Religion and cognitive development: implications for the developing world

Nothing shapes the morals, values, and folkways in the Global South as much as religion. It is the primary mark of identity and adhered to in an extraordinarily passionate manner. Hence, religion matters deeply and permeates directly or indirectly almost every vestige of life not least on growth and socio-economic development of societies. This article explores how religious thinking affects the cognitive development of people, especially children, which may, in turn, impact upon the variables of a country’s economic growth and development. The working assumption is that a weakness in the former deleteriously affects the latter. This article concludes by arguing that the influence of religion is least in the most advanced countries

Imagining technology-enhanced learning with heritage artefacts: teacher-perceived potential of 2D and 3D heritage site visualisations

Background: There is much to be realised in the educational potential of national and world heritage sites. Such sites need to be supported in sharing their resources with a wide and international public, especially within formal education. Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) heritage site visualisations could serve this need. Our study focuses on the teacher-perceived possibilities and benefits for education around such visualisations. Purpose: We describe how a group of UK teachers perceive the potential of cross-curricular learning that could arise from an Italian world heritage site. The teachers commented on 2D visualisations of artefacts from this site, as well as the design of a 3D immersive environment to serve educational purposes. We consider as follows: (1) how the cross-curricular teaching potential of such resources is perceived, and (2) what design features of a 3D immersive environment teachers suggest are needed for educational explorations. Sample: We recruited 10 teachers from the Midlands region of the UK and carried out semi-structured interviews. Methods: Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis applied to the conversations. Questioning was grounded in the examination of 2D and 3D visual resources. This provoked cross-curricular and educational design thinking. Results: Teacher responses highlighted a wide range of cross-curricular possibilities. However, they expressed a more ‘assimilative’ than ‘accommodative’ approach when relating resources to the curriculum. Such ‘assimilation’ involved seeing the site artefacts as raw material for more instrumental ‘curriculum activities’ (e.g. within art and design, geography, maths or literacy) rather than a more accommodative approach whereby curricular disciplines were exercised to make new meaning from the artefacts. In relation to 3D technology design, most teachers highlighted three technology features that would render it well matched to educational practice and three educational benefits over non-3D immersive environments. Conclusions: Teachers can easily imagine a rich range of opportunities to utilise 2D and 3D heritage site artefacts within the curriculum. However, the largely assimilative nature of this cross-curricular appropriation suggests the value of providing more guidance and support to teachers in the interpretation and application of artefacts. Their design suggestions can usefully inform construction of educational features within 3D immersive technologies that support heritage site experiences

Identifying educator behaviours for high quality verbal feedback in health professions education: literature review and expert refinement

Background Health professions education is characterised by work-based learning and relies on effective verbal feedback. However the literature reports problems in feedback practice, including lack of both learner engagement and explicit strategies for improving performance. It is not clear what constitutes high quality, learner-centred feedback or how educators can promote it. We hoped to enhance feedback in clinical practice by distinguishing the elements of an educator’s role in feedback considered to influence learner outcomes, then develop descriptions of observable educator behaviours that exemplify them. Methods An extensive literature review was conducted to identify i) information substantiating specific components of an educator’s role in feedback asserted to have an important influence on learner outcomes and ii) verbal feedback instruments in health professions education, that may describe important educator activities in effective feedback. This information was used to construct a list of elements thought to be important in effective feedback. Based on these elements, descriptions of observable educator behaviours that represent effective feedback were developed and refined during three rounds of a Delphi process and a face-to-face meeting with experts across the health professions and education. Results The review identified more than 170 relevant articles (involving health professions, education, psychology and business literature) and ten verbal feedback instruments in health professions education (plus modified versions). Eighteen distinct elements of an educator’s role in effective feedback were delineated. Twenty five descriptions of educator behaviours that align with the elements were ratified by the expert panel. Conclusions This research clarifies the distinct elements of an educator’s role in feedback considered to enhance learner outcomes. The corresponding set of observable educator behaviours aim to describe how an educator could engage, motivate and enable a learner to improve. This creates the foundation for developing a method to systematically evaluate the impact of verbal feedback on learner performance

Racism as a determinant of health: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite a growing body of epidemiological evidence in recent years documenting the health impacts of racism, the cumulative evidence base has yet to be synthesized in a comprehensive meta-analysis focused specifically on racism as a determinant of health. This meta-analysis reviewed the literature focusing on the relationship between reported racism and mental and physical health outcomes. Data from 293 studies reported in 333 articles published between 1983 and 2013, and conducted predominately in the U.S., were analysed using random effects models and mean weighted effect sizes. Racism was associated with poorer mental health (negative mental health: r = -.23, 95% CI [-.24,-.21], k = 227; positive mental health: r = -.13, 95% CI [-.16,-.10], k = 113), including depression, anxiety, psychological stress and various other outcomes. Racism was also associated with poorer general health (r = -.13 (95% CI [-.18,-.09], k = 30), and poorer physical health (r = -.09, 95% CI [-.12,-.06], k = 50). Moderation effects were found for some outcomes with regard to study and exposure characteristics. Effect sizes of racism on mental health were stronger in cross-sectional compared with longitudinal data and in non-representative samples compared with representative samples. Age, sex, birthplace and education level did not moderate the effects of racism on health. Ethnicity significantly moderated the effect of racism on negative mental health and physical health: the association between racism and negative mental health was significantly stronger for Asian American and Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants, and the association between racism and physical health was significantly stronger for Latino(a) American participants compared with African American participants.<br /

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research