Recovery Colleges and Dementia Courses – A Scoping Survey

Purpose: This project aimed to understand how dementia is represented within current UK Recovery College courses and how people with dementia are involved with such courses. Design: A scoping survey was developed with seven multiple choice questions. Information was collected to find out: How many Colleges are currently offering dementia courses; have previously offered courses or plan to start offering courses; how they have developed their courses; who delivers them; who can attend; and how long they have courses been running. Individual Recovery Colleges could leave contact details if they were interested in collaborating on future research projects. UK Recovery Colleges were identified using a published list (Anfossi, 2017) supplemented with internet searching. 86 email messages were sent to Recovery Colleges inviting Leads/Managers to complete the survey through an electronic link. Findings: Of the 28 (32.6%) Recovery Colleges who completed the survey, eleven reported to be currently offering dementia courses, with eight planned to start doing so. Six Recovery Colleges stated they were not currently offering dementia courses, have not done so previously and have no current plans to. Research Implications: The survey results indicate variability in provision of UK Recovery College courses for people with dementia, and raise further questions about the way the courses are used, their acceptability and usefulness. Originality: This service evaluation highlights the variability in what is offered, which is an important step in understanding the current service provision

Building an initial understanding of UK Recovery College dementia courses: A national survey of Recovery College and memory services staff. Journal: Working with Older People Working with Older People

PurposeRecovery Colleges were developed to support the recovery of people with mental health difficulties through courses co-produced by professionals and people with lived experience. This study aims to examine the use of Recovery Colleges to support people with dementia.Design/methodology/approachA survey was circulated to UK Recovery College and memory service staff, exploring provision, delivery and attendance of dementia courses. Open responses provided insight into participant views about recovery in post-diagnostic support and the practicalities of running dementia courses.FindingsA total of 51 Recovery College staff and 210 memory service staff completed the survey. Twelve Recovery College dementia courses were identified across the UK. Three categories emerged from the qualitative data: post-diagnostic support, recovery in the context of dementia, challenges and areas of innovation

On the use of systematic reviews to inform environmental policies

AbstractEnvironmental research varies in its methodological quality, degree of bias, and relevance to policy questions. Using this heterogeneous, and sometimes polarised, research to inform environmental policies can be challenging. Policy-making in the healthcare field sometimes uses systematic reviews (SRs) to tackle these issues and present a comprehensive, policy-neutral, transparent and reproducible synthesis of the evidence. However, there is less familiarity with SRs in the environmental field. The aim of this article is to: (1) summarise the process of conducting SRs, using best practice methods from the healthcare field as an example, (2) explain the rationale behind each stage of conducting a SR, and (3) examine the prospects and challenges of using SRs to inform environmental policy. We conclude that existing SR protocols from healthcare can be, and have been, applied successfully to environmental research but some adaptations could improve the process. The literature search stage could be expedited by standardising the reporting and indexing of environmental studies, equivalent to that in the healthcare field. The consistency of the study appraisal stage of SRs could be augmented by refining the existing quality assessment tools used in the healthcare field, enhancing their ability to discriminate quality and risk of bias in non-randomised studies. Ultimately, the strength of evidence within SRs on environmental topics could be improved through more widespread use of randomised controlled trials as a research method, owing to their inherently lower risk of bias when conducted according to best practice

Evaluating the role of quality assessment of primary studies in systematic reviews of cancer practice guidelines

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of study quality assessment of primary studies in cancer practice guidelines. METHODS: Reliable and valid study quality assessment scales were sought and applied to published reports of trials included in systematic reviews of cancer guidelines. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between quality scores and pooled odds ratios (OR) for mortality and need for blood transfusion. RESULTS: Results found that that whether trials were classified as high or low quality depended on the scale used to assess them. Although the results of the sensitivity analyses found some variation in the ORs observed, the confidence intervals (CIs) of the pooled effects from each of the analyses of high quality trials overlapped with the CI of the pooled odds of all trials. Quality score was not predictive of pooled ORs studied here. CONCLUSIONS: Had sensitivity analyses based on study quality been conducted prospectively, it is highly unlikely that different conclusions would have been found or that different clinical recommendations would have emerged in the guidelines

Reporting bias in medical research - a narrative review

Reporting bias represents a major problem in the assessment of health care interventions. Several prominent cases have been described in the literature, for example, in the reporting of trials of antidepressants, Class I anti-arrhythmic drugs, and selective COX-2 inhibitors. The aim of this narrative review is to gain an overview of reporting bias in the medical literature, focussing on publication bias and selective outcome reporting. We explore whether these types of bias have been shown in areas beyond the well-known cases noted above, in order to gain an impression of how widespread the problem is. For this purpose, we screened relevant articles on reporting bias that had previously been obtained by the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care in the context of its health technology assessment reports and other research work, together with the reference lists of these articles