PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15071508

Can those that do - teach?

Abstract

The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mike Grace. 2004-04-10. Can those that do - teach?. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811128

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Frequency and difficulty in caregiving among spouses of individuals with cancer: effects of adult attachment and gender.

How caregivers relate to care recipients can affect how well care is provided and how much burden is experienced in providing it. We conceptualized the relationship of spousal caregivers via adult attachment theory and examined how attachment qualities of caregivers related to level of caregiving involvement and difficulties in caregiving. Gender differences in the associations were also explored. From participants in the ACS Quality of Life Survey for Caregivers, 400 spousal caregivers provided valid data for the study variables. Findings indicated that frequency of various types of care was a joint function of attachment orientation and gender. In contrast, the difficulty that caregivers experienced in providing care related directly to attachment, without moderation by gender. Our findings suggest that ineffective caregivers of cancer patients, who can be identified by their attachment orientation and/or gender, may benefit from educational programs to improve their caregiving skills and to encourage them to utilize resources from other family members or community.

Attitude↗

Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey.

BACKGROUND: Peer reviewers are usually unpaid and their efforts not formally acknowledged. Some journals have difficulty finding appropriate reviewers able to complete timely reviews, resulting in publication delay. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: A survey of peer reviewers from five biomedical journals was conducted to determine why reviewers decline to review and their opinions on reviewer incentives. Items were scored on 5-point Likert scales, with low scores indicating low importance or low agreement. RESULTS: 551/890 (62%) reviewers responded. Factors rated most highly in importance for the decision to accept to review a paper included contribution of the paper to subject area (mean 3.67 (standard deviation (SD) 86)), relevance of topic to own work (mean 3.46 (SD 0.99)) and opportunity to learn something new (mean 3.41 (SD 0.96)). The most highly rated factor important in the decision to decline to review was conflict with other workload (mean 4.06 (SD 1.31)). Most respondents agreed that financial incentives would not be effective when time constraints are prohibitive (mean 3.59 (SD 1.01)). However, reviewers agreed that non-financial incentives might encourage reviewers to accept requests to review: free subscription to journal content (mean 3.72 (SD 1.04)), annual acknowledgement on the journal's website (mean 3.64 (SD 0.90)), more feedback about the outcome of the submission (mean 3.62 (SD 0.88)) and quality of the review (mean 3.60 (SD 0.89), and appointment of reviewers to the journal's editorial board (mean 3.57 (SD 0.99)). CONCLUSION: Reviewers are more likely to accept to review a manuscript when it is relevant to their area of interest. Lack of time is the principal factor in the decision to decline. Reviewing should be formally recognised by academic institutions and journals should acknowledge reviewers' work.

Attitude↗

Consenting of the vulnerable: the informed consent procedure in advanced cancer patients in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: A topic of great concern in bioethics is the medical research conducted in poor countries sponsored by wealthy nations. Western drug companies increasingly view Latin America as a proper place for clinical research trials. The region combines a large population, modern medical facilities, and low per capita incomes. Participants from developing countries may have little or non alternative means of treatment other than that offered through clinical trials. Therefore, the provision of a valid informed consent is important. METHODS: To gain insight about some aspects of the informed consent procedure in a major cancer centre in Mexico, we conducted a three-step evaluation process: 1) a ten point multiple choice survey questionnaires, was used to explore some aspects of the patients' experiences during the informed consent process, 2) researchers' knowledge about specific aspects of the informed consent was evaluated in this study using survey questionnaires; and 3) the comprehensibility, readability and number of pages of the consent forms were analysed. The socioeconomic and educational level of the patients, were also considered. Results were reported using a numerical scale. RESULTS: Thirty five patients, 20 doctors, and 10 individuals working at the hospital agreed to participate in the study. Eighty three percent of the patients in the study were classified as living in poverty; education level was poor or non existent, and 31% of the patients were illiterate. The consent forms were difficult to understand according to 49% of the patients, most doctors agreed that the forms were not comprehensible to the patients. The average length of the IC documents analysed was 14 pages, and the readability average score was equivalent to 8th grade. CONCLUSION: The results presented in this work describe some relevant characteristics of the population seen at public health care institutions in Mexico. Poverty, limited or no education, and the complexity of the information provided to the patients may question the validity of the informed consent procedure in this group of patients.

Attitude↗