An empowerment intervention for Indigenous communities: An outcome assessment

© 2015 Kinchin et al. Background: Empowerment programs have been shown to contribute to increased empowerment of individuals and build capacity within the community or workplace. To-date, the impact of empowerment programs has yet to be quantified in the published literature in this field. This study assessed the Indigenous-developed Family Wellbeing (FWB) program as an empowerment intervention for a child safety workforce in remote Indigenous communities by measuring effect sizes. The study also assessed the value of measurement tools for future impact evaluations. Methods: A three-day FWB workshop designed to promote empowerment and workplace engagement among child protection staffwas held across five remote north Queensland Indigenous communities. The FWB assessment tool comprised a set of validated surveys including the Growth and Empowerment Measure (GEM), Australian Unity Wellbeing Index, Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) and Workforce engagement survey. The assessment was conducted pre-intervention and three months post-intervention. Results: The analysis of pre-and post-surveys revealed that the GEM appeared to be the most tangible measure for detecting positive changes in communication, conflict resolution, decision making and life skill development. The GEM indicated a 17 % positive change compared to 9 % for the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index, 5 % for the workforce engagement survey and less than 1 % for K10. Conclusions: This study extended qualitative research and identified the best measurement tool for detecting the outcomes of empowerment programs. The GEM was found the most sensitive and the most tangible measure that captures improvements in communication, conflict resolution, decision making and life skill development. The GEM and Australian Unity Wellbeing Index could be recommended as routine measures for empowerment programs assessment among similar remote area workforce

The complexity of health service integration: A review of reviews

© 2016 Heyeres, McCalman, Tsey and Kinchin. Background: The aim of health service integration is to provide a sustainable and integrated health system that better meets the needs of the end user. Yet, definitions of health service integration, methods for integrating health services, and expected outcomes are varied. This review was commissioned by Queensland Health, the government department responsible for health service delivery in Queensland, Australia, to inform efforts to integrate their mental health services. This review reports on the characteristics, reported outcomes, and design quality of studies included in systematic reviews of health service integration research. Method: The review was developed by systematically searching nine electronic databases to find peer-reviewed Australian and international systematic reviews with a focus on health service integration. Reviews were included if they were in the English language and published between 2000 and 2015. A standardized assessment tool was used to analyze the study design quality of included reviews. Data relating to the integration types, methods, and reported outcomes of integration were synthesized. Results: Seventeen publications met the inclusion criteria. Eleven (65%) reviews were published during the past 5 years, which may indicate a trend for increased awareness of the need for service integration. The majority of reviews were published by researchers in the UK (8/47%), USA (3/18%), and Australia (3/18%). Included reviews focused on a variety of integration types, including integrated care pathways, governance models, integration of interventions, collaborative/integrated care models, and integration of different types of health care. Most (53%) of the reviews reported on the cost-effectiveness of service integration, e.g., positive results, no effect, or inconclusive. Only one of the reviews reported on the importance of consumer involvement. The overall design of 70% of the reviews was high, 18% medium, and 12% low. Conclusion: There is no "one size fits all" approach to health service integration. Instead, this literature review highlighted the complexity of service integration, which in most primary studies involved a range of strategies. Rigorous assessments of cost-effectiveness and reporting on consumer involvement are required in future research

Evaluating the Implementation of a Mental Health Referral Service "Connect to Wellbeing": A Quality Improvement Approach.

There is increasing demand for mental health services to be accessible to diverse populations in flexible, yet, cost-effective ways. This article presents the findings from a study that evaluated the process of implementing Connect to Wellbeing (CTW), a new mental health intake, assessment and referral service in regional Australia, to determine how well it improved access to services, and to identify potential measures that could be used to evaluate value for money. The study used a hybrid study design to conduct a process evaluation to better understand: the process of implementing CTW; and the barriers and factors enabling implementation of CTW. In addition, to better understand how to measure the cost-effectiveness of such services, the hybrid study design included an assessment of potential outcome measures suitable for ascertaining both the effectiveness of CTW in client health outcomes, and conducting a value for money analysis. The process evaluation found evidence that by improving processes, and removing waitlists CTW had created an opportunity to broadened the scope and type of psychological services offered which improved accessibility. The assessment of potential outcome measures provided insight into suitable measures for future evaluation into service effectiveness, client health outcomes and value for money

