1,020 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Defining participatory video from practice
In this chapter we explore the common threads within different strands of participatory video by considering some examples of practice. Taken together these reveal a rich diversity of purpose and application. Participatory video has been used as a term to describe some quite distinct practices, and conversely, there are instances of the use of video in social settings that seem to be closely related to participatory video without being described as such. This makes it difficult to immediately pin down what the term means, and indeed it is said that there is no common understanding of participatory video.
To scholars the diversity of participatory video practice presents two separate issues. The first is that it is necessary to bear in mind that participatory video has been applied in many more ways outside of academic research and education than inside. Even if one is only interested in participatory video solely as a component of research, an understanding of non-academic practice is likely to enrich and enhance methodological choices. The second is that participatory video is a rich site for a pragmatic and phronetic scholarship that questions social experiences to explore what works and to what end. The question here is what lessons can be learned from diverse practices, and how to apply this learning elsewhere. Thus with participatory video, as with any practice, scholarship has a role to play in terms of providing a platform for considered and critical reflection, a space to consider the significance of what is and of what could be.
Effective reflection rests on some basic taxonomic work in order to gain an overview of the field. We therefore have selected three vignettes to show some key features of participatory video in practice, with an eye to establishing a broad baseline. These examples are drawn from our personal research in two cases and some background research in the third. For the purpose of this chapter, breadth is more appropriate if we are interested in to explore the range of extant practice, and the vignettes are simple outlines to provide illustration for an exploratory discussion rather than fully developed case studies with all of the detailed evidence presented
ATRT-02. Neuropsychological function in infant atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor versus low-grade glioma survivors reflects tumor malignancy and multimodal treatment [Abstract]
BACKGROUND: Therapy of infants with brain tumors predisposes these patients to increased risks for cognitive sequelae, especially following radiotherapy. Neuropsychological outcome gains importance for those 40-60% of patients with an atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (ATRT) who survive beyond 2 years. Still, reports on cognitive late-effects in children with ATRT are scarce compared to other pediatric brain tumor groups. We analyzed neuropsychological outcome for long-term ATRT-survivors registered in EU-RHAB and infant low-grade glioma (LGG) survivors from the SIOP-LGG 2004-study and LGG-registry. PATIENTS+METHODS: Age at diagnosis of both cohorts was 0-36 months. ATRT-patients (n=13) treated with up to 54Gy radiotherapy (median age 22 months (±7.1)) were evaluated with the “ATRT-Neuropsychology” tool based on SIOPE-BTG QoS-Group recommendations at median 6.8 years (±2.8) after diagnosis. LGG-patients (n=15) treated without radiotherapy (4/15 with chemotherapy) were analyzed with the German “Neuropsychological-Basic-Diagnostic” tool 5.2 years (±0.6) post-diagnosis. RESULTS: The ATRT- vs. LGG-cohorts were comparable for median age at diagnosis, sex-ratio and tumor-localization, though they differed slightly in median age at assessment (9.5/7.2 years (±2.5/1.1)). Results of age-appropriate tests showed increased impairments for ATRT-patients in fluid intelligence (FI) (p=.006, d=1.214) and in visual-spatial processing (VSP) (p<.001, d=2.233) compared to LGG-patients. The median for neuropsychological test results of ATRT-patients spanned from considerably below the normal to the lower normal range (median=65-90), while results of LGG-patients were mostly in the lower normal range (median=83-103). Results for psychomotor speed abilities (PMS) were distinctly below the norm for both patient groups (p=.002-.007). CONCLUSION: Infant ATRT- and LGG-patients develop significant impairments in PMS abilities following multimodal treatment. Long-term survivors of ATRT suffer from additional FI and VSP deficits. Our data suggest that high malignancy requiring multimodal treatment determines the inferior cognitive outcome for the ATRT-cohort. Long-term neuropsychological monitoring (and treatment options) should be implemented as standard of care in ATRT- and LGG-trials
Risk of advanced fibrosis in first-degree relatives of with nonalcoholic liver disease
Peer reviewe
- …