Where are all the men? The marginalization of men in social scientific research on infertility

There is a wealth of research exploring the psychological consequences of infertility and assisted reproduction technology: a substantial body of sociological and anthropological work on ‘reproductive disruptions’ of many kinds and a small but growing literature on patient perspectives of the quality of care in assisted reproduction. In all these fields, research studies are far more likely to be focused on the understandings and experiences of women than those of men. This paper discusses reasons for the relative exclusion of men in what has been called the ‘psycho-social’ literature on infertility, comments on research on men from psychological and social perspectives and recent work on the quality of patient care, and makes suggestions for a reframing of the research agenda on men and assisted reproduction. Further research is needed in all areas, including: perceptions of infertility and infertility treatment seeking; experiences of treatment; information and support needs; decisions to end treatment; fatherhood post assisted conception; and the motivation and experiences of sperm donors and men who seek fatherhood through surrogacy or co-parenting. This paper argues for multimethod, interdisciplinary research that includes broader populations of men which can contribute to improved clinical practice and support for users of assisted reproduction treatment

Scientific standards for human intervention trials evaluating health benefits of foods, and their application to infants, children and adolescents

Associations between the consumption of particular foods and health outcomes may be indicated by observational studies. However, intervention trials that evaluate the health benefits of foods provide the strongest evidence to support dietary recommendations for health. Thus, it is important that these trials are carried out safely, and to high scientific standards. Accepted standards for the reporting of the health benefits of pharmaceutical and other medical interventions have been provided by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. However, there are no generally accepted standards for trials to evaluate the health benefits of foods. Trials with foods differ from medical trials in issues related to safety, ethics, research governance and practical implementation. Furthermore, these important issues can deter the conduct of both medical and nutrition trials in infants, children and adolescents. This paper provides standards for the planning, design, conduct, statistical analysis and interpretation of human intervention trials to evaluate the health benefits of foods that are based on the CONSORT guidelines, and outlines the key issues that need to be addressed in trials in participants in the paediatric age range.

Psychosocial aspects in cardiac rehabilitation: From theory to practice. A position paper from the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation of the European Society of Cardiology

A large body of empirical research shows that psychosocial risk factors (PSRFs) such as low socio-economic status, social isolation, stress, type-D personality, depression and anxiety increase the risk of incident coronary heart disease (CHD) and also contribute to poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and prognosis in patients with established CHD. PSRFs may also act as barriers to lifestyle changes and treatment adherence and may moderate the effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Furthermore, there appears to be a bidirectional interaction between PSRFs and the cardiovascular system. Stress, anxiety and depression affect the cardiovascular system through immune, neuroendocrine and behavioural pathways. In turn, CHD and its associated treatments may lead to distress in patients, including anxiety and depression. In clinical practice, PSRFs can be assessed with single-item screening questions, standardised questionnaires, or structured clinical interviews. Psychotherapy and medication can be considered to alleviate any PSRF-related symptoms and to enhance HRQoL, but the evidence for a definite beneficial effect on cardiac endpoints is inconclusive. A multimodal behavioural intervention, integrating counselling for PSRFs and coping with illness should be included within comprehensive CR. Patients with clinically significant symptoms of distress should be referred for psychological counselling or psychologically focused interventions and/or psychopharmacological treatment. To conclude, the success of CR may critically depend on the interdependence of the body and mind and this interaction needs to be reflected through the assessment and management of PSRFs in line with robust scientific evidence, by trained staff, integrated within the core CR team.

Autism and ABA: Best Practice in America and the Way Forward for Europe.