Evaluating research impact: The development of a research for impact tool

© 2016 Tsey, Lawson, Kinchin, Bainbridge, McCalman, Watkin, Cadet-James and Rossetto. Introduction: This paper examines the process of developing a Research for Impact Tool in the contexts of general fiscal constraint, increased competition for funding, perennial concerns about the over-researching of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues without demonstrable benefits as well as conceptual and methodological difficulties of evaluating research impact. The aim is to highlight the challenges and opportunities involved in evaluating research impact to serve as resource for potential users of the research for impact tool and others interested in assessing the impact of research. Materials and methods: A combination of literature reviews, workshops with researchers, and reflections by project team members and partners using participatory snowball techniques. Results: Assessing research impact is perceived to be difficult, akin to the so-called "wicked problem," but not impossible. Heuristic and collaborative approach to research that takes the expectations of research users, research participants and the funders of research offers a pragmatic solution to evaluating research impact. The logic of the proposed Research for Impact Tool is based on the understanding that the value of research is to create evidence and/or products to support smarter decisions so as to improve the human condition. Research is, therefore, of limited value unless the evidence created is used to make smarter decisions for the betterment of society. A practical way of approaching research impact is, therefore, to start with the decisions confronting decision makers whether they are government policymakers, industry, professional practitioners, or households and the extent to which the research supports them to make smarter policy and practice decisions and the knock-on consequences of doing so. Embedded at each step in the impact planning and tracking process is the need for appropriate mix of expertise, capacity enhancement, and collaborative participatory learning-by-doing approaches. Discussion: The tool was developed in the context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research but the basic idea that the way to assess research impact is to start upfront with the information needs of decisions makers is equally applicable to research in other settings, both applied (horizontal) and basic (vertical) research. The tool will be further tested and evaluated with researchers over the next 2 years (2016/17). The decision by the Australian Government to include 'industry engagement' and 'impact' as additions to the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) quality measures from 2018 makes the Research for Impact Tool a timely development. The wider challenge is to engage with major Australian research funding agencies to ensure consistent alignment and approaches across research users, communities, and funders in evaluating impact

No one's discussing the elephant in the room: Contemplating questions of research impact and benefit in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australian health research

© 2015 Bainbridge et al. Background: There remains a concern that Indigenous Australians have been over-researched without corresponding improvements in their health; this trend is applicable to most Indigenous populations globally. This debate article has a dual purpose: 1) to open a frank conversation about the value of research to Indigenous Australian populations; and 2) to stimulate ways of thinking about potential resolutions to the lack of progress made in the Indigenous research benefit debate. Discussion: Capturing the meaning of research benefit takes the form of ethical value-oriented methodological considerations in the decision-making processes of Indigenous research endeavours. Because research practices come from Western knowledge bases, attaining such positions in research means reconciling both Indigenous and Western knowledge systems to produce new methodologies that guide planning, evaluating and monitoring of research practices as necessary. Increasingly, more sophisticated performance measures have been implemented to ensure academic impact and benefits are captured. Assessing societal and other non-academic impacts and benefits however, has not been accorded corresponding attention. Research reform has only focussed on research translation in more recent years. The research impact debate must take account of the various standards of accountability (to whom), impact priorities (for whom), positive and negative impacts, and biases that operate in describing impact and measuring benefit. Summary: A perennial question in Indigenous research discourse is whether the abundance of research conducted; purportedly to improve health, is justified and benefits Indigenous people in ways that are meaningful and valued by them. Different research stakeholders have different conceptions of the value and nature of research, its conduct, what it should achieve and the kinds of benefits expected. We need to work collaboratively and listen more closely to the voice of Indigenous Australians to better understand, demonstrate and measure health research benefits. The authors conclude that as an imperative, a systematic benefit assessment strategy that includes identification of research priorities and planning, monitoring and evaluation components needs to be developed and implemented across research projects. In Indigenous health research, this will often mean adopting a benefit-led approach by changing the way research is done and preferencing alternative research methodologies. As a point of departure to improving impact and reaching mutually beneficial outcomes for researchers and partners in Indigenous health research, we need to routinise the assessment of benefit from outset of research as one of the standards toward which we work

Breathlessness, anxiety, depression and function - the BAD-F study: a cross-sectional, population prevalence study in adults.

