Search

O objetivo do presente estudo de casos múltiplos foi explorar se haveriam diferenças nas competências emocionais, nos processos grupais e na potência em equipes de dirigentes de empresas juniores (EJs) em áreas de formação distintas. O desenho de pesquisa incluiu quatro etapas: Aplicação do Perfil de Competências Emocionais (PEC), Entrevista individual e Aplicação da Escala de Potência em Equipes de Trabalho, observações sistemáticas e grupos focais. Resultados apontam para maior similaridade que diferenciação entre os casos em todas as variáveis do estudo, atribuída ao contexto de socialização das EJs. Algumas diferenças identificadas podem ser interpretadas à luz das especificidades dos membros de cada grupo diretivo e o tempo de experiência na gestão e na empresa júnior.

Funding Information: Catalina M. Valencia reports no conflicts of interest. Ben W. Mol reports an investigator grant from NHMRC; consultancy for ObsEva; and research funding from Guerbet, Ferring, and Merck KGaA. Bo Jacobbson reports research grants from Swedish Research Council, Norwegian Research Council, March of Dimes, Burroughs Wellcome Fund and the US National Institute of Health; clinical diagnostic trials on NIPT with Ariosa (completed), Natera (ongoing), Vanadis (completed) and Hologic (ongoing) with expendidures reimbused per patient; clinical probiotic studies with product provided by FukoPharma (ongoing, no funding) and BioGaia (ongoing; also provided a research grant for the specific study); collaboration in IMPACT study where Roche, Perkin Elmer and Thermo Fisher provided reagents to PLGF analyses; coordination of scientific conferences and meetings with commercial partners as such as NNFM 2015, ESPBC 2016 and a Nordic educational meeting about NIPT and preeclampsia screening. Bo Jacobbson is also Chair of the FIGO Working Group for Preterm Birth and the European Association of Perinatal Medicine's special interest group of preterm delivery; steering group member of Genomic Medicine Sweden; chairs the Genomic Medicine Sweden complex diseases group; and is Swedish representative in the Nordic Society of Precision Medicine.

IntroductionIn its recent World Report on Vision, the WHO called for an updated approach to monitor eye health as part of universal health coverage (UHC). This project sought to develop a consensus among eye health experts from all world regions to produce a menu of indicators for countries to monitor eye health within UHC.MethodsWe reviewed the literature to create a long-list of indicators aligned to the conceptual framework for monitoring outlined in WHO’s World Report on Vision. We recruited a panel of 72 global eye health experts (40% women) to participate in a two-round, online prioritisation exercise. Two-hundred indicators were presented in Round 1 and participants prioritised each on a 4-point Likert scale. The highest-ranked 95 were presented in Round 2 and were (1) scored against four criteria (feasible, actionable, reliable and internationally comparable) and (2) ranked according to their suitability as a ‘core’ indicator for collection by all countries. The top 30 indicators ranked by these two parameters were then used as the basis for the steering group to develop a final menu.ResultsThe menu consists of 22 indicators, including 7 core indicators, that represent important concepts in eye health for 2020 and beyond, and are considered feasible, actionable, reliable and internationally comparable.ConclusionWe believe this list can inform the development of new national eye health monitoring frameworks, monitor progress on key challenges to eye health and be considered in broader UHC monitoring indices at national and international levels.

The last decade witnessed the ascendancy of rheumatology to become one of the most dynamic and progressive across the fields of medicine. During the COVID-19 pandemic our discipline emerged at the forefront of molecular medicine with the rapid uptake of immune-modulatory therapeutics and depth of immune pathogenesis understanding contributing fundamentally to the COVID-19 response. The European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) played a fundamental and vital role in this response in guiding rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMD) therapeutics, vaccine use and even treatment innovations in the context of COVID-19 itself. Given this remarkable contribution, it is timely to reflect on EULAR—what is it and for what does it stand? At its core, EULAR represents people with RMDs, including their national societies, health professionals in rheumatology and scientific societies of rheumatology across the European nations. Our mission is to reduce the burden of RMDs on individuals and society and improve the treatment and prevention of RMDs. In this message from the new EULAR President and Steering Group, we present the most relevant activities of EULAR, its strategic aims and the concept of the EULAR family, a fantastic team of people working together across the three pillars of medical, health professional and patient societies.

The content of the report is based on data collected by the SA Rugby Injury and Illness Surveillance and Prevention Project (SARIISPP) steering group.

Summary Common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) represents a heterogeneous group of rare disorders. There is considerable morbidity and mortality as a result of non-infectious complications, and this presents clinicians with management challenges. Clinical guidelines to support the management of CVID are urgently required. The UK Primary Immunodeficiency Network and the British Society for Immunology funded a joint project to address this. A modified Delphi Survey was conducted for the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of the non-infectious blood, respiratory, gut and liver complications of CVID. A steering group of 10 consultant immunologists and one nurse specialist developed and reviewed the survey statements and agreed the final recommendations. In total, 22 recommendations and three areas for research were developed.

