypti and A. albopictus, have not gained substantial interest in the scientific research community. As such, this review aims to summarize the current knowledge on ZIKV tropism and some important mechanisms which may be employed by the virus for effective strategies on viral survival in mosquitoes. In addition, this review identifies the areas of research that should be placed attention to, for which to be exploited for novel mosquito control strategies