Search

Interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity and counter-disciplinarity are the hallmark of cultural studies and qualitative research, as scholars over the past three decades have discussed through extensive self-reflexive inquiry into their own unstable and ever-shifting methods (Denzin and Lincoln, 2018; Dicks et al., 2006: 78; Grossberg, 2010). Building on the interdisciplinary thought of Jacques Rancière and Caroline Levine on the one hand and traditions of participatory action research and activist anthropology on the other, we bring the methods conversation forward by shifting the focus from disciplines to forms and by making a case for aesthetic practice as qualitative research process. In this paper, the question of methods is approached through the action-based Cartonera Publishing Project with editoriales cartoneras in Latin America – community publishers who make low-cost books out of materials recovered from the street in the attempt to democratise and decolonise literary/artistic production – and specifically through our process-oriented, collaborative work with four cartonera publishers in Brazil and Mexico. Guided by the multiple forms of cartonera knowledge production, which are rooted not in academic research but rather in aesthetic practice and community relations, we offer an innovative 'trans-formal' methodological framework, which opens up new pathways for practitioners and researchers to work, think and act across social, cultural and aesthetic forms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Comunicação, Mídia e Consumo is the property of Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Rationale, aims and objectives: Several health information sources are available to assist physical therapists in the clinical decision‐making process, with a notable increase in the importance of using evidence‐based practice (EBP). The aim of this study is to investigate the health information sources most used by Brazilian physical therapists to guide their clinical decision making for knee osteoarthritis (OA) management, use of Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), knowledge about the existence of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and associated factors. Methods: A cross‐sectional study using an electronic survey was conducted. Physical therapists registered in a Regional Physical Therapy Council in Brazil were invited to participate. Sociodemographic data, professional training, health information sources, frequency of use of PEDro, and knowledge about CPGs were collected. Descriptive analysis of the data was performed, and the chi square test and multinomial and binary logistic regression were used to verify association between the variables. Results: The survey was completed by 370 professionals. The three health information sources most used by Brazilian physical therapists were clinical experience, courses, and books. Among these professionals, only 12.1% use PEDro frequently, and 60.5% know that CPGs for knee OA management exist. Level of education was associated with PEDro use and knowledge about the existence of CPGs (P <.05). Conclusions: The study results indicated a significant deficiency in engagement with research evidence by Brazilian physical therapists to guide their clinical decision making for knee OA. Further investigations on educational needs and the development of new strategies to narrow the gap between research evidence and clinical practice should be performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]