Whiteness and diasporic Irishness: nation, gender and class

Whiteness is often detached from the notion of diaspora in the recent flurry of interest in the phenomenon, yet it is a key feature of some of the largest and oldest displacements. This paper explores the specific contexts of white racial belonging and status over two centuries in two main destinations of the Irish diaspora, the USA and Britain. Its major contribution is a tracing of the untold story of ‘How the Irish became white in Britain’ to parallel and contrast with the much more fully developed narrative in the USA. It argues that, contrary to popular belief, the racialisation of the Irish in England did not fade away at the end of the nineteenth century but became transmuted in new forms which have continued to place the ‘white’ Irish outside the boundaries of the English nation. These have been strangely ignored by social scientists, who conflate Irishness and working-class identities in England without acknowledging the distinctive contribution of Irish backgrounds to constructions of class difference. Gender locates Irish women and men differently in relation to these class positions, for example allowing mothers to be blamed for the perpetuation of the underclass. Class and gender are also largely unrecognised dimensions of Irish ethnicity in the USA, where the presence of ‘poor white’ neighbourhoods continues to challenge the iconic story of Irish upward mobility. Irishness thus remains central to the construction of mainstream ‘white’ identities in both the USA and Britain into the twenty-first century

Screening for Emotional Distress in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments

Screening for emotional distress is becoming increasingly common in cancer care. This systematic review examines the psychometric properties of the existing tools used to screen patients for emotional distress, with the goal of encouraging screening programs to use standardized tools that have strong psychometrics. Systematic searches of MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for English-language studies in cancer patients were performed using a uniform set of key words (eg, depression, anxiety, screening, validation, and scale), and the retrieved studies were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Evaluation criteria included the number of validation studies, the number of participants, generalizability, reliability, the quality of the criterion measure, sensitivity, and specificity. The literature search yielded 106 validation studies that described a total of 33 screening measures. Many generic and cancer-specific scales satisfied a fairly high threshold of quality in terms of their psychometric properties and generalizability. Among the ultrashort measures (ie, those containing one to four items), the Combined Depression Questions performed best in patients receiving palliative care. Among the short measures (ie, those containing five to 20 items), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale demonstrated adequate psychometric properties. Among the long measures (ie, those containing 21–50 items), the Beck Depression Inventory and the General Health Questionaire–28 met all evaluation criteria. The PsychoSocial Screen for Cancer, the Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer Patients–Revised, and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist are long measures that can also be recommended for routine screening. In addition, other measures may be considered for specific indications or disease types. Some measures, particularly newly developed cancer-specific scales, require further validation against structured clinical interviews (the criterion standard for validation measures) before they can be recommended

Management of eating disorders for people with higher weight : clinical practice guideline

Introduction: The prevalence of eating disorders is high in people with higher weight. However, despite this, eating disorders experienced by people with higher weight have been consistently under-recognised and under-treated, and there is little to guide clinicians in the management of eating disorders in this population. Aim: The aim of this guideline is to synthesise the current best practice approaches to the management of eating disorders in people with higher weight and make evidence-based clinical practice recommendations. Methods: The National Eating Disorders Collaboration Steering Committee auspiced a Development Group for a Clinical Practice Guideline for the treatment of eating disorders for people with higher weight. The Development Group followed the ‘Guidelines for Guidelines’ process outlined by the National Health and Medical Research Council and aim to meet their Standards to be: 1. relevant and useful for decision making; 2. transparent; 3. overseen by a guideline development group; 4. identifying and managing conflicts of interest; 5. focused on health and related outcomes; 6. evidence informed; 7. making actionable recommendations; 8. up-to-date; and, 9. accessible. The development group included people with clinical and/or academic expertise and/or lived experience. The guideline has undergone extensive peer review and consultation over an 18-month period involving reviews by key stakeholders, including experts and organisations with clinical academic and/or lived experience. Recommendations: Twenty-one clinical recommendations are made and graded according to the National Health and Medical Research Council evidence levels. Strong recommendations were supported for psychological treatment as a first-line treatment approach adults (with bulimia nervosa or binge-eating disorder), adolescents and children. Clinical considerations such as weight stigma, interprofessional collaborative practice and cultural considerations are also discussed. Conclusions: This guideline will fill an important gap in the need to better understand and care for people experiencing eating disorders who also have higher weight. This guideline acknowledges deficits in knowledge and consequently the reliance on consensus and lower levels of evidence for many recommendations, and the need for research particularly evaluating weight-neutral and other more recent approaches in this field