Assessment for learning in the accountability era: Queensland, Australia

Developments in school education in Australia over the past decade have witnessed the rise of national efforts to reform curriculum, assessment and reporting. Constitutionally the power to decide on curriculum matters still resides with the States. Higher stakes in assessment, brought about by national testing and international comparative analyses of student achievement data, have challenged State efforts to maintain the emphasis on assessment to promote learning while fulfilling accountability demands. In this article lessons from the Queensland experience indicate that it is important to build teachers' assessment capacity and their assessment literacy for the promotion of student learning. It is argued that teacher assessment can be a source of dependable results through moderation practice. The Queensland Studies Authority has recognised and supported the development of teacher assessment and moderation practice in the context of standards-driven, national reform. Recent research findings explain how the focus on learning can be maintained by avoiding an over-interpretation of test results in terms of innate ability and limitations and by encouraging teachers to adopt more tailored diagnosis of assessment data to address equity through focus on achievement for all. Such efforts are challenged as political pressures related to the Australian government’s implementation of national testing and national partnership funding arrangements tied to the performance of students at or below minimum standards become increasingly apparent

How Can Nutrition Research Better Reflect the Relationship Between Wasting and Stunting in Children? Learnings from the Wasting and Stunting Project

Childhood wasting and stunting affect large numbers of children globally. Both are important risk factors for illness and death yet, despite the fact that these conditions can share common risk factors and are often seen in the same child, they are commonly portrayed as relatively distinct manifestations of undernutrition. In 2014, the Wasting and Stunting project was launched by the Emergency Nutrition Network. Its aim was to better understand the complex relationship and associations between wasting and stunting and examine whether current separations that were apparent in approaches to policy, financing, and programs were justified or useful. Based on the project's work, this article aims to bring a wasting and stunting lens to how research is designed and financed in order for the nutrition community to better understand, prevent, and treat child undernutrition. Discussion of lessons learnt focuses on the synergy and temporal relationships between children's weight loss and linear growth faltering, the proximal and distal factors that drive diverse forms of undernutrition, and identifying and targeting people most at risk. Supporting progress in all these areas requires research collaborations across interest groups that highlight the value of research that moves beyond a focus on single forms of undernutrition, and ensures that there is equal attention given to wasting as to other forms of malnutrition, wherever it is present

Testing for sexually transmitted infections in general practice: cross-sectional study

Background: Primary care is an important provider of sexual health care in England. We sought to explore the extent of testing for chlamydia and HIV in general practice and its relation to associated measures of sexual health in two contrasting geographical settings.Methods: We analysed chlamydia and HIV testing data from 64 general practices and one genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinic in Brent (from mid-2003 to mid-2006) and 143 general practices and two GUM clinics in Avon (2004). We examined associations between practice testing status, practice characteristics and hypothesised markers of population need (area level teenage conception rates and Index of Multiple Deprivation, IMD scores).Results: No HIV or chlamydia testing was done in 19% (12/64) of general practices in Brent, compared to 2.1% (3/143) in Avon. In Brent, the mean age of general practitioners (GPs) in Brent practices that tested for chlamydia or HIV was lower than in those that had not conducted testing. Practices where no HIV testing was done had slightly higher local teenage conception rates (median 23.5 vs. 17.4/1000 women aged 15-44, p = 0.07) and served more deprived areas (median IMD score 27.1 vs. 21.8, p = 0.05). Mean yearly chlamydia and HIV testing rates, in practices that did test were 33.2 and 0.6 (per 1000 patients aged 15-44 years) in Brent, and 34.1 and 10.3 in Avon, respectively. In Brent practices only 20% of chlamydia tests were conducted in patients aged under 25 years, compared with 39% in Avon.Conclusions: There are substantial geographical differences in the intensity of chlamydia and HIV testing in general practice. Interventions to facilitate sexually transmitted infection and HIV testing in general practice are needed to improve access to effective sexual health care. The use of routinely-collected laboratory, practice-level and demographic data for monitoring sexual health service provision and informing service planning should be more widely evaluated

The relationship between wasting and stunting in young children: A systematic review.