According to recent estimates, 1 in each 68 new-borns will be diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the USA (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014), while 1 in every 29 children will be diagnosed with ASD in the UK (Dillenburger, Jordan, McKerr, & Keenan, 2015). Individuals diagnosed with ASD share a set of characteristics at varying levels of severity: impairments in social communication skills and presence of restricted interests and repetitive behaviours (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).Notwithstanding these figures, little effort has been placed in European countries’ policies for reaching an early diagnosis. This has a detrimental effect on future prognosis for children with ASD, since research has clearly shown that when evidence-based interventions are accessed early in life, they can lead to great improvements on the overall functioning of children with ASD, including significant gains in social communication and reduction of inappropriate behaviours (Dawson, Rogers, Munson, Smith, Winter, Greenson, Donaldson, & Varley, 2009).Additionally, when looking at the services available for children with ASD and their families in Europe, it seems that not much improvement has been made in the last decades. Traditional eclectic approaches and a wealth of non-scientific methods seem to be available and often recommended by public bodies, while state-funded evidence-based interventions are not offered as part of the education or health system. Given that there is a wealth of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions based on the science of ABA, it seems that specific action is required to correct the situation, respecting children’s right to effective treatment and inclusion.In the present paper, these issues are fully discussed and recommendations for best practice are offered.

Development of a pharmacy practice intervention: lessons from the literature

The development of health interventions is receiving increasing attention within the scientific literature. In the past, interventions were often based on the ISLAGIATT principle: that is, ‘It seemed like a good idea at the time’. However, such interventions were frequently ineffective because they were either delivered in part or not at all, demonstrating a lack of fidelity, or because little attention had been paid to their development, content, and mode of delivery. This commentary seeks to highlight the latest methodological advances in the field of intervention development, drawing on health psychology literature, together with guidance from key organisations and research consortia which are setting standards for development and reporting. Those working within pharmacy practice research can learn from the more systematic approach being advocated, and apply these methods to help generate evidence to support new services and professional roles.

Evidence-based practice: the relevance of systematic reviews.

Aim:
To demonstrate how systematic reviews provide robust evidence to inform clinical decision making in practice.

Background
Systematic reviews collate findings from a number of research studies in order to provide a comprehensive and reliable summary of the best available evidence. The use of systematic reviews to inform practice based decisions has increased as a result of the overwhelming amount of research literature available, poor quality of research evidence and the need to ensure practice is based upon the best available evidence. Systematic reviews are an efficient way of coping with large volumes of data to answer focused research questions. They differ from traditional literature reviews as they adhere to an explicit scientific process. The use of explicit and rigorous methods to identify, appraise and synthesise relevant studies minimises bias and provides a reliable basis for decision making. As a result systematic reviews provide clear evidence on the effectiveness of a healthcare intervention to inform policy and decision making across healthcare systems. An example of how the findings from systematic reviews can provide reliable evidence to inform healthcare decisions will be provided in this presentation1. This will demonstrate how focused clinical questions can be answered by systematic reviews and translated into practice.

Reference:
1. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Moutray M. (2007) Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of Intensive Care admission admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards (REVIEW). The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3. art no CD005529

How can we use systematic reviews to inform clinical practice?

Aims/purpose: Systematic reviews provide the highest quality evidence and inform clinical practice. For patient benefit, it is imperative that nurses keep abreast of evidence-based practice. This presentation highlights where to find systematic reviews and how the information presented can be used to inform care.
Presentation description: Clinical research is increasing at an incredible rate. In the clinical trials database alone, more than 2000 new studies are registered/month and this does not include qualitative studies that do not require registration. Keeping abreast of current evidence can not only be a time consuming process, but can be problematic when studies produce conflicting results. Systematic reviews can be useful for summarizing the increasing amount of knowledge that is gained from scientific papers. In addition, combining individual studies in a meta-analysis increases statistical power, resulting in more precise effect estimates. This presentation draws upon a few systematic reviews relevant to ICU nursing practice, highlights their findings and demonstrates how the information can be used to inform translation of evidence into practice. Additionally, although these reviews include steps to minimize bias, nurses should be aware of some of the biases that may reduce confidence in the findings.
Conclusion: Systematic reviews can be useful tools for informing evidence based practice, although careful interpretation is necessary for understanding their relevance to local practice.