24 research outputs found
Virtually impossible: limiting Australian children and adolescents daily screen based media use
Background: Paediatric recommendations to limit children’s and adolescents’ screen based media use (SBMU) to less than two hours per day appear to have gone unheeded. Given the associated adverse physical and mental health outcomes of SBMU it is understandable that concern is growing worldwide. However, because the majority of studies measuring SBMU have focused on TV viewing, computer use, video game playing, or a combination of these the true extent of total SBMU (including non-sedentary hand held devices) and time spent on specific screen activities remains relatively unknown. This study assesses the amount of time Australian children and adolescents spend on all types of screens and specific screen activities. Methods: We administered an online instrument specifically developed to gather data on all types of SBMU and SBMU activities to 2,620 (1373 males and 1247 females) 8 to 16 year olds from 25 Australian government and non-government primary and secondary schools. Results: We found that 45% of 8 year olds to 80% of 16 year olds exceeded the recommended < 2 hours per day for screen use. A series of hierarchical linear models demonstrated different relationships between the degree to which total SBMU and SBMU on specific activities (TV viewing, Gaming, Social Networking, and Web Use) exceeded the < 2 hours recommendation in relation to sex and age. Conclusions: Current paediatric recommendations pertaining to screen use exposure may no longer be tenable because screen based media are central in the everyday lives of children and adolescents. In any reappraisal of SBMU exposure times, researchers, educators and health professionals need to take cognizance of the extent to which screen use differs across specific screen activity, sex, and age
The influence of contextual factors on healthcare quality improvement initiatives:a realist review
Background Recognising the influence of context and the context-sensitive nature of quality improvement (QI) interventions is crucial to implementing effective improvements and successfully replicating them in new settings, yet context is still poorly understood. To address this challenge, it is necessary to capture generalisable knowledge, first to understand which aspects of context are most important to QI and why, and secondly, to explore how these factors can be managed to support healthcare improvement, in terms of implementing successful improvement initiatives, achieving sustainability and scaling interventions. The research question was how and why does context influence quality improvement initiatives in healthcare? Methods A realist review explored the contextual conditions that influence healthcare improvement. Realist methodology integrates theoretical understanding and stakeholder input with empirical research findings. The review aimed to identify and understand the role of context during the improvement cycle, i.e. planning, implementation, sustainability and transferability; and distil new knowledge to inform the design and development of context-sensitive QI initiatives. We developed a preliminary theory of the influence of context to arrive at a conceptual and theoretical framework. Results Thirty-five studies were included in the review, demonstrating the interaction of key contextual factors across healthcare system levels during the improvement cycle. An evidence-based explanatory theoretical model is proposed to illustrate the interaction between contextual factors, system levels (macro, meso, micro) and the stages of the improvement journey. Findings indicate that the consideration of these contextual factors would enhance the design and delivery of improvement initiatives, across a range of improvement settings. Conclusions This is the first realist review of context in QI and contributes to a deeper understanding of how context influences quality improvement initiatives. The distillation of key contextual factors offers the potential to inform the design and development of context-sensitive interventions to enhance improvement initiatives and address the challenge of spread and sustainability. Future research should explore the application of our conceptual model to enhance improvement-planning processes
Shedding Light on the Galaxy Luminosity Function
From as early as the 1930s, astronomers have tried to quantify the
statistical nature of the evolution and large-scale structure of galaxies by
studying their luminosity distribution as a function of redshift - known as the
galaxy luminosity function (LF). Accurately constructing the LF remains a
popular and yet tricky pursuit in modern observational cosmology where the
presence of observational selection effects due to e.g. detection thresholds in
apparent magnitude, colour, surface brightness or some combination thereof can
render any given galaxy survey incomplete and thus introduce bias into the LF.
Over the last seventy years there have been numerous sophisticated
statistical approaches devised to tackle these issues; all have advantages --
but not one is perfect. This review takes a broad historical look at the key
statistical tools that have been developed over this period, discussing their
relative merits and highlighting any significant extensions and modifications.
In addition, the more generalised methods that have emerged within the last few
years are examined. These methods propose a more rigorous statistical framework
within which to determine the LF compared to some of the more traditional
methods. I also look at how photometric redshift estimations are being
incorporated into the LF methodology as well as considering the construction of
bivariate LFs. Finally, I review the ongoing development of completeness
estimators which test some of the fundamental assumptions going into LF
estimators and can be powerful probes of any residual systematic effects
inherent magnitude-redshift data.Comment: 95 pages, 23 figures, 3 tables. Now published in The Astronomy &
Astrophysics Review. This version: bring in line with A&AR format
requirements, also minor typo corrections made, additional citations and
higher rez images adde
