The kindergarten program, Tools of the Mind (Tools), has been shown to improve executive functions (as assessed by laboratory measures) and academic performance. The objective here was to see if Tools can improve executive functions in the real world (in the classroom), academic outcomes not previously investigated, reduce bullying and peer ostracism, and increase teachers’ and students’ joy in being in the classroom. This first randomized controlled trial of Tools in Canada included 351 kindergarten children (mean age 5.2 years at entry; 51% female) in 18 public schools. Stratified randomization resulted in teachers and students in both groups being closely matched. Teachers in both groups received the same number of training hours and same funds for new materials. Outcome measures were pre and post standardized academic skill assessments and teacher online survey responses. This study replicated that Tools improves reading and shows for the first time that it improves writing (far exceeding levels the school districts had seen before), self-control and attention-regulation in the real world (e.g., time on task without supervision), reduces teacher burnout and children being ostracized or excluded, and increases the joy students and teachers experience in school. By Spring, Tools teachers were still enthusiastic about teaching; control teachers were exhausted. These results were not only better than the control group but also better than Tools teachers experienced the year before Tools. Thus, children in a kindergarten curriculum that emphasized play, improving self-regulation, working together and helping one another, and hands-on learning performed better academically, showed less bullying and peer ostracism and more kindness and helping behavior than students in more traditional classes, and teacher enthusiasm for teaching soared. Tools reduced initial disparities separating children, schools, and teachers.

Background Breast cancer patients requiring mastectomy do not consistently receive information about post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) surgery from the treatment team. Patients have varying levels of self-efficacy, defined as one's confidence in their ability to gather information and make health-related decisions. The present preliminary study was designed to evaluate the relationship between self-efficacy and access to PMBR information. Methods A qualitative interview study was conducted on a convenience sample of 10 breast cancer patients considering or having already undergone PMBR and six key health care provider informants. The modified six-item Stanford Self-Efficacy Scale for managing chronic disease was administered. Results Patient self-efficacy scores ranged from 5 to 9.3 (out of 10). Two main access to information themes were identified from the patient qualitative data: theme A – difficulty initiating the PMBR discussion; and theme B – perceived lack of access to PMBR information with the sub-themes of timing, modality, quantity and content of resources. All respondents expressed their concern over the absence of a standardized process for initiating the dialogue of PMBR. Patients also reported that credible and easily accessible information was not routinely available and expressed a desire to hear about their PMBR options early in the decision-making process. Conclusions Health care providers may need to assume more responsibility in standardizing information dissemination on PMBR. This information should be distributed early in the consultation process, the content should be complete, and there may be a role for individualizing the delivery of information based on a patient's level of self-efficacy.

No abstract

We received strong positive feedback on the CBL experience, with no score less than 3.8 on a 5-point scale (where 5 indicated strongly agree with a positively phrased question). Thematic data analysis revealed several key themes, including positive comments for a specialist tutor, the use of visual media, and the "mini-cases" style of CBL, while challenges included a lack of motivation. Group assignments scored high, ranging from 88.9% to 99.3%. Tracked pre- and post-CBL knowledge test scores showed a 32% (from 42% to 74%) increase in scores after the CBL experience. Conclusion and Relevance: CBL in dermatology medical education was well received by students and tutors, with high scores in content evaluation and knowledge assessment. Future studies should examine optimal delivery methods and its long-term effects on knowledge retention.

No abstract