Interdisciplinarity in health education: updating, successes and challenges

The advent of the concept of interdisciplinarity arose from the need to update traditional curricula in view of the complexity of health problems and the search for training professionals with a more global vision and a reflective attitude, less fragmented and biological, resulting in the correlation between the disciplines as an important tool in current healthcare education. The aim of the study is to present an update on the importance of interdisciplinarity in the curricular formation of health education and its applicability in the context of health work. A literature review was carried out in the Scielo, Lilacs and PUBMED/Medline databases, between January 2016 and April 2021 with the keywords interdisciplinarity, education and health. 77 publications related to the keywords were identified. Of these, 23 were considered relevant to the scope of the study. The publications show successful examples of the implementation of interdisciplinarity as a curricular model tool in healthcare courses and between different courses in this area (interprofessionality), cases of educational institutions that have already used it for a long time in their curricula and discuss the challenges to its implementation and its benefits to the professional egress and to the society that receives their service. It is necessary to implement interdisciplinarity in the curricula of health schools so that we can train professionals who have a more global and reflective vision for patients and society

The new wave of wine brands

Wine branding is a series of complex marketing propositions intended to sell wine as a ‘brand’ – a product marketed much more thanks to its individual name and image rather than to its original quality. Wine brands can be basically divided in two distinct groups: some have called them ‘benign’ (a.k.a ‘historic’ or ‘classical’ - as for Champagne and the Bordeaux châteaux, for ex.) and ‘modern’ brands. ‘Modern’ wine brands are usually built upon a base of elastic supply (to maintain consistency) and planned promotion, most are owned big multinational companies, are standardized and aimed at the international market taste and a determined price level, lacking in diversity and terroir tipicity. In this study, the author describes how these ‘modern brands’ are structured and what are their marketing tools, run through examples of successful wine brands, and describe about their ads and cons for international consumers

The new wave of wine brands

Wine branding is a series of complex marketing propositions intended to sell wine as a ‘brand’ – a product marketed much more thanks to its individual name and image rather than to its original quality. Wine brands can be basically divided in two distinct groups: some have called them ‘benign’ (a.k.a ‘historic’ or ‘classical’ - as for Champagne and the Bordeaux châteaux, for ex.) and ‘modern’ brands. ‘Modern’ wine brands are usually built upon a base of elastic supply (to maintain consistency) and planned promotion, most are owned big multinational companies, are standardized and aimed at the international market taste and a determined price level, lacking in diversity and terroir tipicity. In this study, the author describes how these ‘modern brands’ are structured and what are their marketing tools, run through examples of successful wine brands, and describe about their ads and cons for international consumers

Rheumatic fever: update on the Jones criteria according to the American Heart Association review - 2015

ABSTRACT Rheumatic fever is still currently a prevalent disease, especially in developing countries. Triggered by a Group A β-hemolytic Streptococcus infection, the disease may affect genetically predisposed patients. Rheumatic carditis is the most important of its clinical manifestations, which can generate incapacitating sequelae of great impact for the individual and for society. Currently, its diagnosis is made based on the Jones criteria, established in 1992 by the American Heart Association. In 2015, the AHA carried out a significant review of these criteria, with new diagnostic parameters and recommendations. In the present study, the authors perform a critical analysis of this new review, emphasizing the most relevant points for clinical practice