Aproximaciones metodológicas a la investigación en artes

La ciencia, entendida como saber científico, puede definirse como una forma de llegar al conocimiento. Pero ¿qué es realmente y cómo iniciarse en esta forma de trabajo? Este artículo expone algunas estrategias y orientaciones sobre cómo elaborar y planificar una investigación en artes, atendiendo a las actividades y conocimientos necesarios para desarrollarla. El objetivo principal es ayudar al estudiante que se dispone a dar sus primeros pasos en el camino de la investigación, por lo que se abordan algunas de las cuestiones más comunes entre los investigadores nóveles y que, con frecuencia, presentan dificultades notables, tales como: cuáles son los tipos de investigaciones en este ámbito, el posicionamiento teórico a adoptar por parte del investigador; la elección de una metodología o el procedimiento para recogida y análisis de datos, entre otras. Science, as a scientific knowledge, can be defined as a means to reach knowledge. Nevertheless, what is it actually and how can I get started with this work method? This article shows some strategies and orientations about elaborating and planning art investigations by paying attention to those activities and knowledge that are necessary to develop it. The main scope is helping the student who is trying to take their first steps in the investigation field; thus, some of the most frequent questions among novel investigators will be approached. In many occasions, these issues cause difficulties, such as: the type of investigations that can be found in this field; the theoretical position to be adopted by the investigator; or the selection of a method or a procedure to collect and analyse data, among many other

Development of a prototype real-time sting-jet precursor tool for forecasters

Damaging surface winds in some European storms have been attributed to descending mesoscale airstreams termed sting jets. The development of a prototype real-time tool that Met Office forecasters can use to identify favourable conditions for sting jet occurrence in extratropical cyclones is presented. The motivation is to improve national severe weather warnings. We have previously developed a convective-instability-based tool to identify sting-jet precursors for research purposes and applied it to storms in reanalyses and climate models with insufficient spatial resolution to represent sting jets. Here we describe the challenges of applying this research-derived diagnostic to output from an operational forecast system and demonstrate its usefulness for a recent winter storm. Through close collaboration with the researchers and forecasters from the Met Office, the diagnostic has been adapted to work on output from the Met Office’s operational global ensemble forecasts as it becomes available. Since autumn 2019, forecasters have been able to view graphical output informing them whether storms impacting the UK and Europe (up to seven days in the future) have the precursor. The tool has already proven useful in informing guidance for severe weather warnings, including those issued by the Met Office's impact-based National Severe Weather Warning Service that goes out to seven days ahead and is the primary hazardous weather warning service for the public and emergency responders

PREP2 Algorithm Predictions Are Correct at 2 Years Poststroke for Most Patients

Background. The PREP2 algorithm combines clinical and neurophysiological measures to predict upper-limb (UL) motor outcomes 3 months poststroke, using 4 prediction categories based on Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) scores. The algorithm was accurate at 3 months for 75% of participants in a previous validation study. Objective. This study aimed to evaluate whether PREP2 predictions made at baseline are correct 2 years poststroke. We also assessed whether patients’ UL performance remained stable, improved, or worsened between 3 months and 2 years after stroke. Methods. This is a follow-up study of 192 participants recruited and assessed in the original PREP2 validation study. Participants who completed assessments 3 months poststroke (n = 157) were invited to complete follow-up assessments at 2 years poststroke for the present study. UL outcomes were assessed with the ARAT, upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale, and Motor Activity Log. Results. A total of 86 participants completed 2-year follow-up assessments in this study. PREP2 predictions made at baseline were correct for 69/86 (80%) participants 2 years poststroke, and PREP2 UL outcome category was stable between 3 months and 2 years poststroke for 71/86 (83%). There was no difference in age, stroke severity, or comorbidities among patients whose category remained stable, improved, or deteriorated. Conclusions. PREP2 algorithm predictions made within days of stroke are correct at both 3 months and 2 years poststroke for most patients. Further investigation may be useful to identify which patients are likely to improve, remain stable, or deteriorate between 3 months and 2 years

Implementation of neurological group-based telerehabilitation within existing healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods evaluation

