M-health review: joining up healthcare in a wireless world

In recent years, there has been a huge increase in the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) to deliver health and social care. This trend is bound to continue as providers (whether public or private) strive to deliver better care to more people under conditions of severe budgetary constraint

Education, Health and Care plans: A qualitative investigation into service user experiences of the planning process

An Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan sets out the education, health and care support that is to be provided to a child or young person aged 0-25 years who has Special Educational Needs or a Disability (SEND). It is drawn up by the local authority after an EHC needs assessment of the child or young person, in consultation with relevant partner agencies, parents and the child or young person themselves. EHC plans, and the needs assessment process through which they are created, were introduced as part of the Children and Families Act 2014. The Act, and an accompanying SEND Code of Practice, sets out how local authorities must deliver EHC plans. In 2016, a national survey commissioned by the Department for Education (DfE) found variations in how EHC plan recipients experienced the EHC planning process across different local authorities.1 Based on these results, DfE commissioned two further research projects: a multivariate analysis of factors affecting satisfaction with the EHC planning process, and this qualitative investigation of user experiences of the EHC planning process. The qualitative investigation consisted of two distinct exercises: • Twenty-five face-to-face in-depth interviews with parents involved in the 2016 survey, with the aim of better understanding factors that lead to satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the EHC plan process. Thirteen interviews were conducted in local authorities with above average satisfaction, and 12 were conducted in local authority areas with below average satisfaction. • An evaluation of EHC plan quality focussing on plans provided by 18 of the 25 parents interviewed. The evaluation was conducted by a panel of 10 SEND experts with wide experience as SEND policy advisors, strategic leaders in LAs, specialist advisory teachers, officers in SEN statutory services, Special Needs Co-ordinators, teachers in special and mainstream schools and lecturers. There was little evidence of a link between families’ satisfaction with the process of getting the EHC plan and experts’ evaluations of the quality of the plan: this report therefore discusses these two strands of research separately.Department for Educatio

Experiences of Education, Health and Care plans: A survey of parents and young people

An Education, Health and Care plan (EHC plan) sets out the education, health and care support that is to be provided to a child or young person aged 0-25 years who has Special Educational Needs (SEN) or a disability (SEND). It is drawn up by the local authority after an Education, Health and Care (EHC) needs assessment of the child or young person has determined that an EHC plan is necessary, and after consultation with relevant partner agencies and with children, young people and parents. EHC plans, and the needs assessment process through which these are made, were introduced as part of the Children and Families Act 2014. The Act, and an accompanying SEND Code of Practice1, sets out how local authorities must deliver these, including:• Developing and maintaining these collaboratively with children, young people and parents; • Supporting children, young people and parents to participate fully; • Focusing on securing the best possible outcomes for the child/young person; • Enabling participation by relevant partner agencies, to enable joined-up provision.The SEND accountability framework established in 20152 sets out an approach for assessing SEND provision in conjunction with the Act and SEND Code of Practice. The framework provides structure for improving outcomes and experiences for children, young people and their families and, when applied, seeks to show how the system is performing, hold partners to account and support self-improvement. The framework applies at the local and national levels and to independent assessments of the EHC plan process – such as those carried out by Ofsted. In this context, the Department for Education commissioned a survey of parents and young people with an EHC plan, in order to build a representative national (and, where the data allows, local) picture of how parents and young people in England were experiencing the EHC needs assessment and planning process and the resultant EHC plans. The aim was to assess whether delivery of the EHC needs assessments and planning process and the resultant EHC plans reflected the intentions set out in the Children and Families Act 2014 and the accompanying SEND Code of Practice. The findings would help inform the SEND accountability framework.To achieve these aims the survey sought to answer the following questions: • To what extent do children, young people and families experience the EHC needs assessment and planning process as they are intended to be experienced; • How satisfied are children, young people and families with the EHC needs assessment and planning process and the resultant EHC plan; and • To what extent does this vary by local authority and by groups with different characteristics? The findings presented here and throughout the main report explore parents’ and young people’s responses to the survey questions. The report also explores where experiences of the EHC needs assessment and planning process varied for groups with different characteristics, applying a bivariate analysis approach3. The report only highlights such differences where these are statistically significant4.Department for Educatio

Does Job Stability Mediate the Relationship Between Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Health Among Low‐Income Women?

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100283/1/ajop12053.pd

Systematic Multi-Domain Alzheimer's Risk Reduction Trial (SMARRT): Study Protocol.

