Measuring Speech Flow of Co-located and Distributed Command and Control Teams During a Communication Channel Glitch.

Team cognition can be observed in the flow of communications among team members. This is shown in the context of a simulated unmanned aerial vehicle ground control station. Automatic measures of low-level team communication flow were used to assess high-level constructs of team cognition. Measures show support for the expected results of manipulations in this task. Co-location and channel degradation effects were successfully predicted by CHUMS, ProNet, and a cross-correlation function-based Dominance measure. Results grant concurrent validity to the measures, and highlight substantive effects of the manipulations. In particular, in geographically distributed teams, communication patterns are less stable, and the route planner exerts less communicative influence. Some co-location effects drop with task experience. During a mission containing a five-minute one-way communication channel cut, all teams communicate more like distributed teams, and team members do create alternate pathways to retain information flow

Soil Application Effects of Metarhizium anisopliae on Japanese Beetle (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) Behavior and Survival in Turfgrass Microcosms

The effect of mycelial and conidial formulations of the insect pathogenic fungi, M. anisopliae, on the survival and behavior Japanese beetle, Popillia japonica Newman, larvae and ovipositing adults in turfgrass-soil microcosms was explored. Changes in Japanese beetle grub feeding site selection on sod roots, movement patterns, and survival in Metarhizium anisopliae inoculated soil were examined in greenhouse studies and through the use of radiographic analysis in the laboratory. Our studies indicate that the application of mycelial particles in soil affected the behavior of both larval and adult Japanese beetles. Japanese beetle grubs avoided soil that contained high concentrations of pathogen for up to 20 d after application. Conversely, the incorporation of mycelial particles increased oviposition in both choice and no choice studies. Our findings on scarab response to inundative applications of M. anisopliae mycelium may help explain some of the inconsistency in results that often occur when fungal pathogens are used to control insects in the fiel

Strategies designed to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants to research studies.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and approaching eligible participants for recruitment to research studies usually relies on healthcare professionals. This process is sometimes hampered by deliberate or inadvertent gatekeeping that can introduce bias into patient selection. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to identify and assess the effect of strategies designed to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants to research studies. SEARCH METHODS: We performed searches on 5 January 2015 in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Methodology Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, ASSIA and Web of Science (SSCI, SCI-EXPANDED) from 1985 onwards. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant review articles and did citation tracking through Web of Science for all included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected all studies that evaluated a strategy to identify and recruit participants for research via healthcare professionals and provided pre-post comparison data on recruitment rates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search results for potential eligibility, read full papers, applied the selection criteria and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios for each study to indicate the effect of each strategy. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria and all were at medium or high risk of bias. Only five studies gave the total number of participants (totalling 7372 participants). Three studies used a randomised design, with the others using pre-post comparisons. Several different strategies were investigated. Four studies examined the impact of additional visits or information for the study site, with no increases in recruitment demonstrated. Increased recruitment rates were reported in two studies that used a dedicated clinical recruiter, and five studies that introduced an automated alert system for identifying eligible participants. The studies were embedded into trials evaluating care in oncology mainly but also in emergency departments, diabetes and lower back pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no strong evidence for any single strategy to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants in research studies. Additional visits or information did not appear to increase recruitment by healthcare professionals. The most promising strategies appear to be those with a dedicated resource (e.g. a clinical recruiter or automated alert system) for identifying suitable participants that reduced the demand on healthcare professionals, but these were assessed in studies at high risk of bias.We would like to acknowledge the support of the Methodology theme of theCancer ExperiencesCollaborative (CECo), who have supported this review.This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.MR000036.pub2/abstract

What should we report? Lessons learnt from the development and implementation of serious adverse event reporting procedures in non-pharmacological trials in palliative care

Background/aims: Serious adverse event reporting guidelines have largely been developed for pharmaceutical trials. There is evidence that serious adverse events, such as psychological distress, can also occur in non-pharmaceutical trials. Managing serious adverse event reporting and monitoring in palliative care non-pharmaceutical trials can be particularly challenging. This is because patients living with advanced malignant or non-malignant disease have a high risk of hospitalisation and/or death as a result of progression of their disease rather than due to the trial intervention or procedures. This paper presents a number of recommendations for managing serious adverse event reporting that are drawn from two palliative care non-pharmacological trials. Methods: The recommendations were iteratively developed across a number of exemplar trials. This included examining national and international safety reporting guidance, reviewing serious adverse event reporting procedures from other pharmacological and non-pharmacological trials, a review of the literature and collaboration between the ACTION study team and Data Safety Monitoring Committee. These two groups included expertise in oncology, palliative care, statistics and medical ethics and this collaboration led to the development of serious adverse event reporting procedures. Results: The recommendations included; allowing adequate time at the study planning stage to develop serious adverse event reporting procedures, especially in multi-national studies or research naïve settings; reviewing the level of trial oversight required; defining what a serious adverse event is in your trial based on your study population; development and implementation of standard operating procedures and training; refining the reporting procedures during the trial if necessary and publishing serious adverse events in findings papers. Conclusions: There is a need for researchers to share their experiences of managing this challenging aspect of trial conduct. This will ensure that the processes for managing serious adverse event reporting are continually refined and improved so optimising patient safety. Trial registration: ACTION trial registration number: ISRCTN63110516 (date of registration 03/10/2014). Namaste trial registra

