Database of peer review publications written by occupational therapists about mental health

An Excel spreadsheet which includes every peer reviewed publication written by occupational therapists in mental health since 2000. It is updated each January to include the previous years publications. Information recorded includes author number, author designation, bibliographic details (i.e. title, journal), categorisation according to doing/being/becoming/belonging, levels of evidence and days between submission and acceptance, and acceptance and publication.

Using technology to improve peer review and collaborative conversations to benchmark academic standards

In 2010 the Australian government commissioned the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) to undertake a national project to facilitate disciplinary development of threshold learning standards. The aim was to lay the foundation for all higher education providers to demonstrate to the new national higher education regulator, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), that graduates achieved or exceeded minimum academic standards. Through a yearlong consultative process, representatives of employers, professional bodies, academics and students, developed learning standards applying to any Australian higher education provider. Willey and Gardner reported using a software tool, SPARKPLUS, in calibrating academic standards amongst teaching staff in large classes. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of this technology to promote calibrated understandings with the national accounting learning standards. We found that integrating the software with a purposely designed activity provided significant efficiencies in calibrating understandings about learning standards, developed expertise and a better understanding of what is required to meet these standards and how best to demonstrate them. The software and supporting calibration and assessment process can be adopted by other disciplines, including engineering, seeking to provide direct evidence about performance against learning standards. © 2012 IEEE.

How long is too long in contemporary peer review? Perspectives from authors publishing in conservation biology journals

Delays in peer reviewed publication may have consequences for both assessment of scientific prowess in academics as well as communication of important information to the knowledge receptor community. We present an analysis on the perspectives of authors publishing in conservation biology journals regarding their opinions on the importance of speed in peer-review as well as how to improve review times. Authors were invited to take part in an online questionnaire, of which the data was subjected to both qualitative (open coding, categorizing) and quantitative analyses (generalized linear models). We received 637 responses to a total of 6,547 e-mail invitations sent. Peer-review speed was generally perceived as slow, with authors experiencing a typical turnaround time of 14 weeks while their perceived optimal review time is six weeks. Male and younger respondents seem to have higher expectations of review speed than females and older respondents. Majority of participants attributed lengthy review times to the 'stress' on the peer-review system (i.e., reviewer and editor fatigue), while editor persistence and journal prestige were believed to speed up the review process. Negative consequences of lengthy review times appear to be greater for early career researchers and can also have impact on author morale (e.g. motivation or frustration). Competition among colleagues were also of concern to respondents. Incentivizing peer review was among the top suggested alterations to the system along with training graduate students in peer review, increased editorial persistence, and changes to the norms of peer-review such as opening the peer-review process to the public. It is clear that authors surveyed in this study view the peer-review system as under stress and we encourage scientists and publishers to push the envelope for new peer review models.

The impact structured patient assessment frameworks have on patient care: an integrative review

Aims and objectives:
To evaluate structured patient assessment frameworks' impact on patient care.

Background:
Accurate patient assessment is imperative to determine the status and needs of the patient and the delivery of appropriate patient care. Nurses must be highly skilled in conducting timely and accurate patient assessments to overcome environmental obstacles and deliver quality and safe patient care. A structured approach to patient assessment is widely accepted in everyday clinical practice, yet little is known about the impact structured patient assessment frameworks have on patient care.

Design:
Integrative review.

Methods:
An electronic database search was conducted using Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System, PubMed and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The reference sections of textbooks and journal articles on patient assessment were manually searched for further studies. A comprehensive peer review screening process was undertaken. Research studies were selected that evaluated the impact structured patient assessment frameworks have on patient care. Studies were included if frameworks were designed for use by paramedics, nurses or medical practitioners working in prehospital or acute in-hospital settings.

Results:
Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. There were no studies that evaluate the impact of a generic nursing assessment framework on patient care. The use of a structured patient assessment framework improved clinician performance of patient assessment. Limited evidence was found to support other aspects of patient care including documentation, communication, care implementation, patient and clinician satisfaction, and patient outcomes.

Conclusion:
Structured patient assessment frameworks enhance clinician performance of patient assessment and hold the potential to improve patient care and outcomes; however, further research is required to address these evidence gaps, particularly in nursing.

Relevance to clinical practice:
Acute care clinicians should consider using structured patient assessment frameworks in clinical practice to enhance their performance of patient assessment.

Tests examining skill outcomes in sport: A systematic review of measurement properties and feasibility

Background
A high level of participant skill is influential in determining the outcome of many sports. Thus, tests assessing skill outcomes in sport are commonly used by coaches and researchers to estimate an athlete’s ability level, to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions or for the purpose of talent identification.

Objective
The objective of this systematic review was to examine the methodological quality, measurement properties and feasibility characteristics of sporting skill outcome tests reported in the peer-reviewed literature.

Data Sources
A search of both SPORTDiscus and MEDLINE databases was undertaken.

Study Selection
Studies that examined tests of sporting skill outcomes were reviewed. Only studies that investigated measurement properties of the test (reliability or validity) were included. A total of 22 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods
A customised checklist of assessment criteria, based on previous research, was utilised for the purpose of this review.

Results
A range of sports were the subject of the 22 studies included in this review, with considerations relating to methodological quality being generally well addressed by authors. A range of methods and statistical procedures were used by researchers to determine the measurement properties of their skill outcome tests. The majority (95 %) of the reviewed studies investigated test–retest reliability, and where relevant, inter and intra-rater reliability was also determined. Content validity was examined in 68 % of the studies, with most tests investigating multiple skill domains relevant to the sport. Only 18 % of studies assessed all three reviewed forms of validity (content, construct and criterion), with just 14 % investigating the predictive validity of the test. Test responsiveness was reported in only 9 % of studies, whilst feasibility received varying levels of attention.

Limitations
In organised sport, further tests may exist which have not been investigated in this review. This could be due to such tests firstly not being published in the peer-review literature and secondly, not having their measurement properties (i.e., reliability or validity) examined formally.

Conclusions
Of the 22 studies included in this review, items relating to test methodological quality were, on the whole, well addressed. Test–retest reliability was determined in all but one of the reviewed studies, whilst most studies investigated at least two aspects of validity (i.e., content, construct or criterion-related validity). Few studies examined predictive validity or responsiveness. While feasibility was addressed in over half of the studies, practicality and test limitations were rarely addressed. Consideration of study quality, measurement properties and feasibility components assessed in this review can assist future researchers when developing or modifying tests of sporting skill outcomes.