Background and Aim: Caregivers in the home environment have an important role in timely detecting and responding to abuse. The aim of this review was to provide insight into both the existing tools for the assessment of and interventions for elder abuse by formal and informal caregivers in the home environment, and to categorize them according to a public health perspective, into primary, secondary, tertiary or quaternary prevention. Methods: We selected the assessment tools and interventions that can be used by caregivers in the home environment included in previous reviews by Gallione et al (2017) and Fearing et al (2017). To identify published studies after these reviews, a search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Database, CINAHL and Web of Science. Results: In total, fifteen assessment tools and twelve interventions were included. The number of assessment tools for elder abuse for use in the home environment is increasing; however, tools must be validated over different cultures and risk groups. In addition, the tools lack attention for the needs of vulnerable older persons such as persons with dementia. Existing interventions for caregivers in the home environment lack evidence for addressing elder abuse and do not address potential adverse effects (quaternary prevention). Conclusion: Assessment tools for elder abuse need further testing for validity and reliability for use by caregivers in the home environment. For interventions, meaningful outcome measures are needed. Important to note is that quaternary prevention requires more attention. This argues for taking into account perspectives of (abused) older persons and caregivers in the development of assessment tools and interventions protocols.
Most violence risk assessment tools have been validated predominantly in males. In this multicenter study, the Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 (HCR-20), Historical, Clinical, Risk Management–20 Version 3 (HCR-20V3), Female Additional Manual (FAM), Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability (START), Structured Assessment of Protective Factors for violence risk (SAPROF), and Psychopathy Checklist–Revised (PCL-R) were coded on file information of 78 female forensic psychiatric patients discharged between 1993 and 2012 with a mean follow-up period of 11.8 years from one of four Dutch forensic psychiatric hospitals. Notable was the high rate of mortality (17.9%) and readmission to psychiatric settings (11.5%) after discharge. Official reconviction data could be retrieved from the Ministry of Justice and Security for 71 women. Twenty-four women (33.8%) were reconvicted after discharge, including 13 for violent offenses (18.3%). Overall, predictive validity was moderate for all types of recidivism, but low for violence. The START Vulnerability scores, HCR-20V3, and FAM showed the highest predictive accuracy for all recidivism. With respect to violent recidivism, only the START Vulnerability scores and the Clinical scale of the HCR-20V3 demonstrated significant predictive accuracy.
MULTIFILE
Living labs are complex multi-stakeholder collaborations that often employ a usercentred and design-driven methodology to foster innovation. Conventional management tools fall short in evaluating them. However, some methods and tools dedicated to living labs' special characteristics and goals have already been developed. Most of them are still in their testing phase. Those tools are not easily accessible and can only be found in extensive research reports, which are difficult to dissect. Therefore, this paper reviews seven evaluation methods and tools specially developed for living labs. Each section of this paper is structured in the following manner: tool’s introduction (1), who uses the tool (2), and how it should be used (3). While the first set of tools, namely “ENoLL 20 Indicators”, “SISCODE Self-assessment”, and “SCIROCCO Exchange Tool” assess a living lab as an organisation and are diving deeper into the organisational activities and the complex context, the second set of methods and tools, “FormIT” and “Living Lab Markers”, evaluate living labs’ methodologies: the process they use to come to innovations. The paper's final section presents “CheRRIes Monitoring and Evaluation Tool” and “TALIA Indicator for Benchmarking Service for Regions”, which assess the regional impact made by living labs. As every living lab is different regarding its maturity (as an organisation and in its methodology) and the scope of impact it wants to make, the most crucial decision when evaluating is to determine the focus of the assessment. This overview allows for a first orientation on worked-out methods and on possible indicators to use. It also concludes that the existing tools are quite managerial in their method and aesthetics and calls for designers and social scientists to develop more playful, engaging and (possibly) learning-oriented tools to evaluate living labs in the future. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/overdiek12345/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/mari-genova-17a727196/?originalSubdomain=nl
The pressure on the European health care system is increasing considerably: more elderly people and patients with chronic diseases in need of (rehabilitation) care, a diminishing work force and health care costs continuing to rise. Several measures to counteract this are proposed, such as reduction of the length of stay in hospitals or rehabilitation centres by improving interprofessional and person-centred collaboration between health and social care professionals. Although there is a lot of attention for interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP), the consortium senses a gap between competence levels of future professionals and the levels needed in rehabilitation practice. Therefore, the transfer from tertiary education to practice concerning IPECP in rehabilitation is the central theme of the project. Regional bonds between higher education institutions and rehabilitation centres will be strengthened in order to align IPECP. On the one hand we deliver a set of basic and advanced modules on functioning according to the WHO’s International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and a set of (assessment) tools on interprofessional skills training. Also, applications of this theory in promising approaches, both in education and in rehabilitation practice, are regionally being piloted and adapted for use in other regions. Field visits by professionals from practice to exchange experiences is included in this work package. We aim to deliver a range of learning materials, from modules on theory to guidelines on how to set up and run a student-run interprofessional learning ward in a rehabilitation centre. All tested outputs will be published on the INPRO-website and made available to be implemented in the core curricula in tertiary education and for lifelong learning in health care practice. This will ultimately contribute to improve functioning and health outcomes and quality of life of patients in rehabilitation centres and beyond.
