Elite female athletes’ experiences and perceptions of the menstrual cycle on training and sport performance

The purpose of the current study was twofold (a) to examine elite female athletes’ experiences of their menstrual cycle, with a focus upon the impact on training and competition performance and (b) the openness of conversation pertaining to the menstrual cycle with coaching and support staff. Following receipt of institutional ethical approval, individual semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 17 elite female athletes (25.5 ± 4.7 years) from multiple sports. Results revealed athletes’ experiencing a natural menstrual cycle reported physical symptoms alongside mood disturbances and reduced motivation to train. The decision to actively control the menstrual cycle was often triggered by a desire to reduce the effect on competition, to lessen anxieties about making required weight or reduce distraction to manage during competition. Athletes indicated an openness to talk about the menstrual cycle to other females, however, there was variation in the comfort athletes experienced regarding talking to male coaches. Overall, the findings highlight the need to educate elite athletes and coaches on the menstrual cycle, considering it in the same light as other physiological functions in sport to improve health, well‐being, and performance. Furthermore, providing education on how to construct positive conversations, equipping individuals with the correct terminology, and confidence to talk about the menstrual cycle will reduce some reservations identified through improved knowledge and understanding

The measurement of sleep in children with neurogenetic syndromes

This thesis is submitted for the Clinical Psychology Doctorate at the University of Birmingham. The thesis contains three chapters which comprise the research component of the doctorate. The first chapter is a systematic review of the concordance between objective and subjective sleep assessment methods in rare neurogenetic syndromes. The second chapter is an empirical paper which uses an existing actigraphy dataset to explore the impact of sleep assessment methodologies on sleep parameter estimates across neurogenetic syndromes. The final chapter is in the form of a press release for both the review and empirical chapters

The conceptual relevance of assessment measures in patients with mild/mild-moderate Alzheimer\u27s disease

Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the conceptual relevance of four measures of disease activity in patients with mild/mild-moderate Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD): (1) the Alzheimer\u27s Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale; (2) the Alzheimer\u27s Disease Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living Inventory; (3) the Neuropsychiatry Inventory; and (4) the Dependence Scale. Methods: A conceptual model depicting patient experience of mild AD was developed via literature review; concepts were compared with the items of the four measures. Relevance of the concepts included in the four measures was evaluated by patients with mild AD in a survey and follow-up interviews. Results: The four measures assessed few of the symptoms/impacts of mild AD identified within the literature. Measured items addressing emotional impacts were deemed most relevant by participants but were included in the measures only superficially. Discussion: The four assessment measures do not appear to capture the concepts most relevant to/important to patients with mild/mild-moderate AD. © 2018 The Author

Reflecting on Crisis: Ethics of Dis/Engagement in Migration Research

This article offers a collective “gaze from within” the process of migration research, on the effects the pandemic has had on our interlocutors, our research fields, and our positionalities as researchers. Drawing from our experiences of researching a field in increasing crisis, and following the methodological reflections of the article written by our colleagues in this issue, we discuss a number of dilemmas and repositionings stemming from—and extending beyond—the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Focusing on issues of positionality, ethics of (dis)engaging from the research field, and the underlying extractivist nature of Global North academia, we propose our own vision of more egalitarian and engaged research ethics and qualitative methodologies in the post-pandemic world

A modified Delphi process to establish future research priorities in malignant oesophagogastric surgery

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Elsevier via the DOI in this frecordBackground: With rapid advancement in the genomics of oesophagogastric (OG) cancer and raised expectations in clinical outcomes from patients and clinicians alike there is a clear need to determine the current research priorities in OG cancer surgery. The aim of our study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine the research priorities among OG cancer surgeons in the United Kingdom. Methods: Delphi methodology may be utilised to develop consensus opinion amongst a group of experts. Members of the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland were invited to submit individual research questions via an online survey (phase I). Two rounds of prioritisation by multidisciplinary expert healthcare professionals (phase II and III) were completed to determine a final list of high priority research questions. All questions submitted and subsequently ranked were analysed on an anonymised basis. Results: In total, 427 questions were submitted in phase I and 75 with an OG cancer focus were taken forward for prioritisation in phase II. Phase III produced a final list of 12 high priority questions with an emphasis on tailored or personalised treatment strategies in OG cancer surgery. Conclusion: A modified Delphi process produced a list of 12 high priority research questions in OG cancer surgery. Future studies and awards from funding bodies should reflect this consensus list of prioritised questions in the interest of improving patient care and encouraging collaborative research across multiple centres

