Conectar
To analyse the effectiveness of rapid diagnostic clinics (RDCs) as an alternative pathway for patients with concerning symptoms and a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) result
A retrospective and prospective cohort study.
GSTT RDC, one of England’s largest single-centre RDCs. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of FIT
Patients with an FIT result
A total of 1299 patients with an FIT
This study demonstrates the effectiveness of RDCs as an alternate pathway for FIT
Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MASLD) is the hepatic manifestation of metabolic syndrome and the leading cause of chronic liver disease worldwide. Given that there is no pharmacological treatment for MASLD, it is imperative to understand whether lifestyle modifications may improve biochemical and pathological outcomes. One commonly proposed dietary modification is the Mediterranean diet; however, vegetarianism may also be a promising intervention. Vegetarianism has been shown to be associated with reduced morbidity and mortality in metabolic syndrome outcomes in coronary artery disease and diabetes; however, the relationship between vegetarian diet and MASLD is less clear. In this scoping review, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the current body of evidence related to a vegetarian diet and MASLD.
The aim of this scoping review is to describe and summarise the current body of evidence related to MASLD and a vegetarian diet. This review will be conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. The literature review will be conducted using the following databases: SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL-Plus, Cochrane Library and Medline. No restriction will be made on publication date. Included studies will encompass clinical trials and observational designs that examine effects or association of vegetarian diet in adults (≥16 years) and report on the incidence, prevalence or progression of MASLD. Grey literature, non-human studies and articles focusing on changes in a specific food or nutraceutical will be excluded. Articles must have an English-language abstract available to be considered for inclusion. Screening and data extraction will be conducted by two independent reviewers. The findings will be summarised with descriptive statistics.
Approval from a medical ethics committee is not required for this review. Once the review is complete, the findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.
Master's degrees for nurses have various foci including clinical practice, leadership and education, with some programs consisting of coursework, while others offer hybrid study that combines coursework and research. Multiple formats are associated with offering the research component. The research component is often termed the minor thesis. Limited knowledge exists regarding the supervision of the research component.
To capture the practices and perspectives of experienced nurse academics regarding effective supervision of the masters-level minor thesis in nursing coursework master degrees.
Qualitative descriptive.
Semi-structured interviews with 28 experienced nurse academics recruited from 15 Australian and three New Zealand universities linked to the Council of Deans in Australia and New Zealand. Inclusion criteria were having experience of supervising masters-level minor theses and higher degrees. Interviews were face-to-face using the internet platform Zoom©. Thematic analysis was undertaken.
The analysis revealed three themes and associated sub-themes: (i) establishing the framework (setting up the student's research; building the student–supervisor relationship; setting clear expectations), (ii) supervisors' knowledge and actions: driving for success (supervisors' knowledge for a satisfactory and timely outcome; supervisors' actions to develop students' capabilities; supervisors' actions of drawing in other expertise) and (iii) supervisor savviness: Attending to the finer points of supervision for student success (using your attributes as a supervisor; being savvy to teach and engage students; creatively seeking a smooth process for student success).
The findings highlight three themes crucial to effective supervision of masters-level minor theses in nursing: Establishing a strong research framework, emphasizing supervisors' knowledge and proactive engagement and attending to nuanced aspects of supervision for student success. These insights contribute to deeper understanding of the multifaceted nature of supervising minor theses, providing a valuable foundation for refining supervisory practices and enhancing the educational experience within coursework nursing master degree programs.
The findings highlight the supervisors' pivotal practices in guiding students through the minor thesis. These insights will be useful for inexperienced and experienced supervisors and for degree program directors. The findings should inform supervision training and supervision practices in the future.
The study addressed a gap in knowledge about what experienced supervisors do to be effective and achieve success in the research component in a hybrid master degree for registered nurses. Effective supervision for student success in the minor thesis requires supervisors to establish and maintain a project and supervisory framework with appropriate boundaries and that is attuned to both the supervisor and student capabilities and preferences. Supervisors have an active role in directing the focus, scale and scope of a minor theses in keeping with university requirements and the short timeframe. Supervisors pay attention to the development of multiple student literacies (research, academic, professional, feedback and cultural) as core aspects of the masters research journey. Supervisors use their savviness and customize supervision to student contexts and capabilities as they guide development to achieve student success. The research findings have implications for targeted supervisor training and enhancing educational strategies for research supervision of minor thesis students.
COREQ reporting was adhered to as the relevant EQUATOR guideline.
No patient or public contribution.
Our main objective is to assess the inter-reviewer reliability (IRR) reported in published systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Our secondary objective is to determine the expected IRR by authors of SLRs for both human and machine-assisted reviews.
We performed a review of SLRs of randomised controlled trials using the PubMed and Embase databases. Data were extracted on IRR by means of Cohen’s kappa score of abstract/title screening, full-text screening and data extraction in combination with review team size, items screened and the quality of the review was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. In addition, we performed a survey of authors of SLRs on their expectations of machine learning automation and human performed IRR in SLRs.
