Data Protection and Privacy for Media and Individuals Under Irish and EU Law

Recent public discussion has seen an increasing emphasis placed on data protection and privacy. An accord must be struck between the individual\u27s right to privacy and an organisation’s right to examine an individual’s personal information for its given commercial, contractual or social media activities. This paper examines the evolution of data protection and regulation in Irish and EU law, Illustrating that data protection applies in relation to the publication of material in the media, even if it may still be set aside in the case of public interest. It concludes that the Irish and European Courts place considerable significance on the protection of the right to privacy and data protection as demonstrated by the recent jurisprudence and cases referred to the Courts of Justice of the EU. Furthermore, it is suggested that the introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018 should lessen the Irish media’s uncertainties on how to comply with data protection

Sex Differences in Measures of Wave Reflection and Aortic Arterial Stiffness in Response to Weight Machine Resistance Exercise

International Journal of Exercise Science 15(2): 1190-1201, 2022. While it has been demonstrated that acute resistance exercise (RE) alters measures of wave reflection and aortic arterial stiffness in young, healthy individuals, limited research has evaluated sex differences. Accordingly, we recruited moderately active, resistance-trained men (Age: 22 ± 3yrs, n=12) and women (23 ± 3yrs, n=10) to perform two randomized conditions consisting of an acute bout of weight machine RE or a quiet control (CON). Measures of aortic wave reflection and aortic stiffness were taken at baseline and 15 minutes following the RE (Recovery). At baseline, women had significantly higher heart rate (p = 0.05) and lower brachial systolic blood pressure (p = 0.009) compared to men. There were no significant three-way interactions for any variable. Significant condition by time interactions were noted for heart rate (Baseline: 65 ± 10bpm, Recovery: 87 ± 13bpm, p = 0.001), brachial systolic blood pressure (Baseline: 116 ± 9mmHg, Recovery: 123 ± 10mmHg, p = 0.014), and the augmentation index (AIx) normalized at 75bpm (Baseline: 7.7 ± 12.8%, Recovery: 15.5 ± 9.5%, p = 0.002) such that Recovery was augmented compared to Baseline following RE but not CON. There was also a significant main effect of time for augmentation pressure (Baseline: 4.1 ± 4.0mmHg, Recovery: 4.0 ± 3.6mmHg, p = 0.04) such that it decreased from Baseline to Recovery following RE but not the CON. There were no significant effects of sex, condition, or time on aortic arterial stiffness. Men and women have similar responses in measures of aortic wave reflection and aortic arterial stiffness following acute RE using weight machines

The overlap between randomised evaluations of recruitment and retention interventions:An updated review of recruitment (Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls) and retention (Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls) literature

Background: The Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls (ORRCA) and the Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls (ORRCA2) were established to organise and map the literature addressing participant recruitment and retention within clinical research. The two databases are updated on an ongoing basis using separate but parallel systematic reviews. However, recruitment and retention of research participants is widely acknowledged to be interconnected. While interventions aimed at addressing recruitment challenges can impact retention and vice versa, it is not clear how well they are simultaneously considered within methodological research. This study aims to report the recent update of ORRCA and ORRCA2 with a special emphasis on assessing crossover of the databases and how frequently randomised studies of methodological interventions measure the impact on both recruitment and retention outcomes. Methods: Two parallel systematic reviews were conducted in line with previously reported methods updating ORRCA (recruitment) and ORRCA2 (retention) with publications from 2018 and 2019. Articles were categorised according to their evidence type (randomised evaluation, non-randomised evaluation, application and observation) and against the recruitment and retention domain frameworks. Articles categorised as randomised evaluations were compared to identify studies appearing in both databases. For randomised studies that were only in one database, domain categories were used to assess whether the methodological intervention was likely to impact on the alternate construct. For example, whether a recruitment intervention might also impact retention. Results: In total, 806 of 17,767 articles screened for the recruitment database and 175 of 18,656 articles screened for the retention database were added as result of the update. Of these, 89 articles were classified as ‘randomised evaluation’, of which 6 were systematic reviews and 83 were randomised evaluations of methodological interventions. Ten of the randomised studies assessed recruitment and retention and were included in both databases. Of the randomised studies only in the recruitment database, 48/55 (87%) assessed the content or format of participant information which could have an impact on retention. Of the randomised studies only in the retention database, 6/18 (33%) assessed monetary incentives, 4/18 (22%) assessed data collection location and methods and 3/18 (17%) assessed non-monetary incentives, all of which could have an impact on recruitment. Conclusion: Only a small proportion of randomised studies of methodological interventions assessed the impact on both recruitment and retention despite having a potential impact on both outcomes. Where possible, an integrated approach analysing both constructs should be the new standard for these types of evaluations to ensure that improvements to recruitment are not at the expense of retention and vice versa.</p