© 2019 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Context: Breathlessness is associated with depression, but its relationship to anxiety or impaired function is less clear. Objectives: This study evaluated associations between chronic breathlessness and anxiety, depression, and functional status in the general population. Methods: This cross-sectional study of consenting adults (18 years and older) used an online survey. Quota sampling (n = 3000) was used reflecting the 2016 national census for sex, age, and place of residence. Other data included Four-Item Patient Health Questionnaire for depression and anxiety, the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Breathlessness Scale, and the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale. Multinomial logistic regression assessed predictors. Results: About 2977 respondents had all relevant scores (female 51.2%; median age 45.0 [range 18–92]). Prevalence of breathlessness (mMRC ≥2) was 2.4%, anxiety 6.0%, depression 2.7%, coexisting anxiety/depression 6.1%, and poorer functional status (Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Scale ≤60) 1.6%. In multinomial regression, depression, anxiety, and coexisting anxiety/depression were predicted by younger age, longer duration of breathlessness, and poorer functional status. The highest proportions of people with breathlessness were found in the coexisting anxiety/depression group (10.6%) and depression only group (8.8%). Poorest function was in the coexisting anxiety/depression group with 11.6%. The relationship between poorer functional status and coexisting anxiety/depression was significant (odds ratio 0.90; 95% CI 0.89, 0.92). Adjusted odds ratio for breathlessness and depression only was 3.0 (95% CI 1.2, 7.8). Conclusion: Clinically important breathlessness (mMRC ≥2) was associated with depression, anxiety, and coexisting anxiety/depression. Poorer function that is associated with psychological morbidity in the general population requires further research

Charting the elements of pedagogic frailty

Background: The concept of pedagogic frailty has been proposed as a unifying concept that may help to integrate institutional efforts to enhance teaching improvement within universities by helping to maintain a simultaneous focus on four key areas that are thought to impede development. Purpose: The variation in internal structure of the four dimensions of pedagogic frailty and the links that have been proposed to connect them are explored here through the analysis of interviews with academics working in a variety of disciplinary areas. Methods: The application of concept map-mediated interviews allows us to view the variable connections within and between these dimensions and the personal ways they are conceptualised by academics working across the heterogeneous university context. Results: The data show that academics conceptualise the discourse of teaching in various ways that have implications for the links that may be developed to integrate the elements within the model. Conclusions: Whilst the form and content of the maps representing dimensions of the pedagogic frailty model exhibit considerable variation, it is suggested that factors such as academic resilience and the explicit use of integrative concepts within disciplines may help to overcome some of the vulnerabilities that accompany pedagogic frailty. The data also raises questions about the links between factors that tend to be under individual control and those that tend towards institutional control

Damage profiles of ultrashallow B implants in Si and the Kinchin-Pease relationship

Damage distributions resulting from 0.1-2 keV B+ implantation at room temperature into Si(100) to doses ranging from 1×1014 to 2×1016 cm-2 have been determined using high-depth-resolution medium-energy-ion scattering in the double alignment mode. For all B+ doses and energies investigated a 3-4 nm deep, near-surface damage peak was observed while for energies at and above 1 keV, a second damage peak developed beyond the mean projected B+ ion range of 5.3 nm. This dual damage peak structure is due to dynamic annealing processes. For the near-surface peak it is observed that, at the lowest implant energies and doses used, for which recombination processes are suppressed due to the proximity of the surface capturing interstitials, the value of the damage production yield for low-mass B+ ions is equal or greater than the modified Kinchin-Pease model predictions [G. H. Kinchin and R. S. Pease, Rep. Prog. Phys. 18, 1 (1955); G. H. Kinchin and R. S. Pease, J. Nucl. Energy 1, 200 (1955); P. Sigmund, Appl. Phys. Lett. 14, 114 (1969)]

Developing a core outcome set (COS) for Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]

\ua9 2023 Grycuk E et al.Background: Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is an important cause of dementia with a range of clinical manifestations, including motor, neuropsychiatric, and autonomic symptoms. Compared with more common forms of dementia such as Alzheimer’s disease, DLB has been the focus of significantly fewer treatment studies, often with diverse outcome measures, making comparison and clinical implementation difficult. A core outcome set (COS) can address this by ensuring that data are comparable, relevant, useful, and usable for making the best healthcare decisions. Methods: Using a multi-stage approach, development of the DLB-COS will include the following stages: (1) A systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines to create an initial long list of outcomes; (2) A two-round online Delphi including clinicians, scientists, policymakers, and individuals with lived experience of DLB and their representatives; (3) An online consensus meeting to agree on the final core list of outcomes (the final DLB-COS) for use in research and clinical practice; (4) A literature search to identify appropriate measurement instruments for the DLB-COS outcomes; (5) A final consensus meeting of the professional stakeholders who attended the online consensus meeting to agree on the instruments that should be used to measure the outcomes in the DLB-COS; and (6) Global dissemination. Discussion: This is a multi-stage project to develop a COS to be used in treatment trials for DLB. A DLB-COS will ensure the selection of relevant outcomes and will identify the instruments to be used to measure DLB globally