This article reports on a study focusing on the inclusion of students with dyslexia in higher education (HE). A systematic review was carried out to retrieve, critically appraise and synthesize the available evidence on how the inclusion of students with dyslexia can be fostered in HE. The 15 studies included in the final synthesis employed descriptive designs and overwhelmingly used qualitative methods to explore dyslexic students' perceptions on the impact of teaching, support and accommodation in their own learning experience. A critical appraisal of these studies revealed a landscape of significant gaps in the available stock of evidence on the inclusion of students with dyslexia in HE. The synthesis of the available evidence is presented in a narrative of five cross-study thematic areas: student coping strategies, being identified as dyslexic, interaction with academic staff, accessibility and accommodations, and using assistive technologies and information and communication technologies. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

The recommendations are designed to support deliberations and decisions about individual studies and to support ethical scrutiny of proposed research studies. Whilst preliminary, it is nevertheless the most comprehensive and detailed currently available.

ObjectiveTo examine how palliative medicine doctors engage patients in end-of-life (hereon, EoL) talk. To examine whether the practice of “eliciting and responding to cues”, which has been widely advocated in the EoL care literature, promotes EoL talk.DesignConversation analysis of video- and audio-recorded consultations.ParticipantsUnselected terminally ill patients and their companions in consultation with experienced palliative medicine doctors.SettingOutpatient clinic, day therapy clinic, and inpatient unit of a single English hospice.ResultsDoctors most commonly promoted EoL talk through open elaboration solicitations; these created opportunities for patients to introduce–then later further articulate–EoL considerations in such a way that doctors did not overtly ask about EoL matters. Importantly, the wording of elaboration solicitations avoided assuming that patients had EoL concerns. If a patient responded to open elaboration solicitations without introducing EoL considerations, doctors sometimes pursued EoL talk by switching to a less participatory and more presumptive type of solicitation, which suggested the patient might have EoL concerns. These more overt solicitations were used only later in consultations, which indicates that doctors give precedence to patients volunteering EoL considerations, and offer them opportunities to take the lead in initiating EoL talk. There is evidence that doctors treat elaboration of patients’ talk as a resource for engaging them in EoL conversations. However, there are limitations associated with labelling that talk as “cues” as is common in EoL communication contexts. We examine these limitations and propose “possible EoL considerations” as a descriptively more accurate term.ConclusionsThrough communicating–via open elaboration solicitations–in ways that create opportunities for patients to volunteer EoL considerations, doctors navigate a core dilemma in promoting EoL talk: giving patients opportunities to choose whether to engage in conversations about EoL whilst being sensitive to their communication needs, preferences and state of readiness for such dialogue.

Clinicians should be mindful that rather than overtly requesting estimates, patients may seek them more cautiously. Before delivering estimates, doctors can support patients to articulate their existing understanding and perspective regarding prognosis, and their readiness to hear more.

No abstract