Testimonial Injustice and Vulnerability: A Qualitative Analysis of Participation in the Court of Protection

This article explores participation in Court of Protection (COP) proceedings by people considered vulnerable. The paper is based on original data obtained from observing COP proceedings and reviewing COP case files. It is argued that the observed absence of the subject of proceedings is a form of testimonial injustice, that is, a failure to value a person in their capacity as a giver of knowledge. The issue of competence to give evidence is considered but it is argued that it is not the formal evidential rules that prohibit a vulnerable adult from giving evidence. Instead, it is the result of a persistent assumption that they are inherently vulnerable and therefore lack credibility as a knowledge giver. This assumption results in the voices of vulnerable adults being routinely absent from legal proceedings. It is argued that having a voice in the courtroom is essential and has a number of intrinsic and instrumental benefits. The paper concludes with a discussion about the implications of the research, including the current trend towards the increased use of special measures, and recommends a presumption in favour of the subject of COP proceedings giving evidence

Bronchiectasis in Europe:data on disease characteristics from the European Bronchiectasis registry (EMBARC)

Background: Bronchiectasis is a heterogeneous, neglected disease with few multicentre studies exploring the causes, severity, microbiology, and treatment of the disease across Europe. This aim of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics of bronchiectasis and compare between different European countries.Methods: EMBARC is an international clinical research network for bronchiectasis. We report on a multicentre, prospective, observational, non-interventional, cohort study (the EMBARC registry) conducted across 27 European countries and Israel. Comprehensive clinical data were collected from adult patients (aged ≥18 years) at baseline and annual follow-up visits using electronic case report form. Data from individual countries were grouped into four regions (the UK, northern and western Europe, southern Europe, and central and eastern Europe according to modified EU EuroVoc classification). Follow-up data were used to explore differences in exacerbation frequency between regions using a negative binomial regression model.Findings: Between Jan 12, 2015, and April 12, 2022, 16 963 individuals were enrolled. Median age was 67 years (IQR 57-74), 10 335 (60·9%) participants were female and 6628 (39·1%) were male. The most common cause of bronchiectasis in all 16 963 participants was post-infective disease in 3600 (21·2%); 6466 individuals (38·1%) were classified as idiopathic. Individuals with bronchiectasis experienced a median of two exacerbations (IQR 1-4) per year and 4483 (26·4%) patients had a hospitalisation for exacerbation in the previous year. When examining the percentage of all isolated bacteria, marked differences in microbiology were seen between countries, with a higher frequency of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and lower Haemophilus influenzae frequency in southern Europe, compared with higher H influenzae in the UK and northern and western Europe. Compared with other regions, patients in central and eastern Europe had more severe bronchiectasis measured by the Bronchiectasis Severity Index (51·3% vs 35·1% in the overall cohort) and more exacerbations leading to hospitalisations (57·9% vs 26·4% in the overall cohort). Overall, patients in central and eastern Europe had an increased frequency of exacerbations (adjusted rate ratio [RR] 1·12, 95% CI 1·01-1·25) and a higher frequency of exacerbations leading to hospitalisations (adjusted RR 1·71, 1·44-2·02) compared with patients in other regions. Treatment of bronchiectasis was highly heterogeneous between regions.Interpretation: Bronchiectasis shows important geographical variation in causes, microbiology, severity, and outcomes across Europe.</p

European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of adult bronchiectasis

Bronchiectasis in adults is a chronic disorder associated with poor quality of life and frequent exacerbations in many patients. There have been no previous international guidelines.The European Respiratory Society guidelines for the management of adult bronchiectasis describe the appropriate investigation and treatment strategies determined by a systematic review of the literature.A multidisciplinary group representing respiratory medicine, microbiology, physiotherapy, thoracic surgery, primary care, methodology and patients considered the most relevant clinical questions (for both clinicians and patients) related to management of bronchiectasis. Nine key clinical questions were generated and a systematic review was conducted to identify published systematic reviews, randomised clinical trials and observational studies that answered these questions. We used the GRADE approach to define the quality of the evidence and the level of recommendations. The resulting guideline addresses the investigation of underlying causes of bronchiectasis, treatment of exacerbations, pathogen eradication, long term antibiotic treatment, anti-inflammatories, mucoactive drugs, bronchodilators, surgical treatment and respiratory physiotherapy.These recommendations can be used to benchmark quality of care for people with bronchiectasis across Europe and to improve outcomes