In 2014, the Emergency Nutrition Network published a report on the relationship between wasting and stunting. We aim to review evidence generated since that review to better understand the implications for improving child nutrition, health and survival. We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, registered with PROSPERO. We identified search terms that describe wasting and stunting and the relationship between the two. We included studies related to children under five from low- and middle-income countries that assessed both ponderal growth/wasting and linear growth/stunting and the association between the two. We included 45 studies. The review found the peak incidence of both wasting and stunting is between birth and 3 months. There is a strong association between the two conditions whereby episodes of wasting contribute to stunting and, to a lesser extent, stunting leads to wasting. Children with multiple anthropometric deficits, including concurrent stunting and wasting, have the highest risk of near-term mortality when compared with children with any one deficit alone. Furthermore, evidence suggests that the use of mid-upper-arm circumference combined with weight-for-age Z score might effectively identify children at most risk of near-term mortality. Wasting and stunting, driven by common factors, frequently occur in the same child, either simultaneously or at different moments through their life course. Evidence of a process of accumulation of nutritional deficits and increased risk of mortality over a child's life demonstrates the pressing need for integrated policy, financing and programmatic approaches to the prevention and treatment of child malnutrition

How do mothers with borderline personality disorder mentalize when interacting with their infants?

Mothers with borderline personality disorder (BPD) have been theorized to have decreased mentalization ability, which is the capacity to perceive and interpret mental states. This could increase the risk for troubled relationships with their infants and therefore have adverse consequences for child social and emotional development. Mind-mindedness (MM), which codes the mother's references to her infant's mental states during an interaction, is one method of indexing mothers' mentalizing ability. However, research has yet to examine MM in mothers with BPD. Our objective was to assess the MM ability of 38 mothers during interactions with their 12-month-old infants, including 10 mothers with BPD and 28 mothers without a psychiatric diagnosis. Trained observers assessed maternal MM from 2 min of videotaped mother-infant free play. BPD was assessed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R-Personality Disorders (SCID-II). Mothers with and without BPD did not differ in the proportion of total comments referring to infant mental states. However, mothers in the BPD group proportionately made 3.6 times more misattuned mind-related comments than control mothers. Thus, mothers with and without BPD appear equally likely to envision mental states in their infants. However, mothers with BPD also appear more likely to misread their infants' mental states

A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Facilitated Home-Based Rehabilitation Intervention in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction and their Caregivers:The REACH-HFpEF Pilot Study

Abstract Introduction Home-based cardiac rehabilitation may overcome suboptimal rates of participation. The overarching aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the novel Rehabilitation EnAblement in CHronic Hear Failure (REACH-HF) rehabilitation intervention for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and their caregivers. Methods and results Patients were randomised 1:1 to REACH-HF intervention plus usual care (intervention group) or usual care alone (control group). REACH-HF is a home-based comprehensive self-management rehabilitation programme that comprises patient and carer manuals with supplementary tools, delivered by trained healthcare facilitators over a 12 week period. Patient outcomes were collected by blinded assessors at baseline, 3 months and 6 months postrandomisation and included health-related quality of life (primary) and psychological well-being, exercise capacity, physical activity and HF-related hospitalisation (secondary). Outcomes were also collected in caregivers. We enrolled 50 symptomatic patients with HF from Tayside, Scotland with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45% (mean age 73.9 years, 54% female, 100% white British) and 21 caregivers. Study retention (90%) and intervention uptake (92%) were excellent. At 6 months, data from 45 patients showed a potential direction of effect in favour of the intervention group, including the primary outcome of Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire total score (between-group mean difference −11.5, 95% CI −22.8 to 0.3). A total of 11 (4 intervention, 7 control) patients experienced a hospital admission over the 6 months of follow-up with 4 (control patients) of these admissions being HF-related. Improvements were seen in a number intervention caregivers' mental health and burden compared with control. Conclusions Our findings support the feasibility and rationale for delivering the REACH-HF facilitated home-based rehabilitation intervention for patients with HFpEF and their caregivers and progression to a full multicentre randomised clinical trial to test its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

A facilitated home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention for people with heart failure and their caregivers:a research programme including the REACH-HF RCT