Background There is a need to evaluate if and how telerehabilitation approaches might co-exist within healthcare in the long-term. Our aim was to implement and evaluate a multidisciplinary group-based telerehabilitation approach for people engaging in neurological rehabilitation. Methods NeuroRehabilitation OnLine (NROL) was adapted and implemented within an existing healthcare system as a programme of repeating six-week blocks. A robust evaluation was undertaken simultaneously using a convergent parallel design underpinned by implementation frameworks. This included service data, and patient and staff interviews. Implementation success was conceptualised using the outcomes of appropriateness, acceptability and sustainability. Results Eight NROL blocks delivered 265 sessions with 1347 patient contacts, and NROL continues as part of standard practice. The approach was appropriate for varied demographics and had positive patient opinions and outcomes for many. Staff perceived NROL provided a compatible means to increase therapy and help meet targets, despite needing to mitigate some challenges when fitting the approach within the existing system. NROL was considered acceptable due to good attendance (68%), low drop-out (12%), and a good safety record (one non-injury fall). It was accepted as a new way of working across rehabilitation disciplines as an ‘extra layer of therapy’. NROL had perceived advantages in terms of patient and staff resource (e.g. saving time, energy and travel). NROL provided staffing efficiencies (ratio 0.6) compared to one-to-one delivery. Technology difficulties and reluctance were surmountable with dedicated technology assistance. Leadership commitment was considered key to enable the efforts needed for implementation and sustained use. Conclusion Pragmatic implementation of group-based telerehabilitation was possible as an adjunct to neurological rehabilitation within an existing healthcare system. The compelling advantages reported of having NROL as part of rehabilitation supports the continued use of this telerehabilitation approach. This project provides an exemplar of how evaluation can be run concurrently with implementation, applying a data driven rather than anecdotal approach to implementation

Allied health professional research engagement and impact on healthcare performance: A systematic review protocol

Background: Existing evidence suggests that clinician and organization engagement in research can improve healthcare processes of care and outcomes. However, current evidence has considered the relationship across all healthcare professions collectively. With the increase in allied health clinical academic and research activity, it is imperative for healthcare organizations, leaders and managers to understand engagement in research within these specific clinical fields. This systematic review aims to identify the effect of engagement in research by allied health professionals (AHPs) and organizations on healthcare performance. Methods: This systematic review has a two‐stage search strategy. The first stage will be to screen a previous systematic review examining the effectiveness of engagement in research in health and social care to identify relevant papers published pre‐2012. The search strategy used in the previous review will then be rerun, but with a specific focus on allied health. This multi‐database search will identify publications from 2012 to date. Only studies that assessed the effectiveness of allied health engagement in research will be included. All stages of the review will be conducted by two reviewers independently, plus documented discussions with the wider research team when discrepancies occur. This systematic review protocol follows the EQUATOR reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses for Protocols (PRISMA‐P). Discussion: The findings of this review will make a significant contribution to the evidence base around the effect of allied health engagement in research on healthcare performance. It will provide insights for clinicians and managers looking to understand the consequences of developing AHP research capability and capacity. The findings of this review will also aim to make recommendations for future evaluation approaches for engagement in research interventions. Trial registration: This systematic review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42021253461. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: This study will provide valuable evidence for professionals and policymakers seeking to understand engagement in research in the allied health disciplines. Where supported by the data, there may be recommendations for future research regarding specific variables to be considered when planning and evaluating engagement in research in allied health practice. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: A previous systematic review identified a positive association between clinician and organization engagement in research and improved processes of care and health outcomes. The reviews’ findings have been used as a justification for clinicians and organizations to increase research capacity. That review evaluated literature published before 2012 and the studies that were identified predominantly reported on engagement in research by medics and nurses. An updated review is now required to include research published since 2012. This review will specifically focus on the effect of engagement in research within allied health disciplines. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Research activity among AHPs is gaining momentum. Given this growth in AHP research activity and the rise in dedicated clinical academic roles, a contemporary review to identify the specific effect of AHP engagement in research on healthcare performance is prudent. The findings will inform clinicians, clinical managers and leaders of the potential impact of research activities by AHP clinicians and organizations. This will support the planning and development of initiatives focused on research capacity, capability and culture within allied health

The value of allied health professional research engagement on healthcare performance: a systematic review

