Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Same Topic (same + topic)
Selected AbstractsAvoiding the effect of item wording by means of bipolar instead of unipolar items: An application to social optimismEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY, Issue 2 2010Karl Schweizer Abstract Scales including positively and negatively worded items usually show an impaired degree of homogeneity. The transformation of unipolar positively and negatively worded items into bipolar items can avoid this disadvantageous effect. The precondition for this transformation is that each pair of items refers to the same topic. It is this topic that serves as the heading of the bipolar item. This scale construction method is demonstrated in the items of the social optimism scale (Schweizer & Schneider, 1997) that comprises unipolar items. The investigation of both the original and the transformed scales in a sample of 808 participants revealed equivalence and a high quality for both scales. Results of an additional sample confirmed the validity of both social optimism scales. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Molecular Recognition by Synthetic Multifunctional Pores in Practice: Are Structural Studies Really Helpful?,ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS, Issue 2 2006Y. Baudry Abstract This account summarizes five years of research devoted to the development of the concept of synthetic multifunctional pores. The objective is to complement a comprehensive graphical summary of molecular recognition with a survey of structural studies on the same topic. The relevance of the latter for research focusing on creation and application of supramolecular functional materials is discussed briefly in a subjective manner. [source] Diffusion of treatment research: does open access matter?JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 7 2008David J. Hardisty Abstract Advocates of the Open Access movement claim that removing access barriers will substantially increase the diffusion of academic research. If successful, this movement could play a role in efforts to increase utilization of psychotherapy research by mental health practitioners. In a pair of studies, mental health professionals were given either no citation, a normal citation, a linked citation, or a free access citation and were asked to find and read the cited article. After 1 week, participants read a vignette on the same topic as the article and gave recommendations for an intervention. In both studies, those given the free access citation were more likely to read the article, yet only in one study did free access increase the likelihood of making intervention recommendations consistent with the article. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol/In Session 64: 1,19, 2008. [source] Determining if disease management saves money: an introduction to meta-analysisJOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, Issue 3 2007Ariel Linden DrPH MS Abstract Disease management (DM) programmes have long been promoted as a major medical cost-saving mechanism, even though the scant research that exists on the topic has provided conflicting results. In a 2004 literature review, the Congressional Budget Office stated that ,there is insufficient evidence to conclude that disease management programs can generally reduce the overall cost of health care services'. To address this question more accurately, a meta-analysis was warranted. Meta-analysis is the quantitative technique used to pool the results of many studies on the same topic and summarize them statistically. This method is also quite suitable for individual DM firms to assess whether their programmes are effective at the aggregate level. This paper describes the elements of a rigorous meta-analytic process and discusses potential biases. A hypothetical DM organization is then evaluated with a specific emphasis on medical cost-savings, simulating a case in which different populations are served, evaluation methodologies are employed, and diseases are managed. [source] The Efficacy of Metered-Dose Inhalers with a Spacer Device in the Pediatric SettingJOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS, Issue 9 2002APRN, Lance J. Buxton MSN Purpose To systematically review the published research and report on the efficacy of using a metereddose inhaler with a spacer (MDI-S) device in a pediatric setting to treat acute exacerbations of asthma. Data sources A literature search was conducted on the CINAHL, Medline, and Cochrane databases; additional searches were made by hand from the reference lists in each study retrieved from databases and from review articles written on the same topic. Conclusion This critical appraisal of the research demonstrates the MDI-S is as effective as the nebulizer, faster in the delivery of medication, and cost-effective. Implications for Practice No significant difference between the MDI-S and nebulizer in delivering medication in an acute exacerbation of asthma was found in this analysis. The practitioner's choice of delivery methods should reflect the family's preference, the practice situation, and economic considerations. [source] Can rational prescribing be improved by an outcome-based educational approach?THE JOURNAL OF CONTINUING EDUCATION IN THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, Issue 1 2010A randomized trial completed in Iran Abstract Introduction: An outcome-based education approach has been proposed to develop more effective continuing medical education (CME) programs. We have used this approach in developing an outcome-based educational intervention for general physicians working in primary care (GPs) and evaluated its effectiveness compared with a concurrent CME program in the field of rational prescribing. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled design was used. All 159 GPs working in 6 cities, in 2 regions in East Azerbaijan province in Iran, were invited to participate. The cities were matched and randomly divided into an intervention arm, for an outcome-based education on rational prescribing, and a control arm for a traditional CME program on the same topic. GPs' prescribing behavior was assessed 9 months before, and 3 months after the CME programs. Results: In total, 112 GPs participated. The GPs in the intervention arm significantly reduced the total number of prescribed drugs and the number of injections per prescription. The GPs in the intervention arm also increased their compliance with specific requirements for a correct prescription, such as explanation of specific time and manner of intake and precautions necessary when using drugs, with significant intervention effects of 13, 36, and 42 percentage units, respectively. Compared with the control arm, there was no significant improvement when prescribing antibiotics and anti-inflammatory agents. Discussion: Rational prescribing improved in some of the important outcome-based indicators, but several indicators were still suboptimal. The introduction of an outcome-based approach in CME seems promising when creating programs to improve GPs' prescribing behavior. [source] RAPID VERSUS FULL SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS: VALIDITY IN CLINICAL PRACTICE?ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY, Issue 11 2008Amber Watt Introduction: Rapid reviews are being produced with greater frequency by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in response to increased pressure from end-user clinicians and policy-makers for rapid, evidence-based advice on health-care technologies. This comparative study examines the differences in methodologies and essential conclusions between rapid and full reviews on the same topic, with the aim of determining the validity of rapid reviews in the clinical context and making recommendations for their future application. Methods: Rapid reviews were located by Internet searching of international HTA agency websites, with any ambiguities resolved by further communication with the agencies. Comparator full systematic reviews were identified using the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination HTA database. Data on a number of review components were extracted using standardized data extraction tables, then analysed and reported narratively. Results: Axiomatic differences between all the rapid and full reviews were identified; however, the essential conclusions of the rapid and full reviews did not differ extensively across the topics. For each of the four topics examined, it was clear that the scope of the rapid reviews was substantially narrower than that of full reviews. The methodology underpinning the rapid reviews was often inadequately described. Conclusions: Rapid reviews do not adhere to any single validated methodology. They frequently provide adequate advice on which to base clinical and policy decisions; however, their scope is limited, which may compromise their appropriateness for evaluating technologies in certain circumstances. [source] | |||||||||||||