What should we report? Lessons learnt from the development and implementation of serious adverse event reporting procedures in non-pharmacological trials in palliative care

Background/aims: Serious adverse event reporting guidelines have largely been developed for pharmaceutical trials. There is evidence that serious adverse events, such as psychological distress, can also occur in non-pharmaceutical trials. Managing serious adverse event reporting and monitoring in palliative care non-pharmaceutical trials can be particularly challenging. This is because patients living with advanced malignant or non-malignant disease have a high risk of hospitalisation and/or death as a result of progression of their disease rather than due to the trial intervention or procedures. This paper presents a number of recommendations for managing serious adverse event reporting that are drawn from two palliative care non-pharmacological trials. Methods: The recommendations were iteratively developed across a number of exemplar trials. This included examining national and international safety reporting guidance, reviewing serious adverse event reporting procedures from other pharmacological and non-pharmacological trials, a review of the literature and collaboration between the ACTION study team and Data Safety Monitoring Committee. These two groups included expertise in oncology, palliative care, statistics and medical ethics and this collaboration led to the development of serious adverse event reporting procedures. Results: The recommendations included; allowing adequate time at the study planning stage to develop serious adverse event reporting procedures, especially in multi-national studies or research naïve settings; reviewing the level of trial oversight required; defining what a serious adverse event is in your trial based on your study population; development and implementation of standard operating procedures and training; refining the reporting procedures during the trial if necessary and publishing serious adverse events in findings papers. Conclusions: There is a need for researchers to share their experiences of managing this challenging aspect of trial conduct. This will ensure that the processes for managing serious adverse event reporting are continually refined and improved so optimising patient safety. Trial registration: ACTION trial registration number: ISRCTN63110516 (date of registration 03/10/2014). Namaste trial registration number: ISRCTN14948133 (date of registration 04/10/2017)

Advance care planning, a multi-centre cluster randomised clinical trial: the research protocol of the ACTION study

Background: Awareness of preferences regarding medical care should be a central component of the care of patients with advanced cancer. Open communication can facilitate this but can occur in an ad hoc or variable manner. Advance care planning (ACP) is a formalized process of communication between patients, relatives and professional caregivers about patients’ values and care preferences. It raises awareness of the need to anticipate possible future deterioration of health. ACP has the potential to improve current and future healthcare decision making, provide patients with a sense of control, and improve their quality of life. Methods/Design: We will study the effects of the ACP program Respecting Choices on the quality of life of patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer. In a phase III multicenter cluster randomised controlled trial, 22 hospitals in 6 countries will be randomised. In the intervention sites, patients will be offered interviews with a trained facilitator. In the control sites, patients will receive care as usual. In total, 1360 patients will be included. All participating patients will be asked to complete questionnaires at inclusion, and again after 2.5 and 4.5 months. If a patient dies within a year after inclusion, a relative will be asked to complete a questionnaire on end-of-life care. Use of medical care will be assessed by checking medical files. The primary endpoint is patients’ quality of life at 2.5 months ost-inclusion. Secondary endpoints are the extent to which care as received is aligned with patients’ preferences, patients’ evaluation of decision-making processes, quality of end-of-life care and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. A complementary qualitative study will be carried out to explore the lived experience of engagement with the Respecting Choices program from the perspectives of patients, their Personal Representatives, healthcare providers and facilitators. Discussion: Transferring the concept of ACP from care of the elderly to patients with advanced cancer, who on average are younger and retain their mental capacity for a larger part of their disease trajectory, is an important next step in an era of increased focus on patient centered healthcare and shared decision-making. Trial registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN63110516. Date of registration: 10/3/2014. Keywords: Advance care planning, Oncology, Quality of life, Medical decision-makin

Circular economy inspired imaginaries for sustainable innovations

In this chapter, Narayan and Tidström draw on the concept of imaginaries to show how Circular Economy (CE) can facilitate values that enable sustainable innovation. Innovation is key for sustainability, however, understanding and implementing sustainable innovation is challenging, and identifying the kind of actions that could direct sustainable innovations is important. The findings of this study indicate that CE-inspired imaginaries enable collaboration and by relating such imaginaries to common and shared social and cultural values, intermediaries could motivate actors into taking actions that contribute to sustainable innovation.fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed