Unravelling deservingness: Which criteria do people use to judge the relative deservingness of welfare target groups? A vignette-based focus group study

Previous research suggests that European citizens share consistent attitudes towards the relative deservingness of different target groups of social policy, such as perceiving elderly people as most deserving, unemployed people as less deserving and immigrants as least deserving. Yet, it is unclear which criteria people apply when making these judgements. In this article, we explore the reasoning behind deservingness judgements. We analyse how four focus groups – from the middle class, the working class, young people and elderly people – discuss and rank various vignettes representing welfare target groups. Our focus groups’ rankings mirror the well-established rank order of welfare target groups, and we also introduce further target groups: median-income families, low-income earners, and well-off earners. Our analyses of reasoning patterns show that depending on the target group specific combinations of deservingness criteria suggested in the literature (e.g. need, reciprocity, identity, control) are applied, and we suggest adding a further criterion emphasizing future returns on invested resources (‘social investment’). Furthermore, by comparing focus groups, we find that different groups back up similar rankings by differing criteria, suggesting that below the surface of a ‘common deservingness culture’ linger class and other differences in perceiving welfare deservingness.NORFACE Welfare State FuturesPeer Reviewe

Legitimizing Inequality

Do people in different countries understand and frame the principle of meritocracy differently? This question is the starting point for this cross-national analysis of the moral repertoires of meritocracy in four countries: Germany, Norway, Slovenia and the United Kingdom. The authors pursue a mixed methods approach, using data from the European Social Survey 2016 and qualitative data from group discussions. In these discussions, citizens openly talked about issues like inequality and social policy, which allows us to study their understandings and framings of meritocracy. The authors show that the issue of unequal rewards does not only find different levels of support, but also that people – corresponding to the context they live in – have different understandings of which merits should count. The authors identify a ‘market success meritocracy’ in the UK, a work-centred understanding in Germany, a ‘common good meritocracy’ in Norway, and non-salience of this issue in Slovenia.Peer Reviewe

Regimes, Social Risks and the Welfare Mix: Unpacking Attitudes to Pensions and Childcare in Germany and the UK through De-liberative Forums

Modern welfare regimes rest on a range of actors – state, market, family/households, em-ployers and charities – but austerity programmes diminish the contribution of the state. While changes in this ‘welfare mix’ require support from the population, attitude studies have focused mainly on people’s views on state responsibilities, using welfare regime the-ory to explain differences. This paper contributes to our understanding of the welfare mix by including other providers such as the market, the family or employers, and also intro-duces social risk theories, contrasting new and old risks. Regime theory implies differences will persist over time, whereas risk theory suggests that growing similarities in certain risks may tend to promote international convergence. This article examines attitudes to the roles of state, market, family, charity/community and employer for pension and childcare in Ger-many and the UK. For data collection we used deliberative forums, a new method in social policy research that allows citizens space to pursue extended lightly moderated discussion and permits researchers to analyse people’s justifications for their attitudes. Our results show that there are patterns of convergence especially in preferences for childcare, but that regime predominates in people’s justifications for their attitudes: regime differences in atti-tudes are resilient

Expression und Verteilung der Östrogenrezeptor-Isoformen (ER) Alpha (α) und Beta (β) im Ovarialkarzinomgewebe

