9 research outputs found

    The knowledge-in-use of expert and experienced supervisors of PhD students in the social sciences

    Get PDF
    This thesis examines what expert and experienced PhD supervisors in the social sciences do well and how they do it. It is set in the context of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) initiatives in the early 1990s to broaden the purposes of an academic research training and to promote timely PhD submissions. Many have claimed that PhD supervisors play a central role in the PhD process and this research aspired to achieve clearer understandings of the expertise involved in fulfilling that role. The research was informed by Schutz's phenomenological analysis of common sense and related concepts. It involved a student survey and six supervisor case studies. The survey aimed to determine the criteria in terms of which students judged supervision to be successful, and to identify those expert supervisors who most fully met these criteria. In going beyond criteria identified by students, the aim of the case studies was to ask how successful supervision could be achieved. 'Expert' supervisors agreeing to participate were observed over several supervision sessions and asked later in interview to talk about the various actions they took in the observed sessions. Conclusions drawn from the student survey and the case studies included a close match between student and supervisor criteria and priorities for supervision. A clear emphasis was placed by both supervisors and students on bridging gaps between student knowledge, skills and motivation at any stage and what was necessary to achieve success in their PhD studies. The distinctive nature of supervisory expertise and the willingness of supervisors to reflect usefully on their taken for-granted expert practices were thought to have important implications for the initial and continuing education of PhD supervisors, the relationships between supervision and formal research training, ESRC research training policy, and future research on the craft of PhD supervision

    The knowledge-in-use of expert and experienced supervisors of PhD students in the social sciences

    Get PDF
    This thesis examines what expert and experienced PhD supervisors in the social sciences do well and how they do it. It is set in the context of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) initiatives in the early 1990s to broaden the purposes of an academic research training and to promote timely PhD submissions. Many have claimed that PhD supervisors play a central role in the PhD process and this research aspired to achieve clearer understandings of the expertise involved in fulfilling that role. The research was informed by Schutz's phenomenological analysis of common sense and related concepts. It involved a student survey and six supervisor case studies. The survey aimed to determine the criteria in terms of which students judged supervision to be successful, and to identify those expert supervisors who most fully met these criteria. In going beyond criteria identified by students, the aim of the case studies was to ask how successful supervision could be achieved. 'Expert' supervisors agreeing to participate were observed over several supervision sessions and asked later in interview to talk about the various actions they took in the observed sessions. Conclusions drawn from the student survey and the case studies included a close match between student and supervisor criteria and priorities for supervision. A clear emphasis was placed by both supervisors and students on bridging gaps between student knowledge, skills and motivation at any stage and what was necessary to achieve success in their PhD studies. The distinctive nature of supervisory expertise and the willingness of supervisors to reflect usefully on their taken for-granted expert practices were thought to have important implications for the initial and continuing education of PhD supervisors, the relationships between supervision and formal research training, ESRC research training policy, and future research on the craft of PhD supervision.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

    Exploring Infant Feeding Pratices In Food Insecure Households: What Is The Real Issue?

    No full text

    Global economic burden of unmet surgical need for appendicitis

    No full text
    Background There is a substantial gap in provision of adequate surgical care in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to identify the economic burden of unmet surgical need for the common condition of appendicitis. Methods Data on the incidence of appendicitis from 170 countries and two different approaches were used to estimate numbers of patients who do not receive surgery: as a fixed proportion of the total unmet surgical need per country (approach 1); and based on country income status (approach 2). Indirect costs with current levels of access and local quality, and those if quality were at the standards of high-income countries, were estimated. A human capital approach was applied, focusing on the economic burden resulting from premature death and absenteeism. Results Excess mortality was 4185 per 100 000 cases of appendicitis using approach 1 and 3448 per 100 000 using approach 2. The economic burden of continuing current levels of access and local quality was US 92492millionusingapproach1and92 492 million using approach 1 and 73 141 million using approach 2. The economic burden of not providing surgical care to the standards of high-income countries was 95004millionusingapproach1and95 004 million using approach 1 and 75 666 million using approach 2. The largest share of these costs resulted from premature death (97.7 per cent) and lack of access (97.0 per cent) in contrast to lack of quality. Conclusion For a comparatively non-complex emergency condition such as appendicitis, increasing access to care should be prioritized. Although improving quality of care should not be neglected, increasing provision of care at current standards could reduce societal costs substantially

    Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

    Get PDF
    Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

    The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    © 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine

    Critical care admission following elective surgery was not associated with survival benefit: prospective analysis of data from 27 countries

    Get PDF
    This was an investigator initiated study funded by Nestle Health Sciences through an unrestricted research grant, and by a National Institute for Health Research (UK) Professorship held by RP. The study was sponsored by Queen Mary University of London

    Delayed colorectal cancer care during covid-19 pandemic (decor-19). Global perspective from an international survey

    No full text
    Background The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer (CRC) care during the pandemic. Methods The impact of COVID-19 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of CRC patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in CRC care. Respondents were divided into two comparator groups: 1) ‘delay’ group: CRC care affected by the pandemic; 2) ‘no delay’ group: unaltered CRC practice. Results A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the ‘delay’ (745, 70.9%) and ‘no delay’ (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to COVID-19 units, units fully dedicated to COVID-19 care, personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the ‘delay’ group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of CRC care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in COVID-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to COVID-19 units were statistically associated with unaltered CRC care in the ‘no delay’ group, while the geographical distribution was not. Conclusions Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic CRC practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health-care delivery systems, hospital’s preparedness, resources availability, and local COVID-19 prevalence rather than geographical factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize CRC care

    1997 Amerasia Journal

    No full text
    corecore