Deviating From the Traditional Instructional Tools: Integrating Twitter in a Sociology of Deviance Course | S’éloigner des outils pédagogiques traditionnels : intégrer Twitter dans un cours sur la sociologie de la deviance

As the use of social media in post-secondary education expands, so does the research literature examining its effectiveness in engaging students. Studies have examined the use of Twitter as an assessment and engagement tool, and since this is a broad and growing research area, better understanding whether Twitter can promote these outcomes in an upper-level university course is valuable. This paper explores these themes based on a student survey (N=37) conducted in a Sociology Deviance course. It also reviews how students responded to the use of Twitter as a “community-classroom” engagement and assessment tool. Findings reveal that Twitter did contribute to some students’ sense of community. We offer suggestions for how instructors can successfully integrate Twitter activities into their course assessment to make them more engaging and to improve connectedness. L’utilisation des médias sociaux dans l’éducation postsecondaire prend de l’ampleur, entraînant l’augmentation de la documentation de recherche qui examine leur efficacité à motiver les élèves. Des études se sont penchées sur l’utilisation de Twitter comme outil d’évaluation et de participation. Comme il s’agit d’un domaine de recherche vaste et en croissance, il est important de mieux comprendre si Twitter peut favoriser ces résultats dans le cadre d’un cours universitaire de haut niveau. Cet article explore ces thèmes en s’appuyant sur un sondage réalisé auprès des étudiants (N=37) dans un cours de sociologie de la déviance. Il examine également comment les étudiants ont réagi à l’usage de Twitter comme outil de participation à une « classe-collectivité » et comme outil d’évaluation. Les conclusions révèlent que Twitter a contribué au sentiment d’appartenance à la collectivité de certains étudiants. Nous offrons des suggestions sur la façon dont les instructeurs peuvent intégrer avec succès des activités liées à Twitter dans leurs évaluations de cours afin de rendre ceux-ci plus motivants et d’améliorer la connectivité

Posttest Analyses of the Steel Containment Vessel Model

A high pressure test of a scale model of a steel containment vessel (SCV) was conducted on December 11-12, 1996 at Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA. The test model is a mixed-scaled model (1:10 in geometry and 1:4 in shell thickness) of an improved Mark II boiling water reactor (BWR) containment. This testis part of a program to investigate the response of representative models of nuclear containment structures to pressure loads beyond the design basis accident. The posttest analyses of this test focused on three areas where the pretest analysis effort did not adequately predict the model behavior during the test. These areas are the onset of global yielding, the strain concentrations around the equipment hatch and the strain concentrations that led to a small tear near a weld relief opening that was not modeled in the pretest analysis

Steel Containment Vessel Model Test: Results and Evaluation

A high pressure test of the steel containment vessel (SCV) model was conducted on December 11-12, 1996 at Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA. The test model is a mixed-scaled model (1:10 in geometry and 1:4 in shell thickness) of an improved Mark II boiling water reactor (BWR) containment. A concentric steel contact structure (CS), installed over the SCV model and separated at a nominally uniform distance from it, provided a simplified representation of a reactor shield building in the actual plant. The SCV model and contact structure were instrumented with strain gages and displacement transducers to record the deformation behavior of the SCV model during the high pressure test. This paper summarizes the conduct and the results of the high pressure test and discusses the posttest metallurgical evaluation results on specimens removed from the SCV model

Barriers and facilitators to weight management in overweight and obese women living in Australia with PCOS: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND:Lifestyle modification targeting weight management is the first-line treatment for women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) regardless of presenting symptoms. Women with PCOS are more likely to gain more weight compared with women without PCOS, which may be related to barriers in engaging in lifestyle modification. The aim of this study is to explore the experience of women with PCOS in weight management and to determine the facilitators and barriers to lifestyle modifications in women with PCOS. METHODS:Ten women with PCOS participated in focus groups and semi-structured telephone interviews on lifestyle and weight management in PCOS. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis of the transcripts was conducted. Thematic analysis of the transcripts were conducted using the method of constant comparison. RESULTS:Women in the current study attempted a wide range of weight loss interventions, but had difficulties losing weight and preventing weight regain. Women felt that having PCOS affected their ability to lose weight and to keep it off. Facilitators to lifestyle modification for weight management were reported as structured approaches such as having balanced meals and support by health professionals, peers, friends or family. Barriers to lifestyle changes in women with PCOS included logistical barriers such as time and cost, motivational barriers including tiredness or feeling unrewarded, environmental barriers such as not having access to safe places to exercise, emotional barriers such as having depressive and defeating thoughts, and relational barriers such as having unsupportive partner or prioritising children's meal preferences. CONCLUSIONS:Women with PCOS face a number of personal, environmental and social facilitators and barriers to lifestyle modification for weight loss. While many of these are also experienced by women without PCOS, women with PCOS face additional barriers in having low sense of self-confidence and high prevalence of negative thoughts which may impair their ability to maintain efforts in lifestyle modification over the long term. Future research should further explore the impact of the emotional and mental burden of PCOS on the management of weight and other aspects of PCOS. Future lifestyle intervention should also address the psychosocial aspect of PCOS.Siew Lim, Caroline A. Smith, Michael F. Costello, Freya MacMillan, Lisa Moran and Carolyn E

