Atmospheric Contributors to Heavy Rainfall Events in the Arkansas-Red River Basin

This study analyzed the top 1% 24-hour rainfall events from 1994 to 2013 at eight climatological sites that represent the east to west precipitation gradient across the Arkansas-Red River Basin in North America. A total of 131 cases were identified and subsequently classified on the synoptic-scale, mesoscale, and local-scale to compile a climatological analysis of these extreme, heavy rainfall events based on atmospheric forcings. For each location, the prominent midtropospheric pattern, mesoscale feature, and predetermined thermodynamic variables were used to classify each 1% rainfall event. Individual events were then compared with other cases throughout the basin. The most profound results were that the magnitudes of the thermodynamic variables such as convective available potential energy and precipitable water values were poor predictors of the amount of rainfall produced in these extreme events. Further, the mesoscale forcings had more of an impact during the warm season and for the westernmost locations, whereas synoptic forcings were extremely prevalent during the cold season at the easternmost locations in the basin. The implications of this research are aimed at improving the forecasting of heavy precipitation at individual weather forecasts offices within the basin through the identified patterns at various scales

Case management used to optimize cancer care pathways: A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Reports of inadequate cancer patient care have given rise to various interventions to support cancer care pathways which, overall, seem poorly studied. Case management (CM) is one method that may support a cost-effective, high-quality patient-centred treatment and care.</p> <p>The purpose of this article was to summarise intervention characteristics, outcomes of interest, results, and validity components of the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining CM as a method for optimizing cancer care pathways.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for RCTs published all years up to August 2008. Identified papers were included if they passed the following standards. Inclusion criteria: 1) The intervention should meet the criteria for CM which includes multidisciplinary collaboration, care co-ordination, and it should include in-person meetings between patient and the case manager aimed at supporting, informing and educating the patient. 2) The intervention should focus on cancer patient care. 3) The intervention should aim to improve subjective or objective quality outcomes, and effects should be reported in the paper.</p> <p>Exclusion criteria: Studies centred on cancer screening or palliative cancer care.</p> <p>Data extraction was conducted in order to obtain a descriptive overview of intervention characteristics, outcomes of interest and findings. Elements of CONSORT guidelines and checklists were used to assess aspects of study validity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The searches identified 654 unique papers, of which 25 were retrieved for scrutiny. Seven papers were finally included. Intervention characteristics, outcomes studied, findings and methodological aspects were all very diverse.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Due to the scarcity of papers included (seven), significant heterogeneity in target group, intervention setting, outcomes measured and methodologies applied, no conclusions can be drawn about the effect of CM on cancer patient care.</p> <p>It is a major challenge that CM shrouds in a "black box", which means that it is difficult to determine which aspect(s) of interventions contribute to overall effects. More trials on rigorously developed CM interventions (opening up the "black box") are needed as is the re-testing of interventions and outcomes studied in various settings.</p

A developmental approach to diversifying neuroscience through effective mentorship practices: perspectives on cross-identity mentorship and a critical call to action.

Many early-career neuroscientists with diverse identities may not have mentors who are more advanced in the neuroscience pipeline and have a congruent identity due to historic biases, laws, and policies impacting access to education. Cross-identity mentoring relationships pose challenges and power imbalances that impact the retention of diverse early career neuroscientists, but also hold the potential for a mutually enriching and collaborative relationship that fosters the mentee\u27s success. Additionally, the barriers faced by diverse mentees and their mentorship needs may evolve with career progression and require developmental considerations. This article provides perspectives on factors that impact cross-identity mentorship from individuals participating in Diversifying the Community of Neuroscience (CNS)-a longitudinal, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) R25 neuroscience mentorship program developed to increase diversity in the neurosciences. Participants in Diversifying CNS were comprised of 14 graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early career faculty who completed an online qualitative survey on cross-identity mentorship practices that impact their experience in neuroscience fields. Qualitative survey data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and resulted in four themes across career levels: (1) approach to mentorship and interpersonal dynamics, (2) allyship and management of power imbalance, (3) academic sponsorship, and (4) institutional barriers impacting navigation of academia. These themes, along with identified mentorship needs by developmental stage, provide insights mentors can use to better support the success of their mentees with diverse intersectional identities. As highlighted in our discussion, a mentor\u27s awareness of systemic barriers along with active allyship are foundational for their role

Experiences of Self-Management Support Following a Stroke: A Meta-Review of Qualitative Systematic Reviews