After removal of duplicates, 836 articles were screened for abstract, and 413 were screened full text. In total, 45 eligible articles were included. The average Cohen’s kappa score reported was 0.82 (SD=0.11, n=12) for abstract screening, 0.77 (SD=0.18, n=14) for full-text screening, 0.86 (SD=0.07, n=15) for the whole screening process and 0.88 (SD=0.08, n=16) for data extraction. No association was observed between the IRR reported and review team size, items screened and quality of the SLR. The survey (n=37) showed overlapping expected Cohen’s kappa values ranging between approximately 0.6–0.9 for either human or machine learning-assisted SLRs. No trend was observed between reviewer experience and expected IRR. Authors expect a higher-than-average IRR for machine learning-assisted SLR compared with human based SLR in both screening and data extraction.
Currently, it is not common to report on IRR in the scientific literature for either human and machine learning-assisted SLRs. This mixed-methods review gives first guidance on the human IRR benchmark, which could be used as a minimal threshold for IRR in machine learning-assisted SLRs.
CRD42023386706.
This study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of barriers and facilitators to accessing Long COVID community rehabilitation.
We used a qualitative descriptive design over two rounds of data collection with three participant groups: (1) people with experience of rehabilitation for Long COVID (PwLC); (2) National Health Service (NHS) staff delivering and/or managing community rehabilitation services (allied health professionals (AHPs)) and (3) NHS staff involved in strategic planning around Long COVID in their health board (Long COVID leads).
Four NHS Scotland territorial health boards.
51 interviews: eight Long COVID leads (11 interviews); 15 AHPs (25 interviews) and 15 PwLC (15 interviews).
Three key themes were identified: (1) accessing care for PwLC, (2) understanding Long COVID and its management and (3) strengths and limitations of existing Long COVID rehabilitation services.
Organisational delivery of Long COVID community rehabilitation is complex and presents multiple challenges. In addition, access to Long COVID community rehabilitation can be challenging. When accessed, these services are valued by PwLC but require adequate planning, publicity and resource. The findings presented here can be used by those developing and delivering services for people with Long COVID.
Women from social disadvantage are at greater risk of poor birth outcomes. The midwife-led continuity of care (MCC) model, which offers flexible and relational care from a small team of midwives, has demonstrated improved birth outcomes. In the general population, the impact of MCC on socially disadvantaged women and on birth outcomes is still unclear. This protocol describes a pragmatic evaluation of the MCC model in a socially disadvantaged population.
An open-labelled individual prospective randomised controlled trial with an internal pilot, process evaluation and economic analysis, from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2024.
Women will be randomly allocated to MCC or standard care as part of usual midwifery practice. Participants and midwives will not be blinded, but researchers will be. An internal pilot will test the feasibility of this process.
Participants are those randomised into MCC or standard care, who consent to participate in one of two Born in Bradford (BiB) birth cohort studies. Outcomes are taken from routinely linked health data, supplemented by additional data capture. The sample size is fixed by the capacity of MCC teams, commissioning duration and numbers recruited into the cohort. The estimated maximum fixed sample size is 1,410 pregnancies (minimum 734).
Intention to treat (ITT) analysis will be undertaken to assess the impact of MCC on two independent primary outcomes. An economic evaluation will explore the impact on health resource use and a process evaluation will explore fidelity to the MCC model, and barriers/facilitators to implementation from midwives’ and women’s perspectives.
Ethical approval has been obtained for the randomisation in midwifery practice, use of the cohort data for evaluation and for the process evaluation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and translated into policy briefings.
Breastfeeding has health benefits for infants and mothers, yet the UK has low rates with marked social inequalities. The Assets-based feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) feasibility study demonstrated the acceptability of a proactive, assets-based, woman-centred peer support intervention, inclusive of all feeding types, to mothers, peer supporters and maternity services. The ABA-feed study aims to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the ABA-feed intervention compared with usual care in first-time mothers in a full trial.
A multicentre randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation to explore clinical and cost-effectiveness, and embedded process evaluation to explore differences in implementation between sites. We aim to recruit 2730 primiparous women, regardless of feeding intention. Women will be recruited at 17 sites from antenatal clinics and various remote methods including social media and invitations from midwives and health visitors. Women will be randomised at a ratio of 1.43:1 to receive either ABA-feed intervention or usual care. A train the trainer model will be used to train local Infant Feeding Coordinators to train existing peer supporters to become ‘infant feeding helpers’ in the ABA-feed intervention. Infant feeding outcomes will be collected at 3 days, and 8, 16 and 24 weeks postbirth. The primary outcome will be any breastfeeding at 8 weeks postbirth. Secondary outcomes will include breastfeeding initiation, any and exclusive breastfeeding, formula feeding practices, anxiety, social support and healthcare utilisation. All analyses will be based on the intention-to-treat principle.
The study protocol has been approved by the East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee. Trial results will be available through open-access publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant meetings and conferences.
FreshRSS 