The initial findings from 230 questionnaires' survey and 36 interviews, in which informants are CWD, children with non-disabilities (CWND), parents of CWD, and teachers in school settings, are stated as: (a) the general understanding of disability is based on medical model and individual model rather than social model, such understandings contribute great impacts to the CWD's experiences in their daily life in general and in school contexts in particular; (b) the most important difficulties which CWD experience at school are those of learning facilities, the empathy from their student peers and barriers in the physical environment; (c) the ways which CWD try to deal with such difficulties are mostly 'do-by-themselves' or try to adapt themselves rather than asking for supports actively. Based on these findings, recommendations for having further activities to change social awareness of disabilities, specific support structures for CWD and school staff are stated in order to promote the social inclusion of CWD in schools.
Chapter 1: Retail initiatives to improve the healthiness of food environments in rural, regional and remote communities Objective: To synthesise the evidence for effectiveness of initiatives aimed at improving food retail environments and consumer dietary behaviour in rural, regional and remote populations in Australia and comparable countries, and to discuss the implications for future food environment initiatives for rural, regional and remote areas of Australia. Study design: Rapid review of articles published between January 2000 and May 2020. Data sources: We searched MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), Health and Society Database (Informit) and Rural and Remote Health Database (Informit), and included studies undertaken in rural food environment settings in Australia and other countries. Data synthesis: Twenty‐one articles met the inclusion criteria, including five conducted in Australia. Four of the Australian studies were conducted in very remote populations and in grocery stores, and one was conducted in regional Australia. All of the overseas studies were conducted in rural North America. All of them revealed a positive influence on food environment or consumer behaviour, and all were conducted in disadvantaged, rural communities. Positive outcomes were consistently revealed by studies of initiatives that focused on promotion and awareness of healthy foods and included co‐design to generate community ownership and branding. Conclusion: Initiatives aimed at improving rural food retail environments were effective and, when implemented in different rural settings, may encourage improvements in population diets. The paucity of studies over the past 20 years in Australia shows a need for more research into effective food retail environment initiatives, modelled on examples from overseas, with studies needed across all levels of remoteness in Australia. Several retail initiatives that were undertaken in rural North America could be replicated in rural Australia and could underpin future research. Chapter 2: Which interventions best support the health and wellbeing needs of rural populations experiencing natural disasters? Objective: To explore and evaluate health and social care interventions delivered to rural and remote communities experiencing natural disasters in Australia and other high income countries. Study design: We used systematic rapid review methods. First we identified a test set of citations and generated a frequency table of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) to index articles. Then we used combinations of MeSH terms and keywords to search the MEDLINE (Ovid) database, and screened the titles and abstracts of the retrieved references. Data sources: We identified 1438 articles via database searches, and a further 62 articles via hand searching of key journals and reference lists. We also found four relevant grey literature resources. After removing duplicates and undertaking two stages of screening, we included 28 studies in a synthesis of qualitative evidence. Data synthesis: Four of us read and assesse...
Background: Historically, research questions have been posed by the pharmaceutical industry or researchers, with little involvement of consumers and healthcare professionals. Objective: To determine what questions about medicine use are important to people living with dementia and their care team and whether they have been previously answered by research. Methods: The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership process was followed. A national Australian qualitative survey on medicine use in people living with dementia was conducted with consumers (people living with dementia and their carers including family,and friends) and healthcare professionals. Survey findings were supplemented with key informant interviews and relevant published documents (identified by the research team). Conventional content analysis was used to generate summary questions. Finally, evidence checking was conducted to determine if the summary questions were ‘unanswered’. Results: A total of 545 questions were submitted by 228 survey participants (151 consumers and 77 healthcare professionals). Eight interviews were conducted with key informants and four relevant published documents were identified and reviewed. Overall, analysis resulted in 68 research questions, grouped into 13 themes. Themes with the greatest number of questions were related to co-morbidities, adverse drug reactions, treatment of dementia, and polypharmacy. Evidence checking resulted in 67 unanswered questions. Conclusion: A wide variety of unanswered research questions were identified. Addressing unanswered research questions identified by consumers and healthcare professionals through this process will ensure that areas of priority are targeted in future research to achieve optimal health outcomes through quality use of medicines.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.