Background Existing evidence suggests that clinician and organisation engagement in research can improve healthcare performance. However, current evidence has considered the relationship across all healthcare professions collectively. With the increase in allied health professional (AHP) clinical academic and research activity, it is imperative for healthcare organisations, leaders and managers to understand research engagement within these specific clinical fields. This systematic review aims to examine the value of research engagement by allied health professionals and organisations on healthcare performance. Methods This systematic review had a two-stage search strategy. Firstly, the papers from a previous systematic review examining the effect of research engagement in healthcare were screened to identify relevant papers published pre-2012. Secondly, a multi-database search was used to update the previous review but with a specific focus on allied health to identify publications from 2012 to date. Studies which explored the value of allied health research engagement on healthcare performance were included. All stages of the review were conducted by two reviewers independently, plus documented discussions with the wider research team when discrepancies occurred. Each study was assessed using the appropriate critical appraisal tool developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Results Twenty-two studies were included, of which six were ranked as high importance. This sample comprised mixed research designs. Overall, the findings indicated positive improvements in processes of care. The review also identified the most common mechanisms which may link research engagement with improvements to processes of care. Conclusion This landmark review is the first benchmark of evidence that explicitly shows improved processes of care and outcomes from AHP research engagement. The lack of transparent reporting of AHP research engagement highlights the need for clear recommendations in the design of future prospective studies. These proposals specifically include greater transparency in relation to AHP involvement, mechanisms and types of research engagement. The inclusion of these aspects as an integral component of future intervention study designs may contribute essential evidence of the value and impact of AHP research engagement

Learning Links: a web of choices

This paper presents Learning Links, Padova University Language Centre\u2019s online English course. The course has developed from a need to provide appropriate language learning support resources for Italian university students aiming to reach Level B1 of the Council of Europe\u2019s Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (see Clark, 2004). Whilst the University Language Centre offers its users a wide range of resources, the students have indicated the need for materials to be accessible from home and therefore available via the Internet (Ackerley, 2002; Ackerley, Sours, 2004). This need has led to the in-house creation of course structure and content by English teachers, web development experts and other members of staff at the University Language Centre. This paper discusses how the combination of choice and guidance is a key element in the provision of an autonomous learning environment, since it helps the students reach their individual learning objectives (Ackerley, 2003), allows for a range of cognitive attitudes (Bertin, 2001) and facilitates knowledge construction. The paper also describes some of the learning activities in Learning Links and, in particular, focuses on how they are linked together and the ways in which they can be used by the learners

Implementation of neurological group-based telerehabilitation within existing healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic : a mixed methods evaluation

Background: There is a need to evaluate if and how telerehabilitation approaches might co-exist within healthcare in the long-term. Our aim was to implement and evaluate a multidisciplinary group-based telerehabilitation approach for people engaging in neurological rehabilitation. Methods: NeuroRehabilitation OnLine (NROL) was adapted and implemented within an existing healthcare system as a programme of repeating six-week blocks. A robust evaluation was undertaken simultaneously using a convergent parallel design underpinned by implementation frameworks. This included service data, and patient and staff interviews. Implementation success was conceptualised using the outcomes of appropriateness, acceptability and sustainability. Results: Eight NROL blocks delivered 265 sessions with 1347 patient contacts, and NROL continues as part of standard practice. The approach was appropriate for varied demographics and had positive patient opinions and outcomes for many. Staff perceived NROL provided a compatible means to increase therapy and help meet targets, despite needing to mitigate some challenges when fitting the approach within the existing system. NROL was considered acceptable due to good attendance (68%), low drop-out (12%), and a good safety record (one non-injury fall). It was accepted as a new way of working across rehabilitation disciplines as an ‘extra layer of therapy’. NROL had perceived advantages in terms of patient and staff resource (e.g. saving time, energy and travel). NROL provided staffing efficiencies (ratio 0.6) compared to one-to-one delivery. Technology difficulties and reluctance were surmountable with dedicated technology assistance. Leadership commitment was considered key to enable the efforts needed for implementation and sustained use. Conclusion: Pragmatic implementation of group-based telerehabilitation was possible as an adjunct to neurological rehabilitation within an existing healthcare system. The compelling advantages reported of having NROL as part of rehabilitation supports the continued use of this telerehabilitation approach. This project provides an exemplar of how evaluation can be run concurrently with implementation, applying a data driven rather than anecdotal approach to implementation