FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Effect of the red uniform on the judgment of position or movement used in Wushu Routine, evaluated by practitioners of the modality

by Jinkun Li, Jingmin Zhang, Shuo Tao, Xiaoying Zeng, Rong Zou, Xiaobin Hong

In the artistic sports program, the referee’ scores directly determine the final results of the athletes. Wushu is a artistic sport that has a Chinese characteristic and has the potential to become an official competition at the Summer Olympic. In this study we tested whether a red uniform color affects Wushu Routine practitioners’ ratings of athletes’ position or movement of Wushu Routine. We also tested whether the effect varied depending on the gender of the athlete and the practitioner, and depending on whether female practitioners were in the ovulation phase of their menstrual cycle. Male (Experiment 1: N = 72) and female (Experiment 1: N = 72; Experiment 2: N = 52) participants who major in Wushu Routine were recruited to take a referee’s perspective and rate the movement quality of male and female athletes wearing red or blue uniforms. The results of Experiment 1 showed that both male and female athletes wearing red uniform (compared to blue uniform) received higher ratings (p = .002, η2 = .066; p = .014, η2 = .043), and the red effect was especially strong when male practitioners rated female athletes (p = .002, η2 = .069). The results of Experiment 2, in an all-female sample, showed that in most cases there was no difference in ratings made by women in the ovulation and non-ovulation phases of their menstrual cycle, with the exception of their ratings of male athletes wearing red; in this condition, women gave higher ratings when they were in the ovulation phase of their cycle (p = .026). The results suggest that there is a red effect in an artistic sport like Wushu Routine, in which gender and the female menstrual cycle play an important role.

Care models for patients with heart failure at home: A systematic review

Abstract

Aims

The aim of this study is to evaluate the relative merits of various heart failure models of care with regard to a variety of outcomes.

Design

Systematic review.

Data Sources

Five databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, Embase and Science Direct were searched from the inception date of databases to August 20, 2022.

Review Methods

This review used the Cochrane Collaboration's ‘Risk of Bias’ tool to assess quality. Only randomised controlled trails were included in this review that assessed all care models in the management of adults with heart failure. A categorical summary of the pattern of the papers was found, followed by extraction of outcome indicators.

Results

Twenty articles (19 studies) were included. Seven examined nurse-led care, two examined multidisciplinary specialist care, nine (10 articles) examined patient self-management, and one examined nurse and physiotherapist co-led care. Regarding outcomes, this review examined how well the four models performed with regard to quality of life, health services use, HF self-care, and anxiety and depression for heart failure patients. The model of patient self-management showed more beneficial results than nurse-led care, multidisciplinary specialist care, and nurse and physiotherapist co-led care in reducing hospital days, improving symptoms, promoting self-care behaviours of HF patients, enhancing the quality of life, and strengthening self-care ability.

Conclusions

This systematic review synthesises the different care models and their relative effectiveness. Four different models of care were summarised. Of these models, the self-management model demonstrated better outcomes.

Impact

The self-management model is more effective in increasing self-management behaviours and self-management abilities, lowering the risk of hospitalisation and death, improving quality of life, and relieving anxiety and depression than other models.

No Patient or Public Contribution

There was no funding to remunerate a patient/member of the public for this review.

❌