This article describes the protocol for the Systematic Multi-domain Alzheimer's Risk Reduction Trial (SMARRT), a single-blind randomized pilot trial to test a personalized, pragmatic, multi-domain Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk reduction intervention in a US integrated healthcare delivery system. Study participants will be 200 higher-risk older adults (age 70-89 years with subjective cognitive complaints, low normal performance on cognitive screen, and ≥ two modifiable risk factors targeted by our intervention) who will be recruited from selected primary care clinics of Kaiser Permanente Washington, oversampling people with non-white race or Hispanic ethnicity. Study participants will be randomly assigned to a two-year Alzheimer's risk reduction intervention (SMARRT) or a Health Education (HE) control. Randomization will be stratified by clinic, race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic white versus non-white or Hispanic), and age (70-79, 80-89). Participants randomized to the SMARRT group will work with a behavioral coach and nurse to develop a personalized plan related to their risk factors (poorly controlled hypertension, diabetes with evidence of hyper or hypoglycemia, depressive symptoms, poor sleep quality, contraindicated medications, physical inactivity, low cognitive stimulation, social isolation, poor diet, smoking). Participants in the HE control group will be mailed general health education information about these risk factors for AD. The primary outcome is two-year cognitive change on a cognitive test composite score. Secondary outcomes include: 1) improvement in targeted risk factors, 2) individual cognitive domain composite scores, 3) physical performance, 4) functional ability, 5) quality of life, and 6) incidence of mild cognitive impairment, AD, and dementia. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed in both groups at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months

Histone deacetylase expression patterns in developing murine optic nerve

BACKGROUND: Histone deacetylases (HDACs) play important roles in glial cell development and in disease states within multiple regions of the central nervous system. However, little is known about HDAC expression or function within the optic nerve. As a first step in understanding the role of HDACs in optic nerve, this study examines the spatio-temporal expression patterns of methylated histone 3 (K9), acetylated histone 3 (K18), and HDACs 1–6 and 8–11 in the developing murine optic nerve head. RESULTS: Using RT-qPCR, western blot and immunofluorescence, three stages were analyzed: embryonic day 16 (E16), when astrocyte precursors are found in the optic stalk, postnatal day 5 (P5), when immature astrocytes and oligodendrocytes are found throughout the optic nerve, and P30, when optic nerve astrocytes and oligodendrocytes are mature. Acetylated and methylated histone H3 immunoreactivity was co-localized in the nuclei of most SOX2 positive glia within the optic nerve head and adjacent optic nerve at all developmental stages. HDACs 1–11 were expressed in the optic nerve glial cells at all three stages of optic nerve development in the mouse, but showed temporal differences in overall levels and subcellular localization. HDACs 1 and 2 were predominantly nuclear throughout optic nerve development and glial cell maturation. HDACs 3, 5, 6, 8, and 11 were predominantly cytoplasmic, but showed nuclear localization in at least one stage of optic nerve development. HDACs 4, 9 and10 were predominantly cytoplasmic, with little to no nuclear expression at any time during the developmental stages examined. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showing that HDACs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 11 were each localized to the nuclei of SOX2 positive glia at some stages of optic nerve development and maturation and extend previous reports of HDAC expression in the aging optic nerve. These HDACs are candidates for further research to understand how chromatin remodeling through acetylation, deacetylation and methylation contributes to glial development as well as their injury response

ADD Implementation Assessment: Design, Implementation, and Administration of Individual Development Account Programs in the American Dream Demonstration

ADD Implementation Assessment: Design, Implementation, and Administration of Individual Development Account Programs in the American Dream Demonstratio

Student and Teacher Perceptions of Completing Daily History Entries in a Seventh-Grade Texas History Classroom

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of seventh-grade students and their teacher regarding the completion of daily history entries (a journaling activity) academically, developmentally, and relationally through data collection methods including observations, surveys, interviews, and student samples. To analyze these findings, level 1 and 2 codes were utilized. Additionally, descriptive statistics were utilized to quantitatively understand the implications of average student perceptions. From the data, three major themes were uncovered regarding students’ and their teacher’s perceptions of daily history which include a range of responses, perceptions of writing, and the importance of student teacher relationship. First, students held various opinions of daily history, indicating the need for teachers to differentiate activities to meet diverse student needs. Second, students’ perceptions of writing indicated they wanted to improve, but often expressed a dislike of writing. Last, the student teacher relationship was important for both students and the teacher

Design, Implementation, and Administration of Individual Development Account Programs, Downpayments on the American Dream Policy Demonstration: A National Demonstration of Individual Development Accounts

Design, Implementation, and Administration of Individual Development Account Programs, Downpayments on the American Dream Policy Demonstration: A National Demonstration of Individual Development Account