Understanding the electromagnetic interaction of metal organic framework reactants in aqueous solution at microwave frequencies

Preparation of metal organic frameworks (MOFs) via microwave heating is becoming increasingly popular due to reduced reaction times and enhanced control of MOF particle size. However, there is little understanding about the detailed interaction of the electric field portion of the wave with reactants during the synthesis of MOFs. In order to overcome this lack of fundamental understanding, information about the dielectric properties of the reactants is required. In this work the dielectric constants (ε′) and loss factors (ε′′) of benzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid (H2BDC; also known as terephthalic acid) and a number of M(III) (M = metal) salts dissolved in deionized water were measured as a function of frequency, temperature and concentration and with varying anions and cations. Dielectric data confirm the aqueous M(III) salts to be strong microwave absorbers, particularly at 915 MHz. M(III) salts with mono-anionic ligands (for example chlorides and nitrates) exhibit higher losses than di-anionic salts (sulfates) demonstrating that the former are heated more effectively in an applied microwave field. Of the M(III) salts containing either singly- or doubly-charged anions, those containing Fe(III) have the highest loss indicating that they will heat more efficiently than other M(III) salts such as Cr(III) and Al(III). Interestingly, H2BDC exhibits little interaction with the electric field at microwave frequencies

Patient experiences of psychological therapy for depression: a qualitative metasynthesis

Background Globally, national guidelines for depression have prioritised evidence from randomised controlled trials and quantitative meta-analyses, omitting qualitative research concerning patient experience of treatments. A review of patient experience research can provide a comprehensive overview of this important form of evidence and thus enable the voices and subjectivities of those affected by depression to have an impact on the treatments and services they are offered. This review aims to seek a comprehensive understanding of patient experiences of psychological therapies for depression using a systematic and rigorous approach to review and synthesis of qualitative research. Method PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched for published articles using a qualitative approach to examine experiences of psychological therapies for depression. All types of psychological therapy were included irrespective of model or modes of delivery (e.g. remote or in person; group or individual). Each article was assessed following guidance provided by the Critical Appraisal Skill Programme tool. Articles were entered in full into NVIVO and themes were extracted and synthesized following inductive thematic analysis. Results Thirty-seven studies, representing 671 patients were included. Three main themes are described; the role of therapy features and setting; therapy processes and how they impact on outcomes; and therapy outcomes (benefits and limitations). Subthemes are described within these themes and include discussion of what works and what’s unhelpful; issues integrating therapy with real life; patient preferences and individual difference; challenges of undertaking therapy; influence of the therapist; benefits of therapy; limits of therapy and what happens when therapy ends. Conclusions Findings point to the importance of common factors in psychotherapies; highlight the need to assess negative outcomes; and indicate the need for patients to be more involved in discussions and decisions about therapy, including tailoring therapy to individual needs and taking social and cultural contexts into account

Is it time to stop “fishing”? A review of generalisation following aphasia intervention

Background: The study of generalisation is integral to both demonstrating and maximising therapy effectiveness. With aphasia therapy aiming to promote change in everyday communication, there is a temptation to “fish” for any evidence of improvement; multiple tasks, elicitation methods, and measures may be used to identify any change that might then be attributed to therapy. Examining the evidence about generalisation will allow us to develop our theoretical understanding of change following aphasia intervention and strengthen our ability to form robust predictions for generalisation that can be tested. Aims: We explore what is meant by generalisation, considering it within the broader context of impact of intervention. We propose a framework focusing on linguistic generalisation at the levels of word, sentence, and connected speech. The discussion draws on the therapy literature for spoken production, exploring single-word therapies for nouns and verbs, sentence production therapies, and discourse therapies. Main Contribution: This article introduces a framework to conceptualise and describe generalisation within level, i.e., change to untreated stimuli within the same linguistic level as the focus of treatment, and across level, i.e., change at a different linguistic level to the focus of treatment. The existing evidence base for spoken production is reviewed using the framework, considering our current knowledge, the predictions we are able to make, and areas for future focus. Conclusions: There is an urgent need for further research in this area. While within-level generalisation has often been addressed systematically, there have been more limited attempts to systematically define, predict, and measure generalisation across linguistic levels. This has resulted in a limited evidence base from which to make decisions regarding when and how to best facilitate generalisation and where and how to best measure generalisation. We propose it is time to stop fishing for change in an opportunistic way and to develop a greater understanding of the relationship between change at the different linguistic levels of words, sentences, and connected speech. We need to use theory and evidence to predict change (selecting the right “pond” within which to fish) and identify valid and reliable ways to measure both targeted and generalised therapy effects (selecting the right “bait”)