Evidence summaries and recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome: assessment and treatment of infertility

STUDY QUESTION:What is the recommended assessment and management of infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertize and consumer preference? SUMMARY ANSWER:International evidence-based guidelines, including 44 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of infertile women with PCOS. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY:Previous guidelines on PCOS lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, failed to engage consumer and multidisciplinary perspectives or were outdated. The assessment and management of infertile women with PCOS are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS:Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, a multidisciplinary international guideline development group (GDG), consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed the guideline scope and priorities. The engaged international society-nominated panel included endocrinology, gynaecology, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis and translation experts. Thirty-seven societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Extensive online communication and two face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 19 prioritized clinical questions involving nine evidence-based reviews and 10 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations (EBRs) were formulated prior to consensus voting within the guideline panel. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION:International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. A (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, desirable and undesirable consequences, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. The guideline was peer-reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating societies and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREE II criteria and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the GDG and has been approved by the NHMRC. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE:The quality of evidence (QOE) for the EBRs in the assessment and management of infertility in PCOS included very low (n = 1), low (n = 9) and moderate (n = 4) quality with no EBRs based on high-quality evidence. The guideline provides 14 EBRs, 10 clinical consensus recommendations (CCRs) and 20 clinical practice points on the assessment and management of infertility in PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include emphasizing evidence-based fertility therapy, including cheaper and safer fertility management. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION:Overall evidence is generally of low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition. Regional health systems vary and a process for adaptation of this guideline is provided. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS:The international guideline for the assessment and management of infertility in PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS:The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). GDG members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of conflicts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Dr Costello has declared shares in Virtus Health and past sponsorship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in the IVF unit Fertility SA, travel support from Merck and grants from Ferring. Prof. Norman also has scientific advisory board duties for Ferring. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.This article was not externally peer-reviewed by Human Reproduction Open.M F Costello, M L Misso, A Balen, J Boyle, L Devoto, R M Garad ... et al

Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome

Study Question: What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise, and consumer preference? Summary Answer: International evidence-based guidelines including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS. What Is Known Already: Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist. Study Design, Size, Duration: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength. Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods: Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, fi ve guide- line development groups, and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis, and translation experts. Thirty-seven societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the fi ve guideline panels, modi fi ed based on international feedback and peer review, with fi nal recommendations approved across all panels. Main Results and the Role of Chance: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: i) considerable re fi nement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; ii) reducing unnecessary testing; iii) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modi fi cation, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and iv) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management. Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring signi fi cantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around re fi ning speci fi c diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided. Wider Implications of the Findings: The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program. Study Funding/Competing Interest(S): The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guideline development group members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of con- fl icts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Full details of con fl icts declared across the guideline development groups are available at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/sphpm/mchri/ pcos/guideline intheRegister ofdisclosures ofinterest. Ofnamed authors,Dr Costello has declared sharesinVirtus Healthand pastsponsor- ship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Laven declared grants from Ferring, Euroscreen and personal fees from Ferring, Euroscreen, Danone and Titus Healthcare. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in an IVF unit. The remaining authors have no con fl icts of interest to declare. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating so- cieties and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREEII criteria and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and was submitted for fi nal approval by the NHMRC.Helena J. Teede, Marie L. Misso … Bernardus W (Ben) Mol … Lisa J Moran … Robert J Norman … Raymond J Rodgers … et al. (on behalf of the International PCOS Network

