The Underrepresentation of Latin@ Students in Gifted Programs: Teachers’ Perceptions of Giftedness and Its Effects in the Nomination of Potentially Gifted Latin@ Students

The underrepresentation of Latin@ students in gifted programs is a serious problem that plagues public schools nationwide. Traditionally, teachers’ nomination is the most frequent method used for identifying students for gifted programs. Seeking to understand how teachers’ perceptions of giftedness influenced the nomination of potentially gifted Latin@ students, this qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with eight participants and a follow-up focus group in a Midwestern urban district. The researcher used a hermeneutic phenomenological approach as part of the analytical framework. This research identified several major findings: 1) most participants had narrow and subjective definitions of giftedness that varied based on their levels of training and teaching experience, but none of the participants\u27 definitions were culturally inclusive. However, their conceptual definitions of giftedness did not necessarily mirror their description of robust referral and teaching practices; 2) teachers’ perceptions of potentially gifted Latin@ students influenced the nomination process that varied due to their different biases and cultural models; 3) Latin@ parents were not involved in the nomination process and most teachers did not appear to value their participation. Some teachers expressed a deficit perspective of these families and students; 4) all participants increased the nomination of potentially gifted Latin@ students using traditional and nontraditional assessment tools; 5) three out of the four schools lacked adequate programming to meet the needs of potentially gifted Latin@ students. Key terms: underrepresentation, giftedness, teachers’ perceptions, identification

Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Atrial Fibrillation and History of Acute Coronary Syndromes: Insights from GARFIELD-AF

BACKGROUND: Many patients with atrial fibrillation have concomitant coronary artery disease with or without acute coronary syndromes and are in need of additional antithrombotic therapy. There are few data on the long-term clinical outcome of atrial fibrillation patients with a history of acute coronary syndrome. This is a 2-year study of atrial fibrillation patients with or without a history of acute coronary syndromes

Vorapaxar in the secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Thrombin potently activates platelets through the protease-activated receptor PAR-1. Vorapaxar is a novel antiplatelet agent that selectively inhibits the cellular actions of thrombin through antagonism of PAR-1. METHODS: We randomly assigned 26,449 patients who had a history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or peripheral arterial disease to receive vorapaxar (2.5 mg daily) or matching placebo and followed them for a median of 30 months. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. After 2 years, the data and safety monitoring board recommended discontinuation of the study treatment in patients with a history of stroke owing to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage. RESULTS: At 3 years, the primary end point had occurred in 1028 patients (9.3%) in the vorapaxar group and in 1176 patients (10.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for the vorapaxar group, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.94; P<0.001). Cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or recurrent ischemia leading to revascularization occurred in 1259 patients (11.2%) in the vorapaxar group and 1417 patients (12.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95; P=0.001). Moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 4.2% of patients who received vorapaxar and 2.5% of those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.43 to 1.93; P<0.001). There was an increase in the rate of intracranial hemorrhage in the vorapaxar group (1.0%, vs. 0.5% in the placebo group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Inhibition of PAR-1 with vorapaxar reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or ischemic events in patients with stable atherosclerosis who were receiving standard therapy. However, it increased the risk of moderate or severe bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage. (Funded by Merck; TRA 2P-TIMI 50 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00526474.)