Background Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence.Methods ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362.
This article examines definitions, rationales, and calculations associated with higher education performance measures: persistence, retention rate, attrition rate, drop-out rate, and graduation rate. Strengths and limitations of these measures are scrutinized relative to online master's programs. Outcomes of a sample of students (N = 96) enrolled in multi-university online master's programs sponsored by Great Plains IDEA are tracked over six years. The students' unique characteristics and degree completion patterns suggest modifying performance metrics and increasing the tracking time. The study empirically proves that existing graduation and retention metrics used to compare online to face-to-face programs underreport successful outcomes for online master's students by at least one-third. Such comparisons should be made with caution, using consistent terminology and recognizing the limitations of existing metrics. Standard methods for measuring student persistence in master's degree programs should be universally established at the policy level.
Introduction Visually impaired students (that is, those who are blind or have low vision) have difficulty accessing curricular material in mathematical textbooks because many mathematics texts have visual images that contain important content information that are not transcribed or described in digital versions of the texts. However, little is known about the extent to which this issue exists within texts and what sort of information is contained in visual material in mathematics texts. This article describes a process undertaken to classify images in a selection of math textbooks that are currently being used in grades 5,8, and 11. Methods Representative textbooks were chosen that aligned with Common Core Standards. An exhaustive and mutually exclusive set of image categories was developed, researchers became reliable on coding procedures, and then all images in the representative texts were coded. Results The most common images involved student interest, motivation, and organization, but contained little or no math content. The second most common area of image categories often contained large amounts of math content but were difficult to describe succinctly or might have been described without including important mathematical information. This grouping included tables, line graphs, and images specifically related to a single question. The final group of less frequently appearing images included ray or line diagrams, number lines, pie charts, bar graphs, and maps. Discussion To improve access to visual math content, the focus should be on images that appear frequently and contain math content such as tables, scatter or line graphs, shapes, equations, and images specifically related to a single question. Less common image categories such as models, line diagrams, pictures of calculator keys, and number lines lend themselves easily to description. Implications for practitioners Optimization of limited instructional time would be accomplished by having teachers focus on students’ understanding of the most common types of images, such as tables and line graphs.
For many years, increasing caseloads for vision professionals have caused concerns about the impact on educational services. Average caseload sizes in the literature have remained fairly consistent across decades, with 19.5 students per professional in the 1980s (Pelton, 1986), 18 students in the 1990s (Griffin-Shirley, McGregor, and Jacobson, 1999), and 22 students in the 2000s (Griffin-Shirley et al., 2004). In contrast, the optimal caseload for vision professionals has been approximated as eight students (Mason & Davidson, 2000). Discrepancy between ideal and actual caseload sizes may partly be due to how service levels are determined. Lack of consistency in determining the appropriate level of service for a given child can lead to inflated caseload sizes and ineffective services.Goal 4 of the National Agenda for the Education of Children and Youths with Visual Impairments, Including Those with Multiple Disabilities noted that caseloads are based on the assessed needs of students (American Foundation for the Blind, 2003). An example of such a rubric for determining service delivery levels was developed by the Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority (see, for example, MacCuspie, 1998). In 1995, the Michigan Department of Education's Low Incidence Outreach office began adapting a model developed in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, that used student and environmental characteristics to determine service delivery levels. The task force that was created to adapt the model developed a set of "in house" severity rating scales to determine optimal vision service levels. The scales were revised in 2008 based on feedback from surveys of Michigan vision professionals and with input from professionals across the United States. The scales are now popular enough that national surveys of how the scales are being used seemed appropriate. Interest in the scales is shown by links to them on such vision-related websites as that of the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Ͻwww.TSBVI.eduϾ; the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired, Ͻwww. AERBVI.orgϾ; Maryland-based orientation and mobility (O&M) specialist Dona Sauerburger, Ͻwww.sauerburger.orgϾ; and Paths to Literacy for Students Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired, Ͻwww.pathstoliteracy. orgϾ. The scales are available online at the Low Incidence Outreach website: Ͻhttp:// mde-lio.cenmi.org/Services/StudentsWitha VisualImpairment/MichiganSeverityRating Scales.aspxϾ.The current study reports on the responses from a cross section of O&M instructors and teachers of children with visual impairments to demonstrate how the scales are perceived and being used by professionals. The study presented here also reflects an initial attempt at determining content validity of the scales. The four severity rating scales assessed were the Orientation and Mobility Severity Rating Scale (OMSRS); the Orientation and Mobility Severity Rating Scale Plus (OMSRSϩ), which is for use with children with multiple disabilities; the Vision Services ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.