Einleitung: Eierstockkrebs ist maligne Erkrankung, die sehr lange unerkannt bleibt und dadurch eine besonders schlechte Prognose hat. Es ist noch nicht abgeklärt, aus welchen Vorstufen sich Ovarialkarzinome entwickeln. Es ist lediglich bekannt, dass endokrine Faktoren, Genmutationen (z.B. von BRCA 1 oder 2) und auch Lebensstilfaktoren das Risiko einer Erkrankung erhöhen. Ovarialkarzinome wachsen schnell und neigen zu einer frühzeitigen Metastasenbildung. Ein weiteres Problem stellt die Chemoresistenz der Ovarialkarzinome gegenüber Standardzytostatika dar und auch eine hormonelle Therapie, wie dies bei Brustkrebs Standard ist, hat sich bis jetzt nicht als erfolgreich herausgestellt. Hier sind weitere Studien zur Erforschung der Rolle der Steroidhormone und ihrer Rezeptoren notwendig. Die beiden isomeren Subtypen des Östrogenrezeptors (ER-α und -β) übernehmen im Körper unterschiedliche Aufgaben. So steht ER-α beispielsweise für Zellproliferation und ER-β für östrogen-abhängige Apoptose. Es wird angenommen, dass ein erhöhtes Vorhandensein von ER-β eine bessere Prognose darstellt. Ausgehend von den unterschiedlichen Funktionsbereichen der Östrogenrezeptoren, stehen diese im Interesse für weitere Untersuchungen. Ziele: In dieser Studie wurden an Ovarialkarzinomproben von Patientinnen die Lokalisierung und Verteilung der Östrogenrezeptoren α und β untersucht. Die Ergebnisse wurden mit den klinischen Daten (Alter, FIGO-Klassifikation, Tumorgrading, vollständige Tumorresektion, progressionsfreier Zeitraum, gemessen am Rezidiv, und der Gesamtüberlebenszeit) in Relation gesetzt. Methoden: Für ER-α wurden insgesamt 243 Karzinomproben (Microarrays) immunhistochemisch eingefärbt. Für ER-β war eine immunhistochemische Bestimmung auf Microarrays aufgrund des geringen Vorhandenseins des Rezeptors im erkrankten Gewebe nicht möglich. ER-β wurde somit auf größeren Gewebsschnitten von neun Patientinnen immunhistochemisch untersucht. Durch die Immunreaktion der positiv gefärbten Rezeptoren ER-α und ER-β wurden anschließend mit Hilfe des TissueFAXS© Cell Analysis System eingescannt und digitalisiert. Der Prozentsatz an positiven Zellen sowie auch die Farbintensität wurden daraufhin mit Hilfe der HistoQuest© Software analysiert und der "immunoreaktive Score" (IRS) als Maß für die Rezeptorenanzahl in den Stroma- und Tumorbereichen bestimmt. Diese Methode wurde für die Ovarialkarzinomproben etabliert und validiert. Die statistische Auswertung wurde für ER-α mit dem Programm SPSS 19.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA) vorgenommen. Bei ER-β wurde auf eine statistische Analyse aufgrund der geringen Rezeptordichte im Gewebe verzichtet und es wurde aber eine Charakterisierung der Tumorsubtypen erzielt. Resultate und Schlussfolgerung: Eine statistische Auswertung für ER-β war aufgrund des geringen Vorhandenseins des Rezeptors im erkrankten Gewebe nicht möglich. Die statistische Datenauswertung ergab einen signifikanten Unterschied für ER-α Expression (IRS) im Tumor und im jeweiligen Stroma. ER-α wird fast ausschließlich in Tumorzellen exprimiert. In Immunzellen im Stroma wird ER-α nicht exprimiert. Die statistische Analyse zeigte einen signifikanten Einfluss von ER-α auf das Gesamtüberleben im Gesamtkollektiv (p=0,045), wie auch in der Gruppe der Patientinnen mit serösen Tumoren (p=0,037). Zudem der erweist sich ER-α in der multivariaten Analyse als unabhängig signifikanter Einflussfaktor auf den progressionsfreien Zeitraum (p=0,046). Diese Ergebnisse zeigen die Bedeutung von ER-α bei Ovarialkarzinomen und können daher auch für therapeutische Überlegungen, z. B. Anwendung von SERMs von großer Bedeutung sein. Daher wäre es wichtig weitere Studien mit einer hormonellen Therapie bei Patientinnen die diesen Rezeptor überexprimieren in einem großen, aussagekräftigen Kollektiv durchzuführen.Introduction: Ovarian Cancer is a malignant disease, which is mostly detected at an advanced stage. Consequently, the prognosis for affected women is rather poor. It is still not known, how ovarian cancer develops. It is only established that endocrine factors, different gene mutations such as mutation in BRCA 1 or 2 and also lifestyle factors increase the risk of ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer grows fast and has a high metastasis rate. Another problem is the high chemoresistance rate of ovarian cancer cells towards standard chemotherapeutic treatment. Unlike to breast cancer, there is also no established hormonal therapy. To account for these shortcomings, further studies are needed to explore the role of steroid hormones and their receptors The two subtypes of estrogen receptors, namely ER-α and ER-ß, have different functions. ER-α is responsible for cell proliferation, while ER-β accounts for estrogen-induced apoptosis. It is believed that a higher expression level of ER-β is associated with a better prognosis. Based on these findings, there is an increasing research interest regarding the role of the two receptors. Aims: In this study, malignant tissues of patients with advanced ovarian carcinomas were investigated for the localization and distribution of the estrogen receptors α and β. The results from a quantitative immunohistochemical microscopic evaluation were compared with clinical data, such as age, FIGO-classification, tumor grading, complete tumour resection, progression free survival, and overall survival. Methods: For ER-α determination, 243 samples of ovarian cancer tissue on microarrays were immunohistochemical stained and immunreactive proteins were determined. For ER-β, microarray studies failed because of the loss of ER-β with the tumor progression. Only small levels of ER-β were detectable on larger tissue samples from nine patients. All immunoreactive estrogen receptors α and β samples were visualized on the TissueFAXS© Cell Analysis System. On virtual images, the percentage of positive stained cells together with their color intensity were analyzed with the HistoQuest© Software System to give the immunoreactive score (IRS) in the tumor and stromal areas. This procedure was established and validated for the ovarian cancer samples analyzed. The statistical analysis of ER-α was performed with the program SPSS 19.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA). Because of the low ER-β density in the tissue, no statistical analysis was done. Results and Conclusion: Due to the fact that the expression of ER-β is very low at advanced stage in ovarian cancer tissue, it was not possible to perform a statistical analysis for this receptor. For ER-α, Tumor slides were evaluated with respect to different cancer subtypes (serous and non-serous tumors). In all samples, IRS for ER-α showed a significant difference between the stromal and tumor areas. It is nearly exclusively expressed in tumor cells. There is no positive reaction in the immune cells scattered in the stromal area. The most important finding was that the expression levels of ER-α had a significant influence on the cumulative survival in the collective of all patients (p=0.045) as well as in the group of patients with serous carcinomas (p=0.037). Higher levels of ER-α were associated with a longer survival. Additionally, the multivariat analysis proved that ER-α has an independent significant impact on the progression free survival (p=0.046). These results show the relevance of ER-α in ovarian cancer. ER-α expression may have a potential importance for therapeutical considerations as application of SERMs could be considered in a subgroup of patients with high levels of the receptor. To evaluate the effect of the application, further studies should be performed with hormonal therapies in larger collective of selected patients

Image-based ex-vivo drug screening for patients with aggressive haematological malignancies: interim results from a single-arm, open-label, pilot study

ISSN:2352-302