Bronchiectasis and asthma: Data from the European Bronchiectasis Registry (EMBARC)

\ua9 2024 The AuthorsBackground: Asthma is commonly reported in patients with a diagnosis of bronchiectasis. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patients with bronchiectasis and asthma (BE+A) had a different clinical phenotype and different outcomes compared with patients with bronchiectasis without concomitant asthma. Methods: A prospective observational pan-European registry (European Multicentre Bronchiectasis Audit and Research Collaboration) enrolled patients across 28 countries. Adult patients with computed tomography–confirmed bronchiectasis were reviewed at baseline and annual follow-up visits using an electronic case report form. Asthma was diagnosed by the local investigator. Follow-up data were used to explore differences in exacerbation frequency between groups using a negative binomial regression model. Survival analysis used Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Of 16,963 patients with bronchiectasis included for analysis, 5,267 (31.0%) had investigator-reported asthma. Patients with BE+A were younger, were more likely to be female and never smokers, and had a higher body mass index than patients with bronchiectasis without asthma. BE+A was associated with a higher prevalence of rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps as well as eosinophilia and Aspergillus sensitization. BE+A had similar microbiology but significantly lower severity of disease using the bronchiectasis severity index. Patients with BE+A were at increased risk of exacerbation after adjustment for disease severity and multiple confounders. Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use was associated with reduced mortality in patients with BE+A (adjusted hazard ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.95) and reduced risk of hospitalization (rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.67-0.86) compared with control subjects without asthma and not receiving ICSs. Conclusions: BE+A was common and was associated with an increased risk of exacerbations and improved outcomes with ICS use. Unexpectedly we identified significantly lower mortality in patients with BE+A

Critical thinking for 21st-century education: A cyber-tooth curriculum?

It is often assumed that the advent of digital technologies requires fundamental change to the curriculum and to the teaching and learning approaches used in schools around the world to educate this generation of “digital natives” or the “net generation”. This article analyses the concepts of 21st-century skills and critical thinking, to understand how these aspects of learning might contribute to a 21st-century education. The author argues that, although both critical thinking and 21st-century skills are indeed necessary in a curriculum for a 21st-century education, they are not sufficient, even in combination. The role of knowledge and an understanding of differing cultural perspectives and values indicate that education should also fit local contexts in a global world and meet the specific needs of students in diverse cultures. It should also fit the particular technical and historical demands of the 21st century in relation to digital skills

Children’s Stories Supporting the Development of Critical Literacy and Intercultural Understanding

This chapter examines the possibilities of applying children’s storybooks in supporting the development of critical literacy as well as intercultural understanding. Valuing and supporting children’s reading is known to provide understanding and empathy towards other human beings. The chapter focuses on theoretical notions related to promoting critical literacies through children’s storybooks, but also includes practical examples of utilizing multicultural children’s stories. The chapter introduces different strategies that parents and teachers can use to support the development of critical literacy, including critical thinking and understanding multiple perspectives. Focus is especially on young children, because they already are capable of moving beyond what is in front of them on the page. Since children’s storybooks offer possibilities for readers to question implicit assumptions about self and others, books can support readers in becoming more culturally aware and sensitive. Consequently, reading storybooks can affect children’s intercultural understanding, and the role of storybooks in children’s moral development – both shaping and changing attitudes – should be seen as transformative.Peer reviewe

Child Studies Multiple - Collaborative play for thinking through theories and methods

This is the final version. Available on open access from Linköpings University Electronic Press via the DOI in this recordThis text is an exploration of collaborative thinking and writing through theories, methods, and experiences on the topic of the child, children, and childhood. It is a collaborative written text (with 32 authors) that sprang out of the experimental workshop Child Studies Multiple. The workshop and this text are about daring to stay with mess, “un-closure” , and uncertainty in order to investigate the (e)motions and complexities of being either a child or a researcher. The theoretical and methodological processes presented here offer an opportunity to shake the ground on which individual researchers stand by raising questions about scientific inspiration, theoretical and methodological productivity, and thinking through focusing on process, play, and collaboration. The effect of this is a questioning of the singular academic ‘I’ by exploring and showing what a plural ‘I’ can look like. It is about what the multiplicity of voice can offer research in a highly individualistic time. The article allows the reader to follow and watch the unconventional trial-and-error path of the ongoing-ness of exploring theories and methods together as a research community via methods of drama, palimpsest, and fictionary