Broadening public input into science policy decision making: can the democratic model for science communication influence scientific, innovation and technological trajectories?

This PhD thesis investigates the potential use of science communication models to engage a broader swathe of actors in decision making in relation to scientific and technological innovation in order to address possible democratic deficits in science and technology policy-making. A four-pronged research approach has been employed to examine different representations of the public(s) and different modes of engagement. The first case study investigates whether patient-groups could represent an alternative needs-driven approach to biomedical and health sciences R & D. This is followed by enquiry into the potential for Science Shops to represent a bottom-up approach to promote research and development of local relevance. The barriers and opportunities for the involvement of scientific researchers in science communication are next investigated via a national survey which is comparable to a similar survey conducted in the UK. The final case study investigates to what extent opposition or support regarding nanotechnology (as an emerging technology) is reflected amongst the YouTube user community and the findings are considered in the context of how support or opposition to new or emerging technologies can be addressed using conflict resolution based approaches to manage potential conflict trajectories. The research indicates that the majority of communication exercises of relevance to science policy and planning take the form of a one-way flow of information with little or no facility for public feedback. This thesis proposes that a more bottom-up approach to research and technology would help broaden acceptability and accountability for decisions made relating to new or existing technological trajectories. This approach could be better integrated with and complementary to government, institutional, e.g. university, and research funding agencies activities and help ensure that public needs and issues are better addressed directly by the research community. Such approaches could also facilitate empowerment of societal stakeholders regarding scientific literacy and agenda-setting. One-way information relays could be adapted to facilitate feedback from representative groups e.g. Non-governmental organisations or Civil Society Organisations (such as patient groups) in order to enhance the functioning and socio-economic relevance of knowledge-based societies to the betterment of human livelihoods.

A qualitative study of trends in patient preferences for the management of partial dentition

Objective: To identify factors influencing attitudes of partially dentate adults towards dental treatment in Ireland. Background: People are retaining more teeth later in life than ever before. Management of partially dentate older adults will be a major requirement for the future and it is important to determine factors which may influence patients’ attitudes to care. Methods: Subjects: A purposive sample of 22 partially dentate patients was recruited; 12 women and 12 men, ranging in age from 45 to 75 years. Data Collection: Semi-structured individual interviews. Results: Dental patients have increasing expectations in relation to (i) a more sophisticated approach to the management of missing teeth and (ii) their right to actively participate in decision making regarding the management of their tooth loss. There is some evidence of a cohort effect with younger patients (45–64 years) having higher expectations. Conclusions: The evidence of a cohort effect within this study in relation to higher patient expectations indicates that both contemporary and future patients are likely to seek a service based on conservation and restoration of missing teeth by fixed prostheses.

Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent falls in older people: a systematic overview. The SENATOR Project ONTOP Series

Background: Falls are common events in older people, which cause considerable morbidity and mortality. Non-pharmacological interventions are an important approach to prevent falls. There are a large number of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions, whose evidence needs to be synthesized in order to facilitate evidence-based clinical decision making. Objectives: To systematically examine reviews and meta-analyses that evaluated non-pharmacological interventions to prevent falls in older adults in the community, care facilities and hospitals. Methods: We searched the electronic databases Pubmed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDRO and TRIP from January 2009 to March 2015, for systematic reviews that included at least one comparative study, evaluating any non-pharmacological intervention, to prevent falls amongst older adults. The quality of the reviews was assessed using AMSTAR and ProFaNE taxonomy was used to organize the interventions. Results: Fifty-nine systematic reviews were identified which consisted of single, multiple and multi-factorial non-pharmacological interventions to prevent falls in older people. The most frequent ProFaNE defined interventions were exercises either alone or combined with other interventions, followed by environment/assistive technology interventions comprising environmental modifications, assistive and protective aids, staff education and vision assessment/correction. Knowledge was the third principle class of interventions as patient education. Exercise and multifactorial interventions were the most effective treatments to reduce falls in older adults, although not all types of exercise were equally effective in all subjects and in all settings. Effective exercise programs combined balance and strength training. Reviews with a higher AMSTAR score were more likely to contain more primary studies, to be updated and to perform meta-analysis. Conclusions: The aim of this overview of reviews of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent falls in older people in different settings, is to support clinicians and other healthcare workers with clinical decision-making by providing a comprehensive perspective of findings.