Background Patient engagement in research priority-setting is intended to democratize research and increase impact. The objectives of the Canadian Frailty Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) were to engage people with lived or clinical experience of frailty, and produce a list of research priorities related to care, support, and treatment of older adults living with frailty. Methods The Canadian Frailty PSP was supported by the Canadian Frailty Network, coordinated by researchers in Toronto, On-tario and followed the methods of the James Lind Alliance, which included establishing a Steering Group, inviting partner organizations, gathering questions related to care, support and treatment of older adults living with frailty, processing the data and prioritizing the questions. Results In the initial survey, 799 submissions were provided by 389 individuals and groups. The 647 questions that were within scope were categorized, merged, and summarized, then checked against research evidence, creating a list of 41 unanswered questions. Prioritization took place in two stages: first, 146 individuals and groups participated in survey and their responses short-listed 22 questions; and second, an in-person workshop was held on September 26, 2017 in Toronto, Ontario where these 22 questions were discussed and ranked. Conclusion Researchers and research funders can use these results to inform their agendas for research on frailty. Strategies are needed for involving those with lived experience of frailty in research.

ObjectiveThere are many uncertainties surrounding the aetiology, treatment and sequelae of hyperemesis gravidarum (HG). Prioritising research questions could reduce research waste, helping researchers and funders direct attention to those questions which most urgently need addressing. The HG priority setting partnership (PSP) was established to identify and rank the top 25 priority research questions important to both patients and clinicians.MethodsFollowing the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology, an HG PSP steering group was established. Stakeholders representing patients, carers and multidisciplinary professionals completed an online survey to gather uncertainties. Eligible uncertainties related to HG. Uncertainties on nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and those on complementary treatments were not eligible. Questions were verified against the evidence. Two rounds of prioritisation included an online ranking survey and a 1-hour consensus workshop.Results1009 participants (938 patients/carers, 118 professionals with overlap between categories) submitted 2899 questions. Questions originated from participants in 26 different countries, and people from 32 countries took part in the first prioritisation stage. 66 unique questions emerged, which were evidence checked according to the agreed protocol. 65 true uncertainties were narrowed via an online ranking survey to 26 unranked uncertainties. The consensus workshop was attended by 19 international patients and clinicians who reached consensus on the top 10 questions for international researchers to address. More patients than professionals took part in the surveys but were equally distributed during the consensus workshop. Participants from low-income and middle-income countries noted that the priorities may be different in their settings.ConclusionsBy following the JLA method, a prioritised list of uncertainties relevant to both HG patients and their clinicians has been identified which can inform the international HG research agenda, funders and policy-makers. While it is possible to conduct an international PSP, results from developed countries may not be as relevant in low-income and middle-income countries.

This article is part of a series on the 'A Sustainable Future' workshops. As such, all three articles share the same introduction and 'workshop background' written by the Chair of the Steering Group.

A decade ago, the advocacy of student leaders sparked an Open Educational Resource (OER) program at Tacoma Community College (TCC). Student advocacy remains vital to growing and sustaining our college’s open culture. This article explores the fundamental pillars of an OER sustainability framework and how TCC librarians and the Open Education (OE) Steering Group continue to collaborate with students. We hope our story will show you how to fuel the sparks of OE initiatives at your campus into a flame that lights a clear path to OE sustainability.

Aim Neonatal hypoglycaemia is a common problem, often requiring admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Our aim was to reduce term admissions to NICU for hypoglycaemia by 50% over 4 years. Methods Inborn term babies from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2018 were included. Using quality-improvement methodology, we designed interventions based on human factors to incorporate best practice recommendations for babies at-risk of hypoglycaemia. This included standardisation of local guidelines, introduction of educational programmes to reiterate changes to practice and a multidisciplinary steering group to review term admissions to better understand the cause of failure of the maternal-neonatal pathway. The outcome measures were the number of term babies admitted to NICU for hypoglycaemia and the proportion of these babies not requiring intravenous (IV) dextrose. Run charts were used to monitor hypoglycaemia admissions and the impact of each intervention. Results There was an overall reduction in the number of term babies admitted to NICU for hypoglycaemia from 36 babies in 2014 (baseline) to 5 babies in 2018. The percentage of babies admitted to the neonatal unit who did not require IV dextrose decreased from 22/36 (61%) in 2014 to 0/5 (0%) in 2018. Admissions from the delivery suite decreased from 21/36 (58%) to 1/5 (20%). There were no adverse outcomes observed in the period before or after the intervention. Conclusions We demonstrate a simple, cost-effective quality improvement project using fundamental human factors principles. This initiative successfully reduced the number of term admissions for hypoglycaemia over 4 years.

The FMLM Trainee Steering Group (TSG) sought to capture the lessons learnt through a series of interviews and blogs from individuals stepping forward into the leadership challenges during the COVID19 Pandemic. This included clinicians from Interim Foundation doctors through to chief executives to give a wide view of leadership-in-action and understand what lessons have been learnt so far from those individuals. This opportunity enabled those individuals to take stock and reflect on their own behaviours and of their team/organisation and was documented through a series of blogs. Each of the roles interviewed offered unique challenges and viewpoints. A thematic analysis analysing the behaviours and skills described was performed on the transcripts of these interviews and coded according to the domains from the FMLM standards. The transcripts were then coded using these categories and the percentage breakdown of each category identified and mapped to FMLM standards. Interviewees at all levels had experience or observed behaviours that represented the four overarching leadership domains as described by FMLM Leadership standards for healthcare professionals. There was awareness and experience at all levels up to and including systems leadership despite the individuals position. These interviews underline the importance of good leadership at times of crisis. Some interviewees displayed leadership behaviours that exceeded those that would normally be expected for their clinical position. Specific challenges relating to senior leaders included maintaining visibility and managing anxieties. Nearly all of the leaders interviewed said they were drawing on prior experience. Others interviewees reflected on the importance of having trust in your team and taking a collaborative approach to leading delivery of projects. Another consistent challenge across the interviews was the change to working virtually and how this can change the team dynamics.