Foreign Policy as Ethics: Toward a Re-Evaluation of Values

This article notes that while ethics is increasingly talked of in foreign policy, it remains a blind-spot for FPA. It argues that this must be rectified through a critical approach which conceptualises foreign policy as ethics. The first section examines how even constructivist approaches, which are highly attuned to the intersubjective sphere, still generally avoid dealing with morality. The second section looks at the possibilities and limits of one piece of constructivist theorizing that explores the translation of morality into foreign policy via ‘norms’. This demonstrates the problems that a constructivist account, with its tendency toward explanatory description without evaluation, will always face. The final section argues, through an examination of EU foreign policy (from 1999-2004) and its innovative use of ‘hospitality’, that FPA must critically reassess the value of the norms and principles by which foreign policy operates in order to suggest potentially more ethical modes of encounter.

Evaluation of a Psychoeducational intervention for patients with Advanced Cancer who have Cachexia and their lay Carers (EPACaCC): study protocol

Aim: To evaluate a psychoeducational intervention for patients with advanced cancer who have cachexia and their lay carers.

Background: Cachexia is a frequent and devastating syndrome of advanced cancer. It has an impact on patients biologically, psychologically and socially and has profound impact on their lay carers. Prior research has predominately focused on the biological components of cachexia and associated potential treatment modalities. At present, there is no standardized supportive healthcare intervention in current practice that targets the psychosocial impact of this syndrome.

Design: A pragmatic multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Methods: Patient/carer dyads (n = 200) will be recruited into a randomized controlled trial of a DVD intervention for cachexia management. The sample will be recruited from two urban hospices in the UK. The primary outcome measure will be the General Health Questionnaire-12. Additional questionnaires focusing on distress, readiness to give care and coping skills will be used as secondary outcome measures. In addition, lay carers in the intervention group will be asked to participate in semi-structured interviews following the death of their loved one. Both Office for Research Ethics Committee approval and local governance approval at both hospices have been obtained as of February 2013.

Discussion: This is the first time that a psychoeducational DVD has been tested in a randomized controlled trial in this population. Dissemination of findings will make a significant contribution to international knowledge and understanding in this area. Findings will inform education, practice and policy.

Attitudes and Ethics: Evaluating Knowledge and Regulatory Constructs in Planning Enforcement Practice

The departure point for the paper is the need to scrutinise previously unconsidered dimensions which are fundamental to understanding the dynamics of the planning enforcement system. Drawing upon emerging themes in regulation theory the paper fuses these with knowledge constructs. The rationale is that regulatory regimes must be informed by knowledge imparted from a range of sources and the resultant quality of decision making is inextricably linked to the robustness and completeness of the evidence base collated.
The theoretical analysis, coupled with proposed radical legislative changes, provides a lens for an empirical investigation which scrutinises tactics, strategies, operational mechanisms, attitudinal dimensions and ethics with a view to identifying key factors impacting upon enforcement efficacy. Prizes and pitfalls are identified in the course of the analysis and evaluation, with evidence-based remedies suggested where appropriate. The paper concludes by reflecting on the importance of theoretical synergy, epistemological advancement, taking cognisance of ethical and attitudinal challenges facing the planning profession; and, stresses the importance of identifying and bringing to book those who flagrantly breach the Code of Professional Conduct.

Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported. Hypothesis: Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

Methods and analysis Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).