NELFT celebrated its first quality improvement week – One Small Change – from the 18th- 22nd of September.
The aim of the week was to engage with our staff and service users and ask the question “what one small change would you recommend to improve the care and services at NELFT?”
The All Party Parliamentary Group for Health (APPGH) have published a blog on their website by Alison Tavare, a Bristol GP, about using videos to provide health information.
Conclusions: Although we found lower response rates for Web-based invitations, this solution was more cost-effective (by a factor of 10) and had slightly lower numbers of missing values than questionnaires sent with paper invitations. Analyses of socioeconomic variables showed almost no difference between nonrespondents in both groups, which could imply that the lower response rate in the digital group does not necessarily increase the level of selection bias. Invitations to questionnaire studies via digital mail may be an excellent option for collecting research data in the future.
Shropshire Community Health NHS Trust is progressing with its work to identify a new partner to run its services – but a final decision will not now be reached this month.
Reading and appreciating medical literature is an important aspect of continuing medical education.1 Residents need to learn this important aspect during their training period.2–4 Evidence-based medicine involves updating, critiquing and using the evidence for patient care. It is the explicit use of the best available evidence combined with intuition of the clinician and the intentions of patients in a given clinical situation.5 To practice evidence-based medicine, it is important to analyse the literature critically. Journal club is an effective way to teach critical appraisal skills to residents.6 Use of journal clubs to impart training in evidence-based medicine has been demonstrated by various studies and also been shown to improve clinical care........To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.
There are well over 150 000 health apps available in Europe1—from those designed to improve general wellness to apps that monitor medical conditions, apps for clinicians, and apps that function as medical devices. There have been more than 102 billion down-loads of health apps worldwide yet there is little regulation or guidance available for doctors or patients on quality, safety, or efficacy.
To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.
Commentary. Academic fraud and research misconduct can manifest in many ways. In the olden days, we tend to think of research misconduct as falsifying or fabrication of data, or copying from other publications, including the author's own previous or simultaneous publications. In recent years, academic fraud has taken a more sophisticated turn.
In Postgraduate Medical Journal (PMJ), Qi et al reported on retractions related to faked peer reviews.1 To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.
A faked peer review is a novel cause for retraction. We reviewed the characteristics of papers retracted due to a faked peer review. All papers retracted due to faked peer reviews were identified by searching the Retraction Watch website and by conducting a manual search. All identified papers were confirmed in published journals. To read the full article, log in using your NHS OpenAthens details.