Playing at bullying : the postmodern ethic of Bully (Canis Canem edit)

This essay discusses Bully (Canis Canem Edit), considering the game's antecedents (narratives involving young people in school settings) and the features which set it apart from other teen texts. It discusses the controversy surrounding the game and comes to the conclusion that the principal reason
for unease on the part of parents and educational authorities is that Bully's postmodernist ethic evades the binaries of liberal humanism and calls into question the foundations on which conventional ethical systems are based. Tbe paper considers several episodes from the game to flesh out its arguments about how the game manifests features of postmodernist textuality in its propensity for simultaneously deploying and interrogating references to historical and contemporary cultural practices.

A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: understanding preferences of patients with cancer towards their cancer care across metropolitan and rural regions in Australia.

Medical decision-making in oncology is a complicated process and to date there are few studies examining how patients with cancer make choices with respect to different features of their care. It is also unknown whether patient choices vary by geographical location and how location could account for observed rural and metropolitan cancer differences. This paper describes an ongoing study that aims to (1) examine patient and healthcare-related factors that influence choices of patients with cancer; (2) measure and quantify preferences of patients with cancer towards cancer care using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and (3) explore preference heterogeneity between metropolitan and rural locations.

Patient and nurse preferences for nurse handover-using preferences to inform policy: a discrete choice experiment protocol

INTRODUCTION: Nursing bedside handover in hospital has been identified as an opportunity to involve patients and promote patient-centred care. It is important to consider the preferences of both patients and nurses when implementing bedside handover to maximise the successful uptake of this policy. We outline a study which aims to (1) identify, compare and contrast the preferences for various aspects of handover common to nurses and patients while accounting for other factors, such as the time constraints of nurses that may influence these preferences.; (2) identify opportunities for nurses to better involve patients in bedside handover and (3) identify patient and nurse preferences that may challenge the full implementation of bedside handover in the acute medical setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We outline the protocol for a discrete choice experiment (DCE) which uses a survey design common to both patients and nurses. We describe the qualitative and pilot work undertaken to design the DCE. We use a D-efficient design which is informed by prior coefficients collected during the pilot phase. We also discuss the face-to-face administration of this survey in a population of acutely unwell, hospitalised patients and describe how data collection challenges have been informed by our pilot phase. Mixed multinomial logit regression analysis will be used to estimate the final results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by a university ethics committee as well as two participating hospital ethics committees. Results will be used within a knowledge translation framework to inform any strategies that can be used by nursing staff to improve the uptake of bedside handover. Results will also be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal articles and will be presented at national and international conferences.

A discrete choice experiment to examine the preferences of patients with cancer and their willingness to pay for different types of health care appointments

BACKGROUND: This study sought to understand the preferences of patients with cancer and the trade-offs between appointment attributes using discrete choice experiment (DCE). METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Patients with cancer at 3 hospitals completed a self-administered DCE. Each scenario described 6 attributes: expertise of health care professionals (HCPs), familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history, waiting time, accompaniment by family/friends, travel time, and out-of-pocket costs. Patient preferences were estimated using logistic regression. Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates were derived from regression coefficients. RESULTS: Of 512 patients contacted, 185 returned the questionnaire. The mean age was 61 years, and 60% of respondents were female. The mean time since cancer diagnosis was 34 months, 90% had received treatment; and 61% had early-stage disease. The most important attributes were expertise and familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history; distance traveled was least likely to influence patient preferences. The WTP analysis estimated that patients were willing to pay $680 (95% CI, 470-891) for an appointment with a specialist, $571 (95% CI, 388-754) for doctors familiar with their history, $422 (95% CI, 262-582) for shorter waiting times, $399 (95% CI, 249-549) to be accompanied by family/friends, and $301 (95% CI, 162-441) for shorter traveling times. Male patients had a stronger preference for accompaniment by family/friends. The expertise of HCP was the most important attribute for patients regardless of geographic remoteness. CONCLUSIONS: Our study can assist the development of patient-centered health care models that improve patient access to experienced HCPs, support the role of primary care providers during the cancer journey, and educate patients about the roles of non-oncology HCPs to cope with increasing demand for cancer care.