Background: Rates of participation in centre (hospital)-cardiac rehabilitation by patients with heart failure are suboptimal. Heart failure has two main phenotypes differing in underlying pathophysiology: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is characterised by depressed left ventricular systolic function (‘reduced ejection fraction’), whereas heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is diagnosed after excluding other causes of dyspnoea with normal ejection fraction. This programme aimed to develop and evaluate a facilitated home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention that could increase the uptake of cardiac rehabilitation while delivering the clinical benefits of centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Objectives: To develop an evidence-informed, home-based, self-care cardiac rehabilitation programme for patients with heart failure and their caregivers [the REACH-HF (Rehabilitation Enablement in Chronic Heart Failure) intervention]. To conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of a full trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention in addition to usual care in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. To assess the short- and long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention in addition to usual care in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and their caregivers. Design: Intervention mapping to develop the REACH-HF intervention; uncontrolled feasibility study; pilot randomised controlled trial in those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; randomised controlled trial with a trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; qualitative studies including process evaluation; systematic review of cardiac rehabilitation in heart failure; and modelling to assess long-term cost-effectiveness (in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction). Setting: Four centres in England and Wales (Birmingham, Cornwall, Gwent and York); one centre in Scotland (Dundee) for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Participants: Adults aged ≥ 18 years with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction &lt; 45%) for the main randomised controlled trial (n = 216), and those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 45%) for the pilot randomised controlled trial (n = 50). Intervention: A self-care, facilitated cardiac rehabilitation manual was offered to patients (and participating caregivers) at home over 12 weeks by trained health-care professionals in addition to usual care or usual care alone. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was disease-specific health-related quality of life measured using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included deaths and hospitalisations. Results: The main randomised controlled trial recruited 216 participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and 97 caregivers. A significant and clinically meaningful between-group difference in the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score (primary outcome) at 12 months (–5.7 points, 95% confidence interval –10.6 to –0.7 points) favoured the REACH-HF intervention (p = 0.025). Eight (4%) patients (four in each group) had died at 12 months. There was no significant difference in hospital admissions, at 12 months, with 19 participants in the REACH-HF intervention group having at least one hospital admission, compared with 24 participants in the control group (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 1.51; p = 0.386). The mean cost of the intervention was £418 per participant with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The costs at 12 months were, on average, £401 higher in the intervention group than in the usual care alone group. Model-based economic evaluation, extrapolating from the main randomised controlled trial in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction over 4 years, found that adding the REACH-HF intervention to usual care had an estimated mean cost per participant of £15,452 (95% confidence interval £14,240 to £16,780) and a mean quality-adjusted lifeyear gain of 4.47 (95% confidence interval 3.83 to 4.91) years, compared with £15,051 (95% confidence interval £13,844 to £16,289) and 4.24 (95% confidence interval 4.05 to 4.43) years, respectively, for usual care alone. This gave an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year of £1721. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated 78% probability that the intervention plus usual care versus usual care alone has a cost-effectiveness below the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The intervention was well received by participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, as well as their caregivers. Both randomised controlled trials recruited to target, with &gt; 85% retention at follow-up. Limitations: Key limitations included (1) lack of blinding – given the nature of the intervention and the control we could not mask participants to treatments, so our results may reflect participant expectation bias; (2) that we were not able to capture consistent participant-level data on level of intervention adherence; (3) that there may be an impact on the generalisability of findings due to the demographics of the trial patients, as most were male (78%) and we recruited only seven people from ethnic minorities. Conclusions: Evaluation of the comprehensive, facilitated, home-based REACH-HF intervention for participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and caregivers indicated clinical effectiveness in terms of health-related quality of life and patient self-care but no other secondary outcomes. Although the economic analysis conducted alongside the full randomised controlled trial did not produce significant differences on the EuroQol-5 Dimensions or in quality-adjusted life-years, economic modelling suggested greater cost-effectiveness of the intervention than usual care. Our REACH-HF intervention offers a new evidence-based cardiac rehabilitation option that could increase uptake of cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart failure not attracted to or able to access hospital-based programmes. Future work: Systematic collection of real-world data would track future changes in uptake of and adherence to alternative cardiac rehabilitation interventions in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and increase understanding of how changes in service delivery might affect clinical and health economic outcomes. The findings of our pilot randomised controlled trial in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction support progression to a full multicentre randomised controlled trial. </p

A facilitated home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention for people with heart failure and their caregivers:a research programme including the REACH-HF RCT

Background: Rates of participation in centre (hospital)-cardiac rehabilitation by patients with heart failure are suboptimal. Heart failure has two main phenotypes differing in underlying pathophysiology: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is characterised by depressed left ventricular systolic function (‘reduced ejection fraction’), whereas heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is diagnosed after excluding other causes of dyspnoea with normal ejection fraction. This programme aimed to develop and evaluate a facilitated home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention that could increase the uptake of cardiac rehabilitation while delivering the clinical benefits of centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Objectives: To develop an evidence-informed, home-based, self-care cardiac rehabilitation programme for patients with heart failure and their caregivers [the REACH-HF (Rehabilitation Enablement in Chronic Heart Failure) intervention]. To conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of a full trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention in addition to usual care in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. To assess the short- and long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the REACH-HF intervention in addition to usual care in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and their caregivers. Design: Intervention mapping to develop the REACH-HF intervention; uncontrolled feasibility study; pilot randomised controlled trial in those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; randomised controlled trial with a trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; qualitative studies including process evaluation; systematic review of cardiac rehabilitation in heart failure; and modelling to assess long-term cost-effectiveness (in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction). Setting: Four centres in England and Wales (Birmingham, Cornwall, Gwent and York); one centre in Scotland (Dundee) for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Participants: Adults aged ≥ 18 years with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction &lt; 45%) for the main randomised controlled trial (n = 216), and those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 45%) for the pilot randomised controlled trial (n = 50). Intervention: A self-care, facilitated cardiac rehabilitation manual was offered to patients (and participating caregivers) at home over 12 weeks by trained health-care professionals in addition to usual care or usual care alone. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was disease-specific health-related quality of life measured using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included deaths and hospitalisations. Results: The main randomised controlled trial recruited 216 participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and 97 caregivers. A significant and clinically meaningful between-group difference in the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score (primary outcome) at 12 months (–5.7 points, 95% confidence interval –10.6 to –0.7 points) favoured the REACH-HF intervention (p = 0.025). Eight (4%) patients (four in each group) had died at 12 months. There was no significant difference in hospital admissions, at 12 months, with 19 participants in the REACH-HF intervention group having at least one hospital admission, compared with 24 participants in the control group (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 1.51; p = 0.386). The mean cost of the intervention was £418 per participant with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The costs at 12 months were, on average, £401 higher in the intervention group than in the usual care alone group. Model-based economic evaluation, extrapolating from the main randomised controlled trial in those with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction over 4 years, found that adding the REACH-HF intervention to usual care had an estimated mean cost per participant of £15,452 (95% confidence interval £14,240 to £16,780) and a mean quality-adjusted lifeyear gain of 4.47 (95% confidence interval 3.83 to 4.91) years, compared with £15,051 (95% confidence interval £13,844 to £16,289) and 4.24 (95% confidence interval 4.05 to 4.43) years, respectively, for usual care alone. This gave an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year of £1721. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated 78% probability that the intervention plus usual care versus usual care alone has a cost-effectiveness below the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The intervention was well received by participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, as well as their caregivers. Both randomised controlled trials recruited to target, with &gt; 85% retention at follow-up. Limitations: Key limitations included (1) lack of blinding – given the nature of the intervention and the control we could not mask participants to treatments, so our results may reflect participant expectation bias; (2) that we were not able to capture consistent participant-level data on level of intervention adherence; (3) that there may be an impact on the generalisability of findings due to the demographics of the trial patients, as most were male (78%) and we recruited only seven people from ethnic minorities. Conclusions: Evaluation of the comprehensive, facilitated, home-based REACH-HF intervention for participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and caregivers indicated clinical effectiveness in terms of health-related quality of life and patient self-care but no other secondary outcomes. Although the economic analysis conducted alongside the full randomised controlled trial did not produce significant differences on the EuroQol-5 Dimensions or in quality-adjusted life-years, economic modelling suggested greater cost-effectiveness of the intervention than usual care. Our REACH-HF intervention offers a new evidence-based cardiac rehabilitation option that could increase uptake of cardiac rehabilitation in patients with heart failure not attracted to or able to access hospital-based programmes. Future work: Systematic collection of real-world data would track future changes in uptake of and adherence to alternative cardiac rehabilitation interventions in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and increase understanding of how changes in service delivery might affect clinical and health economic outcomes. The findings of our pilot randomised controlled trial in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction support progression to a full multicentre randomised controlled trial. </p