Supporting self-management in stroke patients improves psychological and functional outcomes but evidence on how to achieve this is sparse. We aimed to synthesise evidence from systematic reviews of qualitative studies in an overarching meta-review to inform the delivery and development of self-management support interventions.We systematically searched eight electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for qualitative systematic reviews (published January 1993 to June 2012). We included studies exploring patients', carers' or health care professionals' experiences relevant to self-management support following a stroke, including studies describing the lived experience of surviving a stroke. We meta-synthesised the included review findings using a meta-ethnographic framework.Seven reviews, reporting 130 unique studies, were included. Themes emerging from the reviews were pertinent, consistent and showed data saturation; though explicit mention of self-management support was rare. Our meta-review highlighted the devastating impact of stroke on patients' self-image; the varying needs for self-management support across the trajectory of recovery; the need for psychological and emotional support throughout recovery particularly when physical recovery plateaus; the considerable information needs of patients and carers which also vary across the trajectory of recovery; the importance of good patient-professional communication; the potential benefits of goal-setting and action-planning; and the need for social support which might be met by groups for stroke survivors.The observed data saturation suggests that, currently, no further qualitative research simply describing the lived experience of stroke is needed; we propose that it would be more useful to focus on qualitative research informing self-management support interventions and their implementation. Our findings demonstrate both the on-going importance of self-management support and the evolving priorities throughout the stages of recovery following a stroke. The challenge now is to ensure these findings inform routine practice and the development of interventions to support self-management amongst stroke survivors

Psychometric validation of a patient‐reported experience measure of obstetric racism© (The PREM‐OB Scale™ suite)

BackgroundPerinatal quality improvement lacks valid tools to measure adverse hospital experiences disproportionately impacting Black mothers and birthing people. Measuring and mitigating harm requires using a framework that centers the lived experiences of Black birthing people in evaluating inequitable care, namely, obstetric racism. We sought to develop a valid patient-reported experience measure (PREM) of Obstetric Racism© in hospital-based intrapartum care designed for, by, and with Black women as patient, community, and content experts.MethodsPROMIS© instrument development standards adapted with cultural rigor methodology. Phase 1 included item pool generation, modified Delphi method, and cognitive interviews. Phase 2 evaluated the item pool using factor analysis and item response theory.ResultsItems were identified or written to cover 7 previously identified theoretical domains. 806 Black mothers and birthing people completed the pilot test. Factor analysis concluded a 3 factor structure with good fit indices (CFI&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.931-0.977, RMSEA&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.087-0.10, R2 &nbsp;&gt;&nbsp;.3, residual correlation&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.15). All items in each factor fit the IRT model and were able to be calibrated. Factor 1, "Humanity," had 31 items measuring experiences of safety and accountability, autonomy, communication, and empathy. A 12-item short form was created to ease respondent burden. Factor 2, "Racism," had 12 items measuring experiences of neglect and mistreatment. Factor 3, "Kinship," had 7 items measuring hospital denial and disruption of relationships between Black mothers and their child or support system.ConclusionsThe PREM-OB Scale™ suite is a valid tool to characterize and quantify obstetric racism for use in perinatal improvement initiatives

A developmental approach to diversifying neuroscience through effective mentorship practices: perspectives on cross-identity mentorship and a critical call to action

Many early-career neuroscientists with diverse identities may not have mentors who are more advanced in the neuroscience pipeline and have a congruent identity due to historic biases, laws, and policies impacting access to education. Cross-identity mentoring relationships pose challenges and power imbalances that impact the retention of diverse early career neuroscientists, but also hold the potential for a mutually enriching and collaborative relationship that fosters the mentee's success. Additionally, the barriers faced by diverse mentees and their mentorship needs may evolve with career progression and require developmental considerations. This article provides perspectives on factors that impact cross-identity mentorship from individuals participating in Diversifying the Community of Neuroscience (CNS)-a longitudinal, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) R25 neuroscience mentorship program developed to increase diversity in the neurosciences. Participants in Diversifying CNS were comprised of 14 graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and early career faculty who completed an online qualitative survey on cross-identity mentorship practices that impact their experience in neuroscience fields. Qualitative survey data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and resulted in four themes across career levels: (1) approach to mentorship and interpersonal dynamics, (2) allyship and management of power imbalance, (3) academic sponsorship, and (4) institutional barriers impacting navigation of academia. These themes, along with identified mentorship needs by developmental stage, provide insights mentors can use to better support the success of their mentees with diverse intersectional identities. As highlighted in our discussion, a mentor's awareness of systemic barriers along with active allyship are foundational for their role