Democratie, burgerschapsvorming, kritisch denken en Bildung worden vaak samen genoemd, maar een heldere kijk op de onderlinge samenhang ontbreekt nog. In dit onderzoeksproject ontwikkelen we een visie op burgerschapsvorming in het middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, waarin kritisch denken en Bildung worden opgenomen.Doel We willen met het project 'Democratisering van kritisch denken' de volgende doelen bereiken: Het formuleren van een heldere kijk op het samenbrengen van kritisch denken, burgerschap, Bildung en de beroepsvoorbereiding in het mbo; Het creëren van een duurzame, professionele leergemeenschap; De ontwikkeling van kennis om kritisch denken toe te passen in de lespraktijk; Het beschikbaar stellen van leerplannen en meetinstrumenten voor mbo-docenten. Resultaten Dit onderzoek loopt. Na afloop vind je hier een samenvatting van de resultaten. Looptijd 17 september 2018 - 31 januari 2023 Aanpak Dit project is onderdeel van de Werkplaats Onderwijsonderzoek van NRO. Deze werkplaatsen zijn gericht op het instellen van duurzame ‘professionele leergemeenschappen’. Ook in dit project komen verschillende expertises samen: die van mbo-docenten (Nederlands, Burgerschap en vakdocenten), onderzoekers van een practoraat, het Expertisecentrum Kritisch Denken (ECKD), het lectoraat Normatieve professionalisering en twee universiteiten. Studenten en externe partners brengen bovendien praktijkkennis in. Samen werken de partners aan een visie op kritisch denken, burgerschap en bildung en de vertaling hiervan in leerlijnen en assessment-tools. Samen met mbo-docenten kijken we bovendien welke professionalisering er nodig is om kritisch denken toe te passen in het beroepsonderwijs. Lees meer over het project Democratisering van kritisch denken.
Democratie, burgerschapsvorming, kritisch denken en Bildung worden vaak samen genoemd, maar een heldere kijk op de onderlinge samenhang ontbreekt nog. In dit onderzoeksproject ontwikkelen we een visie op burgerschapsvorming in het middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, waarin kritisch denken en Bildung worden opgenomen.Doel We willen met het project 'Democratisering van kritisch denken' de volgende doelen bereiken: Het formuleren van een heldere kijk op het samenbrengen van kritisch denken, burgerschap, Bildung en de beroepsvoorbereiding in het mbo; Het creëren van een duurzame, professionele leergemeenschap; De ontwikkeling van kennis om kritisch denken toe te passen in de lespraktijk; Het beschikbaar stellen van leerplannen en meetinstrumenten voor mbo-docenten. Resultaten Dit onderzoek loopt. Na afloop vind je hier een samenvatting van de resultaten. Looptijd 17 september 2018 - 31 januari 2023 Aanpak Dit project is onderdeel van de Werkplaats Onderwijsonderzoek van NRO. Deze werkplaatsen zijn gericht op het instellen van duurzame ‘professionele leergemeenschappen’. Ook in dit project komen verschillende expertises samen: die van mbo-docenten (Nederlands, Burgerschap en vakdocenten), onderzoekers van een practoraat, het Expertisecentrum Kritisch Denken (ECKD), het lectoraat Normatieve professionalisering en twee universiteiten. Studenten en externe partners brengen bovendien praktijkkennis in. Samen werken de partners aan een visie op kritisch denken, burgerschap en bildung en de vertaling hiervan in leerlijnen en assessment-tools. Samen met mbo-docenten kijken we bovendien welke professionalisering er nodig is om kritisch denken toe te passen in het beroepsonderwijs. Lees meer over het project Democratisering van kritisch denken.
