The ‘Scottish approach’ to policy and policymaking: what issues are territorial and what are universal?

The ‘Scottish approach' refers to its distinctive way to make and implement policy. Its reputation suggests that it is relatively comfortable with local discretion and variations in policy outcomes. Yet, policymakers are subject to ‘universal' processes - limited knowledge, attention and coordinative capacity, and high levels of ambiguity, discretion and complexity in policy processes - which already undermine central control and produce variation. If policy is a mix of deliberate and unintended outcomes, a focus on policy styles may exaggerate a government's ability to do things differently. We demonstrate these issues in two ‘cross cutting' policies: ‘prevention' and ‘transition'. complexity ; devolution; prevention; transitionThis article was among the most highly cited articles published in Policy & Politics 2016 and 2017: http://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/journals/policy-and-politics/highly-cite

Empowering future care workforces: Scoping Capabilities to Leverage Assistive Robotics through Co-Design

Project aims: Understand how health and social care professionals can benefit from using assistive robotics on their own terms. Specify capabilities that matter to professionals, service users /carers. Scope a framework for co-designing assistive robotics that forefronts health and social care professionals and service users

PSA 2014 14-16 April Manchester DRAFT COPY Do Not Cite Without Prior Permission From The Author Transition to Adulthood: From Coherence to Fragmentation, Policy Affecting Young People with Cerebral Palsy in Scotland

This paper examines the unusual shift from a coherent government policy on cerebral palsy (CP) 1 in childhood to a fragmented service in adulthood. Cerebral Palsy is the most common cause of disability in childhood. As children, such patients receive a generally well coordinated service where health, social work and education professionals, work together to provide an integrated care package for the individual. However, service users have identified a fragmentation in the service provided as they transition toward and into adulthood. This discourse therefore sets out the major research questions, summarises the current policy and presents initial findings:-1. What policy, if any, exists in Scotland in relation to transition for such patients? 2. How consistent can that policy and its delivery be said to be across Scotland, and why? 3. Is there a clear process of policy formulation and implementation, or does the process in this case need to be understood differently? 4. Are local authorities and health boards in Scotland learning from each other? i.e. is information being shared and, if appropriate, is collaboration taking place? 1 "Cerebral palsy is the commonly used name for a group of conditions characterised by motor dis-function due to non progressive brain damage early in life. There are usually associated disabilities as well as emotional, social and family difficulties. Cerebral palsies are the most common cause of childhood disability. The range of severity may be from total dependency and immobility to adequate abilities of talking, independent self-care and walking, running and other skills, although with some clumsy actions. A number of people with cerebral palsy are now able to benefit from mainstream education and further education. They participate more in various activities in society. These opportunities are assisted by legislation, advances in technology and changing attitudes in their society". (Sophie Levitt, 2010, p.1)

‘Internet is easy if you know how to use it’ : doing online research with people with learning disabilities during the COVID‐19 pandemic

Background The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic changed the way we live, work, interact and do research. Many activities moved online, and digital inclusion became an urgent issue for researchers working with people with learning disabilities and other groups at risk of exclusion. This has generated new questions about how we conduct research and what it means to go into ‘the field’. Methods We discuss our experience working across four qualitative research projects involving 867 participants with learning disabilities, conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Findings Moving research online resulted in often-swift adaptations to research designs and practice, bringing new insights and benefits to our studies. The changing circumstances fostered innovation and greater flexibility and contributed to research becoming more accessible to many. However, doing research online also posed new challenges as well as amplified existing ones. Conclusions The pandemic has made it easier for some people with learning disabilities to participate in research, but more needs to be done to improve the reach and quality of that participation. Researchers should make the process of participation as accessible as possible. It is also their job to question and challenge the conditions that create barriers to participation in research and to look for ways to change these. We make some recommendations on how this can be achieved

Gender in the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist

We are a group of researchers working in the Medical Sciences division at the University of Oxford. Many of us regularly use Equator’s Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist [1] when reporting results from our studies using interviews and focus groups. The aim of this checklist is to encourage transparent and consistent reporting of methods and results, which we support. However, we would like draw attention to one particular criteria; Domain1, criteria 4—‘gender’. The guide questions/description for this checklist item asks authors to state ‘Was the researcher male or female?’

Gender in the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) Checklist.

We are a group of researchers working in the Medical Sciences division at the University of Oxford. Many of us regularly use Equator’s Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist [1] when reporting results from our studies using interviews and focus groups. The aim of this checklist is to encourage transparent and consistent reporting of methods and results, which we support. However, we would like draw attention to one particular criteria; Domain1, criteria 4—‘gender’. The guide questions/description for this checklist item asks authors to state ‘Was the researcher male or female?’