Morality in 21st century pedagogies [Guest Editorial]

The set of papers in this focal issue draw on sociological and philosophic theory to explore the historical conjuncture and interplay between public moralities and schooling in the increasingly diverse and vexed settings of the 21st century...

Is the mental wellbeing of young Australians best represented by a single, multidimensional or bifactor model?

Internationally there is a growing interest in the mental wellbeing of young people. However, it is unclear whether mental wellbeing is best conceptualized as a general wellbeing factor or a multidimensional construct. This paper investigated whether mental wellbeing, measured by the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF), is best represented by: (1) a single-factor general model; (2) a three-factor multidimensional model or (3) a combination of both (bifactor model). 2,220 young Australians aged between 16 and 25 years completed an online survey including the MHC-SF and a range of other wellbeing and mental ill-health measures. Exploratory factor analysis supported a bifactor solution, comprised of a general wellbeing factor, and specific group factors of psychological, social and emotional wellbeing. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the bifactor model had a better fit than competing single and three-factor models. The MHC-SF total score was more strongly associated with other wellbeing and mental ill-health measures than the social, emotional or psychological subscale scores. Findings indicate that the mental wellbeing of young people is best conceptualized as an overarching latent construct (general wellbeing) to which emotional, social and psychological domains contribute. The MHC-SF total score is a valid and reliable measure of this general wellbeing factor.

Does gender moderate the relationship between polydrug use and sexual risk-taking among Australian secondary school students under 16 years of age?

Introduction and Aims This study examines the association of alcohol and polydrug use with risky sexual behaviour in adolescents under 16 years of age and if this association differs by gender. Design and Methods The sample consisted of 5412 secondary school students under 16 years of age from Victoria, Australia. Participants completed an anonymous and confidential survey during class time. The key measures were having had sex before legal age of consent (16 years), unprotected sex before 16 (no condom) and latent-class derived alcohol and polydrug use variables based on alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, inhalants and other illegal drug use in the past month. Results There were 7.52% and 2.55% of adolescents who reported having sex and having unprotected sex before 16 years of age, respectively. After adjusting for antisocial behaviours, peers' drug use and family and school risk factors, girls were less likely to have unprotected sex (odds ratio = 0.31, P = 0.003). However, the interaction of being female and polydrug use (odds ratio = 4.52, P = 0.004) was significant, indicating that girls who engaged in polydrug use were at higher risk of having unprotected sex. For boys, the effect of polydrug use was non-significant (odds ratio = 1.44, P = 0.310). Discussion and Conclusions For girls, polydrug use was significantly associated with unprotected sex after adjusting for a range of risk factors, and this relationship was non-significant for boys. Future prevention programs for adolescent risky sexual behaviour and polydrug use might benefit from a tailored approach to gender differences.

Afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (LUX-Lung 7): a phase 2B, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background The irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib and the reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib are approved for first-line treatment of EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of afatinib and gefitinib in this setting. Methods This multicentre, international, open-label, exploratory, randomised controlled phase 2B trial (LUX-Lung 7) was done at 64 centres in 13 countries. Treatment-naive patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and a common EGFR mutation (exon 19 deletion or Leu858Arg) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or gefitinib (250 mg per day) until disease progression, or beyond if deemed beneficial by the investigator. Randomisation, stratified by EGFR mutation type and status of brain metastases, was done centrally using a validated number generating system implemented via an interactive voice or web-based response system with a block size of four. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival by independent central review, time-to-treatment failure, and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01466660. Findings Between Dec 13, 2011, and Aug 8, 2013, 319 patients were randomly assigned (160 to afatinib and 159 to gefitinib). Median follow-up was 27·3 months (IQR 15·3–33·9). Progression-free survival (median 11·0 months [95% CI 10·6–12·9] with afatinib vs 10·9 months [9·1–11·5] with gefitinib; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·57–0·95], p=0·017) and time-to-treatment failure (median 13·7 months [95% CI 11·9–15·0] with afatinib vs 11·5 months [10·1–13·1] with gefitinib; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·58–0·92], p=0·0073) were significantly longer with afatinib than with gefitinib. Overall survival data are not mature. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (20 [13%] of 160 patients given afatinib vs two [1%] of 159 given gefitinib) and rash or acne (15 [9%] patients given afatinib vs five [3%] of those given gefitinib) and liver enzyme elevations (no patients given afatinib vs 14 [9%] of those given gefitinib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (11%) patients in the afatinib group and seven (4%) in the gefitinib group. Ten (6%) patients in each group discontinued treatment due to drug-related adverse events. 15 (9%) fatal adverse events occurred in the afatinib group and ten (6%) in the gefitinib group. All but one of these deaths were considered unrelated to treatment; one patient in the gefitinib group died from drug-related hepatic and renal failure. Interpretation Afatinib significantly improved outcomes in treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC compared with gefitinib, with a manageable tolerability profile. These data are potentially important for clinical decision making in this patient population.

Mask or mirrors? The emergence of consumer rights in nonprofit human service organisations

This paper reports on a study of 25 nonprofit human service organisations offering four types of human services. The purpose of the study was first to explore the manner in which consumer rights are both conceptualized and operationalized in the nonprofit human service context. Secondly the study explored whether differences occur between organisations whose primary funding body emphasized the importance of a rights framework in its program delivery and those where this is not the case.

Salt in the desert: A comparison of clinical versus serum-calculated osmolality determination of dehydration

Background: Clinicians frequently use their own judgement to assess patient’s hydration status although there is limited evidence for the diagnostic utility of any individual clinical symptom. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of clinically assessed dehydration in older hospital patients (using multiple symptoms), versus dehydration measured using serum-calculated osmolality (CO) as the reference standard. Method: Participants were 44 hospital patients aged ≥ 60 years. Dehydration was assessed clinically and pathologically (CO) within 24 hours of admission and at study exit. Indicators of diagnostic accuracy were calculated. Results: Clinicians identified 27% of patients as dehydrated at admission, and 19% at exit, compared to 19% and 16% using CO. Agreement between the measures was fair at admission and poor at exit. Clinical assessment showed poor sensitivity for predicting dehydration with reasonable specificity. Conclusions: Compared to the use of CO, clinical assessment of dehydration in older patients was poor. Given that failure to identify dehydration in this population may have serious consequences, we recommend that clinicians do not rely upon their own assessments without also using the reference standard.

Associations between dehydration, cognitive impairment and frailty in older hospitalized patients: An exploratory study

An exploratory study was undertaken to assess the prevalence of dehydration in older patients (aged ≥60 years) with and without cognitive impairment (CI) admitted to hospital and to examine associations between dehydration, CI and frailty. Forty-four patients participated and dehydration was assessed within 24 hours of admission and at day 4 or at discharge, whichever occurred first (study exit). Patients’ cognitive function and frailty status were assessed using validated instruments. Twenty-seven (61%) patients had CI and 61% were frail. The prevalence of dehydration at admission was 29% (n=12) and 19% (n=6) at study exit and dehydration status did not differ according to either CI status or frailty status. Within the non-CI group, however, significantly more frail than fit patients were dehydrated at admission (p=0.03). These findings indicate that dehydration is common amongst older hospital patients, and that frailty may increase the risk for dehydration in cognitively intact older patients.