Developing evaluation tools for assessing the educational potential of apps for preschool children in the UK

Selecting high quality apps can be challenging for caregivers and educators. We here develop tools evaluating educational potential of apps for preschool children. In Study 1, we developed two complementary evaluation tools tailored to different audiences. We grounded them in developmental theory and linked them to research on children’s experience with digital media. In Study 2 we applied these tools to a wide sample of apps in order to illustrate their use and to address the role of cost in quality of educational apps. There are concerns that a social disadvantage may lead to a digital disadvantage, an “app gap”. We thus applied our tools to the most popular free (N=19) and paid (N=24) apps targeting preschoolers. We found that the “app gap” associated with cost is only related to some aesthetic features of apps rather than any observable educational advantage proffered by paid apps. Our study adds a novel contribution to the research on children’s apps by developing tools to be used across a wide range of audiences, providing the first description of the quantity of app design features during app use and evaluating the educational potential of free and paid apps

Interventions aimed at improving the nursing work environment: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Nursing work environments (NWEs) in Canada and other Western countries have increasingly received attention following years of restructuring and reported high workloads, high absenteeism, and shortages of nursing staff. Despite numerous efforts to improve NWEs, little is known about the effectiveness of interventions to improve NWEs. The aim of this study was to review systematically the scientific literature on implemented interventions aimed at improving the NWE and their effectiveness.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An online search of the databases CINAHL, Medline, Scopus, ABI, Academic Search Complete, HEALTHstar, ERIC, Psychinfo, and Embase, and a manual search of Emerald and Longwoods was conducted. (Quasi-) experimental studies with pre/post measures of interventions aimed at improving the NWE, study populations of nurses, and quantitative outcome measures of the nursing work environment were required for inclusion. Each study was assessed for methodological strength using a quality assessment and validity tool for intervention studies. A taxonomy of NWE characteristics was developed that would allow us to identify on which part of the NWE an intervention targeted for improvement, after which the effects of the interventions were examined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Over 9,000 titles and abstracts were screened. Eleven controlled intervention studies met the inclusion criteria, of which eight used a quasi-experimental design and three an experimental design. In total, nine different interventions were reported in the included studies. The most effective interventions at improving the NWE were: primary nursing (two studies), the educational toolbox (one study), the individualized care and clinical supervision (one study), and the violence prevention intervention (one study).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Little is known about the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving the NWE, and published studies on this topic show weaknesses in their design. To advance the field, we recommend that investigators use controlled studies with pre/post measures to evaluate interventions that are aimed at improving the NWE. Thereby, more evidence-based knowledge about the implementation of interventions will become available for healthcare leaders to use in rebuilding nursing work environments.</p

Being user-oriented: convergences, divergences, and the potentials for systematic dialogue between disciplines and between researchers, designers, and providers

The challenge this panel addresses is drawn from intersecting literature reviews and critical commentaries focusing on: 1) user studies in multiple fields; and 2) the difficulties of bringing different disciplines and perspectives to bear on user‐oriented research, design, and practice. 1 The challenge is that while we have made some progress in collaborative work, we have some distance to go to become user‐oriented in inter‐disciplinary and inter‐perspective ways. The varieties of our approaches and solutions are, as some observers suggest, an increasing cacophony. One major difficulty is that most discussions are solution‐oriented, offering arguments of this sort ‐‐ if only we addressed users in this way… Each solution becomes yet another addition to the cacophony. This panel implements a central approach documented for its utility by communication researchers and long used by communication mediators and negotiators ‐‐ that of focusing not on communication but rather on meta‐communication: communicating about communication. The intent in the context of this panel is to help us refocus attention from too frequent polarizations between alternative solutions to the possibility of coming to understand what is behind the alternatives and where they point to experientially‐based convergences and divergences, both of which might potentially contribute to synergies. The background project for this panel comes from a series of in‐depth interviews with expert researchers, designers, and providers in three field groupings ‐‐ library and information science; human computer interaction/information technology; and communication and media studies. One set of interviews involved 5‐hour focus groups with directors of academic and public libraries serving 44 colleges and universities in central Ohio; the second involved one‐on‐one interviews averaging 50 minutes with 81 nationally‐internationally known experts in the 3 fields, 25‐27 interviews per field. Using Dervin\u27s Sense‐Making Methodological approach to interviewing, the expert interviews of both kinds asked each interviewee: what he/she considered to be the big unanswered questions about users and what explained why the questions have not been answered; and, what he/she saw as hindering versus helping in attempts to communicate about users across disciplinary and perspective gaps. 2 The panel consists of six teams, two from each field. Prior to the panel presentation at ASIST, each team will have read the set of interviews and completed impressionistic essays of what patterns and themes they saw as emerging. At this stage, team members will purposively not homogenize their differences and most will write solo‐authored essays that will be placed on a web‐site accessible to ASIST members prior to the November meeting. In addition, at least one systematic analysis will be completed and available online. 3 At the ASIST panel, each team\u27s leader will present a brief and intentionally provocative impressionist account of what his/her team came to understand about our struggles communicating across fields and perspectives about users. Again, each team will purposively not homogenize its own differences in viewpoints, but rather highlight them as fodder for discussion. A major purpose will be to invite audience members to join the panel in discussion. At least 20 minutes will be left open for this purpose

The diagnostic criteria for small fibre neuropathy: from symptoms to neuropathology

Small fibre neuropathy (SFN), a condition dominated by neuropathic pain, is frequently encountered in clinical practise either as prevalent manifestation of more diffuse neuropathy or distinct nosologic entity. Aetiology of SFN includes pre-diabetes status and immune-mediated diseases, though it remains frequently unknown. Due to their physiologic characteristics, small nerve fibres cannot be investigated by routine electrophysiological tests, making the diagnosis particularly difficult. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) to assess the psychophysical thresholds for cold and warm sensations and skin biopsy with quantification of somatic intraepidermal nerve fibres (IENF) have been used to determine the damage to small nerve fibres. Nevertheless, the diagnostic criteria for SFN have not been defined yet and a ‘gold standard’ for clinical practise and research is not available. We screened 486 patients referred to our institutions and collected 124 patients with sensory neuropathy. Among them, we identified 67 patients with pure SFN using a new diagnostic ‘gold standard’, based on the presence of at least two abnormal results at clinical, QST and skin biopsy examination. The diagnosis of SFN was achieved by abnormal clinical and skin biopsy findings in 43.3% of patients, abnormal skin biopsy and QST findings in 37.3% of patients, abnormal clinical and QST findings in 11.9% of patients, whereas 7.5% patients had abnormal results at all the examinations. Skin biopsy showed a diagnostic efficiency of 88.4%, clinical examination of 54.6% and QST of 46.9%. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis confirmed the significantly higher performance of skin biopsy comparing with QST. However, we found a significant inverse correlation between IENF density and both cold and warm thresholds at the leg. Clinical examination revealed pinprick and thermal hypoesthesia in about 50% patients, and signs of peripheral vascular autonomic dysfunction in about 70% of patients. Spontaneous pain dominated the clinical picture in most SFN patients. Neuropathic pain intensity was more severe in patients with SFN than in patients with large or mixed fibre neuropathy, but there was no significant correlation with IENF density. The aetiology of SFN was initially unknown in 41.8% of patients and at 2-year follow-up a potential cause could be determined in 25% of them. Over the same period, 13% of SFN patients showed the involvement of large nerve fibres, whereas in 45.6% of them the clinical picture did not change. Spontaneous remission of neuropathic pain occurred in 10.9% of SFN patients, while it worsened in 30.4% of them