No abstract

This case study of an online graduate course determines the message characteristics of the instructor, volunteer teaching assistants, and students in online discussions, and proposes a mentoring, coaching, and facilitating model for online discussions. The researchers developed a coding system based on the literature of mentoring, coaching, and facilitating to identify the characteristics of conference discussion messages. The instructor fostered the development of volunteer teaching assistants into coaches and of student discussion facilitators into facilitators of learning. The proposed constructivist model fosters active learning, provides scaffolding for students to become facilitators of learning, and suggests creative ways for online instructors to manage different types of teaching responsibilities. Recommendations for further research are included.

The article presents an analysis of six semester-long computer conferences moderated by university students to discover how students perceived and used the conferences. The two purposes of the conferences were to provide a meaningful, authentic context for preservice teachers to learn about technology and collaborative learning and to provide an opportunity for graduate students to learn to moderate computer conferences in an authentic context. A qualitative analysis of the conference data yielded the following findings: 1) student moderator roles reflect the influence of both instruction and personal communication styles, and 2) participants adopted behaviors that fostered communication in a text-based environment and led to positive attitudes about computer conferencing. We conclude by identifying the critical tasks of moderators and participants in student-moderated computer conferences.

No abstract

Optimal treatment in men with intermediate (IM) risk prostate cancer (PCa) is still a matter of debate. MRI has improved pre-treatment risk stratification and PCa volume estimation. However, index lesion (IL) volume, which is associated with oncological outcome, is still not included in patient risk assessment. We hypothesise that men with indolent PCa among patients with IM risk disease can be identified by adding MRI IL volume in a large contemporary cohort of men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP).METHODS: We identified 3088 patients with low and IM PCa receiving RP at 11 referral centres. All patients had a positive MRI (PIRADS!3). The aim was to compare oncological outcomes of low risk ISUP 1 PCa (Group 1) and IM risk ISUP 2-3 PCa, stratified according to the most informative IL volume cut-off at MRI, namely IL diameter <10 mm (Group 2) and !10 mm (Group 3). The outcome of this study was biochemical recurrence (BCR) after RP. Multivariable Cox regression analyses (MVA) were used to compare BCR-free survival in Group 1 vs 2 vs 3 after accounting for the following confounders: PSA, prostate volume, PIRADS score, and percent of positive biopsy cores. We then compared BCR-free survival using the adjusted Kaplan-Meier method (KM).RESULTS: 247 (8%), 1747 (57%), and 1094 (35%) patients harboured ISUP group 1, 2, and 3 at RP, respectively. In all, 247 (8%), 2110 (68%), and 731 (24%) patients were stratified into Group 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Median follow-up was 50 months and 227 patients had BCR. The 5-yr BCR-free survival probability was 84%, 86%, and 73%, among patients in group 1, 2, and 3, respectively (Figure 1; p<0.01). At MVA, with Group 1 as reference, only Group 3 was associated with the rate of BCR (Group 2: HR: 0.94, p[0.9; Group 3: HR: 2.32, p[0.03). Specifically, patients with PCa ISUP 1 and PCa ISUP 2-3 with IL <10 mm did not exhibit any differences in BCR-free survival after RP (p[0.6) (Figure 1).CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low volume ISUP 2-3 with IL size <10 mm appear to have comparable oncological outcomes in terms of BCR-free survival to patients with ISUP 1 disease after RP. These results should be taken into account for patient counselling and in decision making of active treatment vs active surveillance in patients with low volume IM risk PCa.