Doctoral Supervision: A Best Practice Review

Unlike taught classroom-based degree courses, doctoral degrees in the UK are normally only, or mainly, focused upon a single intensive research study into a specific topic. Such degree courses facilitate the development of students into highly specialist autonomous researchers capable of independent thought. Typically, a blend of support is provided to each doctoral student which consists of an elective development program of research methods learning opportunities alongside dedicated supervisor support from one or more academic members of staff called “supervisors”. It is the expectation that each supervisor will act as a guide and mentor for the doctoral student, thereby enabling them to successfully complete their program of research. We recommend that the following dimensions of good supervisory practice should be considered, i.e., selecting the right doctoral student, considering the supervisor-doctoral student relationship, understanding the power dynamics between supervisor and doctoral student, integrating doctoral students into the research culture, protecting the mental health of doctoral students, supervising doctoral students, training supervisors, mentoring doctoral students, and assisting doctoral students to complete their studies

Bridging the gap between evidence and policy for infectious diseases: How models can aid public health decision-making.

The dominant approach to decision-making in public health policy for infectious diseases relies heavily on expert opinion, which often applies empirical evidence to policy questions in a manner that is neither systematic nor transparent. Although systematic reviews are frequently commissioned to inform specific components of policy (such as efficacy), the same process is rarely applied to the full decision-making process. Mathematical models provide a mechanism through which empirical evidence can be methodically and transparently integrated to address such questions. However, such models are often considered difficult to interpret. In addition, models provide estimates that need to be iteratively re-evaluated as new data or considerations arise. Using the case study of a novel diagnostic for tuberculosis, a framework for improved collaboration between public health decision-makers and mathematical modellers that could lead to more transparent and evidence-driven policy decisions for infectious diseases in the future is proposed. The framework proposes that policymakers should establish long-term collaborations with modellers to address key questions, and that modellers should strive to provide clear explanations of the uncertainty of model structure and outputs. Doing so will improve the applicability of models and clarify their limitations when used to inform real-world public health policy decisions

An evaluation of a public partnership project between academic institutions and young people with Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage

BackgroundThis project (named Reinvent) aimed to promote Public Involvement (PI) in health research. Academics worked with a community group, the Eloquent Praise & Empowerment Dance Company, to develop a community partnership with young people from Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage communities. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the Reinvent project for key learnings on how to engage and build partnerships with young people from Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage communities.MethodsReinvent developed a steering group which consisted of five young people, one academic, a Race Equality Ambassador and the Director of Eloquent. The steering group co-produced an agenda for two workshops and the evaluation tools used. The content of the workshops included drama exercises, discussions on physical and mental health, nutrition and school-life, short introductions to the concepts of research and PI, and group work to critique and improve a video currently used to promote PI in health research to young people. The evaluation tools included using the ‘Cube’ evaluation framework, video-blogging and collecting anonymous feedback.FindingsThe responses to the ‘Cube’ evaluation framework were positive across all four domains (agenda, voice, contribute change) in both workshops. A few of the young people described having a better understanding of the meaning and practice of PI in a video-blog. The anonymous feedback suggested that the workshops had increased young people’s confidence in sharing their thoughts and opinions about health and PI.ConclusionReinvent has shown that academic institutions and young people from an under-served community can partner to co-design workshops and apply evaluation tools. Working with young people in an environment in which they were comfortable, and by researchers joining in with the activities that the young people enjoyed (such as dance), enabled more informal and open conversations to develop. More work is needed to build upon this project so that young people can feel confident and supported to get involved in PI activities relating to research