Search

Mobile phones and other remote monitoring devices, collectively referred to as "mHealth," promise to transform the treatment of a range of conditions, including movement disorders, such as Parkinson’s disease. In this viewpoint paper, we use Parkinson’s disease as an example, although most considerations discussed below are valid for a wide variety of conditions. The ability to easily collect vast arrays of personal data over long periods will give clinicians and researchers unique insights into disease treatment and progression. These capabilities also pose new ethical challenges that health care professionals will need to manage if this promise is to be realized with minimal risk of harm. These challenges include privacy protection when anonymity is not always possible, minimization of third-party uses of mHealth data, informing patients of complex risks when obtaining consent, managing data in ways that maximize benefit while minimizing the potential for disclosure to third parties, careful communication of clinically relevant information gleaned via mHealth technologies, and rigorous evaluation and regulation of mHealth products before widespread use. Given the complex array of symptoms and differences in comfort and literacy with technology, it is likely that these solutions will need to be individualized. It is therefore critical that developers of mHealth apps engage with patients throughout the development process to ensure that the technology meets their needs. These challenges will be best met through early and ongoing engagement with patients and other relevant stakeholders.

Author(s): Coral Gartner 1, Wayne D. Hall 2,* Progress has been made in reducing the global burden of tobacco-related disease and disability but the implementation of tobacco control measures recommended [...]

Author(s): Coral Gartner 1, Wayne D. Hall 2,* We need effective policies to reduce youth use of ENDS globally. Countries have implemented a variety of regulations to reduce ENDS use [...]

Purpose: This study was conducted to gain a better understanding of engineering students' perceptions of the meaning of employability and the activities that contribute to employability development. Design/methodology/approach: A survey was used to take a cross-section of student perspectives at key stages in the degree, and was followed by a series of focus groups to further explore student opinions on employability. Responses to selected open-ended questions and relevant sections of focus group transcripts were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Findings: It was found that students have different perspectives on the meaning of employability, with the majority describing employability as having the right skills, attributes or competencies. Employability development activities were integrated into three broad categories: developing engineering knowledge, skills and industry experience; career building and industry awareness; and degree progression and completion. Participants also identified barriers to employability development and suggested areas for improvement. Practical implications: The study recommends university staff ensure there is a shared understanding of employability within the student cohort by explicitly reframing employability as being about becoming a professional and that students are repeatedly exposed to the relevant set of industry competencies or standards. The study also outlines a range of activities that students connect to their employability development. Originality/value: The findings of this study will assist university staff across the sector to make decisions about how they can best support employability development in their undergraduate students.