Taxonomic theory and the ICF: Foundations for a unified disability athletics classification

Development of a unified classification system to replace four of the systems currently used in disability athletics (i.e., track and field) has been widely advocated. The definition and purpose of classification, underpinned by taxonomic principles and collectively endorsed by relevant disability sport organizations, have not been developed but are required for successful implementation of a unified system. It is posited that the International classification of functioning. disability, and health (ICF), published by the World Health Organization (2001), and current disability athletics systems are, fundamentally, classifications of the functioning and disability associated with health conditions and are highly interrelated. A rationale for basing a unified disability athletics system on ICF is established. Following taxonomic analysis of the current systems, the definition and purpose of a unified disability athletics classification are proposed and discussed. The proposed taxonomic framework and definitions have implications for other disability sport classification systems.

"It's OK if we say it, but you can't": responses to intergroup and intragroup criticism

Three experiments were conducted examining group members' responses to criticism from ingroup and outgroup members. In Experiment I a, Australians read scripts of a person making either negative or positive comments about Australia. The speaker was identified as coming from either Australia (ingroup member) or another country (outgroup member). Responses indicated an intergroup sensitivity effect; that is, while ingroup criticisms were tolerated surprisingly well, outgroup criticisms were met with sensitivity and defensiveness. This pattern was replicated using the identity of,university student' (Experiment 1b). Experiment 2 demonstrated that the intergroup sensitivity effect is driven by perceptions that ingroup criticisms are seen to be more legitimate and more constructive than are outgroup criticisms. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for intragroup and intergroup relations. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy: When to call it quits

Abstract: Background: Patients diagnosed with cancer are often treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy with curative intent. The transition from curative to palliative intent involves re-evaluation of treatment, and has to take into account the attitudes, beliefs and life aims of the patient. Objective: To discuss the difficulties in determining when to cease chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with advanced cancer. Discussion: The concept of treatment evaluation using a ‘burden versus benefit’ paradigm is discussed. Treatment aims must be in concordance with those of the patient, which are often couched in functional terms or linked to future significant life events. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy can offer patients in the palliative phase of cancer illness, benefits in terms of relief of symptoms and meaningful prolongation of life, and should be considered in appropriate circumstances. (author abstract)

Cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with average cholesterol levels and established ischaemic heart disease: is it cost-effective?

Objective: To measure the cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapy with pravastatin in patients with established ischaemic heart disease and average baseline cholesterol levels. Design: Prospective economic evaluation within a double-blind randomised trial (Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease [LIPID]), in which patients with a history of unstable angina or previous myocardial infarction were randomised to receive 40 mg of pravastatin daily or matching placebo. Patients and setting: 9014 patients aged 35-75 years from 85 centres in Australia and New Zealand, recruited from June 1990 to December 1992. Main outcome measures: Cost per death averted, cost per life-year gained, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, calculated from measures of hospitalisations, medication use, outpatient visits, and quality of life. Results: The LIPID trial showed a 22% relative reduction in all-cause mortality (P < 0.001). Over a mean follow-up of 6 years, hospital admissions for coronary heart disease and coronary revascularisation were reduced by about 20%. Over this period, pravastatin cost $A4913 per patient, but reduced total hospitalisation costs by $A1385 per patient and other long-term medication costs by $A360 per patient. In a subsample of patients, average quality of life was 0.98 (where 0 = dead and 1 = normal good health); the treatment groups were not significantly different. The absolute reduction in all-cause mortality was 3.0% (95% CI, 1.6%-4.4%), and the incremental cost was $3246 per patient, resulting in a cost per life saved of $107730 (95% Cl, $68626-$209881) within the study period. Extrapolating long-term survival from the placebo group, the undiscounted cost per life-year saved was $7695 (and $10 938 with costs and life-years discounted at an annual rate of 5%). Conclusions: Pravastatin therapy for patients with a history of myocardial infarction or unstable angina and average cholesterol levels reduces all-cause mortality and appears cost effective compared with accepted treatments in high-income countries.