Results of steel containment vessel model test

A series of static overpressurization tests of scale models of nuclear containment structures is being conducted by Sandia National Laboratories for the Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation of Japan and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Two tests are being conducted: (1) a test of a model of a steel containment vessel (SCV) and (2) a test of a model of a prestressed concrete containment vessel (PCCV). This paper summarizes the conduct of the high pressure pneumatic test of the SCV model and the results of that test. Results of this test are summarized and are compared with pretest predictions performed by the sponsoring organizations and others who participated in a blind pretest prediction effort. Questions raised by this comparison are identified and plans for posttest analysis are discussed

Large-scale evidence-based guideline development engaging the international PCOS community

The evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) integrates the best available evidence with international, multidisciplinary clinical expertise and consumer preferences to provide health professionals, consumers, and policy makers with high-quality, comprehensive guidance about diagnosing and managing PCOS. Here, we outline the rigorous and systematic process, defined a priori and documented to be reproducible, to minimize bias and maintain transparency, in alignment with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) criteria and incorporating the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework that render this PCOS evidence-based guideline credible, trustworthy, reliable, and useable.Marie L. Misso, Eliza C. Tassone, Michael F. Costello, Anuja Dokras, Joop Laven, Lisa J. Moran, Helena J. Teede (on behalf of the International PCOS International Network

To share or not to share data: how valid are trials evaluating first-line ovulation induction for polycystic ovary syndrome?

BACKGROUND In our recent individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of first-line ovulation induction for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), IPD were only available from 20 studies of 53 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We noticed that the summary effect sizes of meta-analyses of RCTs without IPD sharing were different from those of RCTs with IPD sharing. Granting access to IPD for secondary analysis has implications for promoting fair and transparent conduct of RCTs. It is, however, still common for authors to choose to withhold IPD, limiting the impact of and confidence in the results of RCTs and systematic reviews based on aggregate data. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE We performed a meta-epidemiologic study to elucidate if RCTs without IPD sharing have lower quality and more methodological issues than those with IPD sharing in an IPD meta-analysis evaluating first-line ovulation induction for PCOS. SEARCH METHODS We included RCTs identified for the IPD meta-analysis. We dichotomized RCTs according to whether they provided IPD (shared group) or not (non-shared group) in the IPD meta-analysis. We restricted RCTs to full-text published trials written in English. We assessed and compared RCTs in the shared and non-shared groups on the following criteria: Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0), GRADE approach, adequacy of trial registration; description of statistical methods and reproducibility of univariable statistical analysis; excessive similarity or difference in baseline characteristics that is not compatible with chance; and other miscellaneous methodological issues. OUTCOMES In total, 45 trials (8697 women) were included in this study. IPD were available from 17 RCTs and 28 trials were categorized as the non-shared IPD group. Pooled risk rates obtained from the shared and non-shared groups were different. Overall low risk of bias was associated with 13/17 (76%) of shared RCTs versus 7/28 (25%) of non-shared RCTs. For RCTs that started recruitment after 1 July 2005, adequate trial registration was found in 3/9 (33%) of shared IPD RCTs versus 0/16 (0%) in non-shared RCTs. In total, 7/17 (41%) of shared RCTs and 19/28 (68%) of non-shared RCTs had issues with the statistical methods described. The median (range) of inconsistency rate per study, between reported and reproduced analyses for baseline variables, was 0% (0–92%) (6 RCTs applicable) in the shared group and 54% (0–100%) (13 RCTs applicable) in the non-shared group. The median (range) of inconsistency rate of univariable statistical results for the outcome(s) per study was 0% (0–63%) (14 RCTs applicable) in the shared group and 44% (0–100%) (24 RCTs applicable) in the non-shared group. The distributions of simulation-generated P-values from comparisons of baseline continuous variables between intervention and control arms suggested that RCTs in the shared group are likely to be consistent with properly conducted randomization (P = 0.163), whereas this was not the case for the RCTs in the non-shared group (P = 4.535 × 10−8). WIDER IMPLICATIONS IPD meta-analysis on evaluating first-line ovulation induction for PCOS preserves validity and generates more accurate estimates of risk than meta-analyses using aggregate data, which enables more transparent assessments of benefits and risks. The availability of IPD and the willingness to share these data may be a good indicator of quality, methodological soundness and integrity of RCTs when they are being considered for inclusion in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Esmee M Bordewijk, Rui Wang, Madelon van Wely, Michael F Costello, Robert J Norman, Helena Teede, Lyle C Gurrin, Ben W Mol, Wentao L