Editorial: Decolonising the University

Therefore, in its variety, the contributions in this special issue share theorisations, auto-ethnographic reflections, and pedagogical experiments of decolonisation, politics of knowledge, and activism informed by Feminist, Gender, and Queer studies but also by non-Eurocentred epistemic geo-genealogies grounded in embodied experiences of racialisation, discrimination, and resistance in the academia. Inserting what are inevitably profoundly political contributions, which question the foundations and limitations of hegemonic knowledge creation, into the mould of an academic peer-reviewed special issue is a complex and, at times, seemingly impossible exercise. As the guest editors and editorial board negotiated the process of this issue’s production, we ourselves were challenged to engage with tensions around what constitutes a ‘proper’ scientific contribution, by which and whose standards. As a reader of this special issue, and perhaps a student, teacher, researcher, activist, or a combination thereof, it is likely that you also find yourself addressed and challenged by some of the critiques and proposals articulated in the articles and essays that follow

Understanding land-use change conflict: a systematic review of case studies

The growing demand for food, water, and shelter change the way people use land. These changes have affected or even caused conflict in several locations. However, conflicts do not erupt in isolation; they are the result of multiple interacting causes. There is limited structural understanding of these causes. In this study, we systematically coded case studies that report on conflict related to land-use change, including deforestation in commodity frontiers, agricultural development on common land, and urban development. Based on an analysis of 62 cases, we identified population growth, overlapping land rights, ethnic fragmentation, and economic inequality as the most frequently reported root causes, while rises in land prices was the most often reported proximate cause. Reported institutional causes suggest that the problem is not necessarily the complete absence of governance mechanisms, but rather that governance mechanisms are not fully equipped to deal with the complexities of the observed land-use changes

Five-year extension of a clinical trial comparing the EX-PRESS glaucoma filtration device and trabeculectomy in primary open-angle glaucoma

This study compared the efficacy of the EX-PRESS(®) glaucoma filtration device and trabeculectomy in primary open-angle glaucoma up to five years after surgery. Patients from a previously reported randomized, open-label, parallel-arm clinical trial in which 78 patients received either the EX-PRESS glaucoma filtration device or underwent a trabeculectomy were followed for up to an additional four years (five total) beyond the original study (39 eyes per treatment group). Risk-benefit data were obtained for up to five years after glaucoma surgery. Outcome variables were intraocular pressures and intraocular pressure medications. Complete success was denoted by intraocular pressure values ≤ 18 mmHg without medication. The EX-PRESS glaucoma filtration device controlled intraocular pressure more effectively without medication for more patients from year 1 (86.8% versus 61.5%, P = 0.01) to year 3 (66.7% versus 41.0%, P = 0.02) than trabeculectomy. At year 1, only 12.8% of patients required intraocular pressure medication after EX-PRESS implantation, compared with 35.9% after trabeculectomy. The proportions became closer at year 5 (41% versus 53.9%). The responder rate was higher with EX-PRESS and time to failure was longer. In addition, surgical interventions for complications were fewer after EX-PRESS implantation. This five-year analysis confirmed and extended the results reported after one year. Compared with trabeculectomy, EX-PRESS provided better intraocular pressure control in the first three years, and patients required fewer intraocular pressure medications and fewer surgical interventions during the five-year study period. For patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, the EX-PRESS glaucoma filtration device, implanted under a superficial scleral flap, produced significantly higher success rates than trabeculectomy. EX-PRESS is an effective device for long-term treatment of primary open-angle glaucom

Safety of aspirin for preeclampsia prevention

In de tweede lijn schrijven gynaecologen zwangere vrouwen die een hoog risico op pre-eclampsie lopen steeds vaker aspirine voor. De laatste tijd krijgen ook huisartsen regelmatig een verzoek om een aspirinerecept. Maar is aspirine wel veilig voor de (on)geboren baby? Recente publicaties laten zien dat aspirinegebruik tijdens de zwangerschap niet schadelijk is voor het kind. Huisartsen lijken daarom veilig aspirine voor te kunnen schrijven aan een zwangere vrouw, mits daar een indicatie voor is

Safety of aspirin for preeclampsia prevention

In de tweede lijn schrijven gynaecologen zwangere vrouwen die een hoog risico op pre-eclampsie lopen steeds vaker aspirine voor. De laatste tijd krijgen ook huisartsen regelmatig een verzoek om een aspirinerecept. Maar is aspirine wel veilig voor de (on)geboren baby? Recente publicaties laten zien dat aspirinegebruik tijdens de zwangerschap niet schadelijk is voor het kind. Huisartsen lijken daarom veilig aspirine voor te kunnen schrijven aan een zwangere vrouw, mits daar een indicatie voor is