The overlap between randomised evaluations of recruitment and retention interventions:An updated review of recruitment (Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls) and retention (Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls) literature

Background: The Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls (ORRCA) and the Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls (ORRCA2) were established to organise and map the literature addressing participant recruitment and retention within clinical research. The two databases are updated on an ongoing basis using separate but parallel systematic reviews. However, recruitment and retention of research participants is widely acknowledged to be interconnected. While interventions aimed at addressing recruitment challenges can impact retention and vice versa, it is not clear how well they are simultaneously considered within methodological research. This study aims to report the recent update of ORRCA and ORRCA2 with a special emphasis on assessing crossover of the databases and how frequently randomised studies of methodological interventions measure the impact on both recruitment and retention outcomes. Methods: Two parallel systematic reviews were conducted in line with previously reported methods updating ORRCA (recruitment) and ORRCA2 (retention) with publications from 2018 and 2019. Articles were categorised according to their evidence type (randomised evaluation, non-randomised evaluation, application and observation) and against the recruitment and retention domain frameworks. Articles categorised as randomised evaluations were compared to identify studies appearing in both databases. For randomised studies that were only in one database, domain categories were used to assess whether the methodological intervention was likely to impact on the alternate construct. For example, whether a recruitment intervention might also impact retention. Results: In total, 806 of 17,767 articles screened for the recruitment database and 175 of 18,656 articles screened for the retention database were added as result of the update. Of these, 89 articles were classified as ‘randomised evaluation’, of which 6 were systematic reviews and 83 were randomised evaluations of methodological interventions. Ten of the randomised studies assessed recruitment and retention and were included in both databases. Of the randomised studies only in the recruitment database, 48/55 (87%) assessed the content or format of participant information which could have an impact on retention. Of the randomised studies only in the retention database, 6/18 (33%) assessed monetary incentives, 4/18 (22%) assessed data collection location and methods and 3/18 (17%) assessed non-monetary incentives, all of which could have an impact on recruitment. Conclusion: Only a small proportion of randomised studies of methodological interventions assessed the impact on both recruitment and retention despite having a potential impact on both outcomes. Where possible, an integrated approach analysing both constructs should be the new standard for these types of evaluations to ensure that improvements to recruitment are not at the expense of retention and vice versa.</p

The Lantern Vol. 70, No. 1, Fall 2002

• (For Z) • Little Sister • Eulogy to Her Son, Dead at 22 • Tuesday • 7 Couplets for Drawing Genevieve • Diner Reflection • We Swam. We Made Sand Castles. • His Lips Were Figure Fitting • Public Transportation • Pop Culture • Running the Ridge • Like a Sunflower • Snooze • Match • Behavioral Correctional Facility of Santa Fe... • The Cellarhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/lantern/1161/thumbnail.jp

Cast versus functional brace in the rehabilitation of patients treated non-operatively for a rupture of the Achilles tendon: protocol for the UK study of tendo achilles rehabilitation (UK STAR) multi-centre randomised trial

INTRODUCTION Achilles tendon rupture affects over 11 000 people yearly in the UK, and the incidence is increasing. Controversy remains with regard to the best rehabilitation strategy for these patients. In operatively treated patients, functional bracing provides better outcomes compared with plaster casts. However, the role of functional bracing in non-operatively managed patients is unclear. This is the protocol for a multicentre randomised trial of plaster cast immobilisation versus functional bracing for patients with a non-operatively managed Achilles tendon rupture. METHODS AND ANALYSIS All adults presenting with a primary rupture of the Achilles tendon will be screened. Non-operatively treated patients will be eligible to take part in the trial. Broad eligibility criteria will ensure that the results of the study can be generalised to the wider patient population. Randomisation will be on a 1:1 basis. Both rehabilitation strategies are widely used within the National Health Service. Standardised protocols will be followed, and details of plaster material and brace will be as per the site's usual practice.A minimum of 330 patients will be randomised to obtain 90% power to detect a difference of 8 points in Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score at 9 months. Quality of life and resource use will be collected at 3, 6 and 9 months. The differences between treatment groups will be assessed on an intention-to-treat basis. The results of the trial-based economic evaluation will be expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The National Research Ethic Committee approved this study on 18 March 2016 (16/SC/0109).The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment monograph and a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal will be submitted on completion of the trial (summer 2019). The results of this trial will substantially inform clinical practice on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment of this injury. This study has been registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry with reference no ISRCTN62639639