Perspectives of carers on medication management in dementia:lessons from collaboratively developing a research proposal

Background: The need for carers to manage medication-related problems for people with dementia living in the community raises dilemmas, which can be identified by carers and people with dementia as key issues for developing carer-relevant research projects.A research planning Public Patient Involvement (PPI) workshop using adapted focus group methodology was held at the Alzheimer's Society's national office, involving carers of people with dementia who were current members of the Alzheimer's Society Research Network (ASRN) in dialogue with health professionals aimed to identify key issues in relation to medication management in dementia from the carer viewpoint. The group was facilitated by a specialist mental health pharmacist, using a topic guide developed systematically with carers, health professionals and researchers. Audio-recordings and field notes were made at the time and were transcribed and analysed thematically. The participants included nine carers in addition to academics, clinicians, and staff from DeNDRoN (Dementias and Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Network) and the Alzheimer's Society. Findings. Significant themes, for carers, which emerged from the workshop were related to: (1) medication usage and administration practicalities, (2) communication barriers and facilitators, (3) bearing and sharing responsibility and (4) weighing up medication risks and benefits. These can form the basis for more in-depth qualitative research involving a broader, more diverse sample. Discussion. The supported discussion enabled carer voices and perspectives to be expressed and to be linked to the process of identifying problems in medications management as directly experienced by carers. This was used to inform an agenda for research proposals which would be meaningful for carers and people with dementia. © 2014 Poland et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Reflection and reflexivity in reviewing and evaluating CDIO:an empirical approach to evaluation

Facilitated by an Engineer and a Social Scientist, both of whom have expertise in Engineering Education Research and Evaluation (EERE), this interactive workshop is divided into three main sections, each one focusing on a different area of evaluation. It will build on research conducted at Aston University School of Engineering and Applied Science to explore and critique the value of introducing CDIO across the first year undergraduate curriculum. Participants will be invited to consider the pedagogical and engineering related challenges of evaluating the academic and practical value of CDIO as a strategy for learning and teaching in the discipline. An empirical approach to evaluation developed by the researchers to provide empirically grounded evidence of the pedagogical and vocational value of CDIO will form the theoretical and conceptual basis of the workshop. This approach is distinctive in that it encapsulates both engineering and social science methods of evaluation. It is also contemporaneous in nature, with the researchers acting as a ‘fly on the wall’ capturing data as the programme unfolds. Through facilitated discussion and participation, the workshop will provide colleagues with the opportunity to develop a cross-disciplinary, empirically grounded research proposal specifically for the purposes of critically evaluating CDIO. It is anticipated that during the workshop, colleagues will work together in small groups. Suitable pedagogical approaches and tools will be suggested and a purposefully developed Engineering Education Research Guide, written by the workshop facilitators, will be given to all participants to inform and support the Workshop approach.

WSRF-based modeling of clinical trial information for collaborative cancer research

The CancerGrid consortium is developing open-standards cancer informatics to address the challenges posed by modern cancer clinical trials. This paper presents the service-oriented software paradigm implemented in CancerGrid to derive clinical trial information management systems for collaborative cancer research across multiple institutions. Our proposal is founded on a combination of a clinical trial (meta)model and WSRF (Web Services Resource Framework), and is currently being evaluated for use in early phase trials. Although primarily targeted at cancer research, our approach is readily applicable to other areas for which a similar information model is available.

Engaging employers as partners in work-based learning assessment:proposal for a quality enhancement framework

This paper seeks to advance research and practice related to the role of employers in all stages of the assessment process of work-based learning (WBL) within a tripartite relationship of higher education institution (HEI), student and employer. It proposes a research-informed quality enhancement framework to develop good practice in engaging employers as partners in assessment. The Enhancement Framework comprises three dimensions, each of which includes elements and questions generated by the experiences of WBL students, HEI staff and employers. The three dimensions of the Enhancement Framework are: 1. ‘premises of assessment’ encompassing issues of learning, inclusion, standards and value; 2. ‘practice’, encompassing stages of assessment made up of course design, assessment task, responsibilities, support, grading and feedback; 3. ‘communication of assessment’ with the emphasis on role clarity, language and pathways. With its prompt questions, the Enhancement Framework may be used as a capacity-building tool for promoting, sustaining, benchmarking and evaluating productive dialogue and critical reflection about assessment between WBL partners. The paper concludes by emphasising the need for professional development as well as policy and research development, so that assessment in WBL can more closely correspond to the potentially transformative nature of the learning experience.

Identifying frames:a comparison of research methods

Framing plays an important role in public policy. Interest groups strategically highlight some aspects of a policy proposal while downplaying others in order to steer the policy debate in a favorable direction. Despite the importance of framing, we still know relatively little about the framing strategies of interest groups due to methodological difficulties that have prevented scholars from systematically studying interest group framing across a large number of interest groups and multiple policy debates. This article therefore provides an overview of three novel research methods that allow researchers to systematically measure interest group frames. More specifically, this article introduces a word-based quantitative text analysis technique, a manual, computer-assisted content analysis approach and face-to-face interviews designed to systematically identify interest group frames. The results generated by all three techniques are compared on the basis of a case study of interest group framing in an environmental policy debate in the European Union.