3 research outputs found

    Message Journal, Issue 5: COVID-19 SPECIAL ISSUE Capturing visual insights, thoughts and reflections on 2020/21 and beyond...

    Get PDF
    If there is a theme running through the Message Covid-19 special issue, it is one of caring. Of our own and others’ resilience and wellbeing, of friendship and community, of students, practitioners and their futures, of social justice, equality and of doing the right thing. The veins of designing with care run through the edition, wide and deep. It captures, not designers as heroes, but those with humble views, exposing the need to understand a diversity of perspectives when trying to comprehend the complexity that Covid-19 continues to generate. As graphic designers, illustrators and visual communicators, contributors have created, documented, written, visualised, reflected, shared, connected and co-created, designed for good causes and re-defined what it is to be a student, an academic and a designer during the pandemic. This poignant period in time has driven us, through isolation, towards new rules of living, and new ways of working; to see and map the world in a different light. A light that is uncertain, disjointed, and constantly being redefined. This Message issue captures responses from the graphic communication design community in their raw state, to allow contributors to communicate their experiences through both their written and visual voice. Thus, the reader can discern as much from the words as the design and visualisations. Through this issue a substantial number of contributions have focused on personal reflection, isolation, fear, anxiety and wellbeing, as well as reaching out to community, making connections and collaborating. This was not surprising in a world in which connection with others has often been remote, and where ‘normal’ social structures of support and care have been broken down. We also gain insight into those who are using graphic communication design to inspire and capture new ways of teaching and learning, developing themselves as designers, educators, and activists, responding to social justice and to do good; gaining greater insight into society, government actions and conspiracy. Introduction: Victoria Squire - Coping with Covid: Community, connection and collaboration: James Alexander & Carole Evans, Meg Davies, Matthew Frame, Chae Ho Lee, Alma Hoffmann, Holly K. Kaufman-Hill, Joshua Korenblat, Warren Lehrer, Christine Lhowe, Sara Nesteruk, Cat Normoyle & Jessica Teague, Kyuha Shim. - Coping with Covid: Isolation, wellbeing and hope: Sadia Abdisalam, Tom Ayling, Jessica Barness, Megan Culliford, Stephanie Cunningham, Sofija Gvozdeva, Hedzlynn Kamaruzzaman, Merle Karp, Erica V. P. Lewis, Kelly Salchow Macarthur, Steven McCarthy, Shelly Mayers, Elizabeth Shefrin, Angelica Sibrian, David Smart, Ane Thon Knutsen, Isobel Thomas, Darryl Westley. - Coping with Covid: Pedagogy, teaching and learning: Bernard J Canniffe, Subir Dey, Aaron Ganci, Elizabeth Herrmann, John Kilburn, Paul Nini, Emily Osborne, Gianni Sinni & Irene Sgarro, Dave Wood, Helena Gregory, Colin Raeburn & Jackie Malcolm. - Coping with Covid: Social justice, activism and doing good: Class Action Collective, Xinyi Li, Matt Soar, Junie Tang, Lisa Winstanley. - Coping with Covid: Society, control and conspiracy: Diana Bîrhală, Maria Borțoi, Patti Capaldi, Tânia A. Cardoso, Peter Gibbons, Bianca Milea, Rebecca Tegtmeyer, Danne Wo

    Patient and stakeholder engagement learnings: PREP-IT as a case study

    Get PDF

    Implementing stakeholder engagement to explore alternative models of consent: An example from the PREP-IT trials

    No full text
    Introduction: Cluster randomized crossover trials are often faced with a dilemma when selecting an optimal model of consent, as the traditional model of obtaining informed consent from participant's before initiating any trial related activities may not be suitable. We describe our experience of engaging patient advisors to identify an optimal model of consent for the PREP-IT trials. This paper also examines surrogate measures of success for the selected model of consent. Methods: The PREP-IT program consists of two multi-center cluster randomized crossover trials that engaged patient advisors to determine an optimal model of consent. Patient advisors and stakeholders met regularly and reached consensus on decisions related to the trial design including the model for consent. Patient advisors provided valuable insight on how key decisions on trial design and conduct would be received by participants and the impact these decisions will have. Results: Patient advisors, together with stakeholders, reviewed the pros and cons and the requirements for the traditional model of consent, deferred consent, and waiver of consent. Collectively, they agreed upon a deferred consent model, in which patients may be approached for consent after their fracture surgery and prior to data collection. The consent rate in PREP-IT is 80.7%, and 0.67% of participants have withdrawn consent for participation. Discussion: Involvement of patient advisors in the development of an optimal model of consent has been successful. Engagement of patient advisors is recommended for other large trials where the traditional model of consent may not be optimal
    corecore