The DOSE Index is a simple, valid tool for assessing the severity of COPD. The index is related to a range of clinically important outcomes such as health care consumption and predicts future events.

Coad J, et al. Evidence-based intervention for preschool children with primary speech and language impairments: Child Talkan exploratory mixed-methods study. Programme Grants Appl Res 2015;3(5). Programme Grants for Applied ResearchISSN 2050-4322 (Print) ISSN 2050-4330 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full PGfAR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/pgfar. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Programme Grants for Applied Research journalReports are published in Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the PGfAR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. Programme Grants for Applied Research programmeThe Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 2006 to produce independent research findings that will have practical application for the benefit of patients and the NHS in the relatively near future. The Programme is managed by the NIHR Central Commissioning Facility (CCF) with strategic input from the Programme Director.The programme is a national response mode funding scheme that aims to provide evidence to improve health outcomes in England through promotion of health, prevention of ill health, and optimal disease management (including safety and quality), with particular emphasis on conditions causing significant disease burden.For more information about the PGfAR programme please visit the website: http://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding/programme-grants-forapplied-research.htm This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by PGfAR as project number RP-PG-0109-10073. The contractual start date was in January 2011. The final report began editorial review in April 2014 and was accepted for publication in October 2014. As the funder, the PGfAR programme agreed the research questions and study designs in advance with the investigators. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The PGfAR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, CCF, NETSCC, PGfAR or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotation...

This study shows that the LINQ is a practical tool for detecting areas where patients need education and is sensitive to change after PR. The quality of the education component of PR can be assessed using the LINQ, which could be considered as a routinely collected outcome measure in PR. The LINQ may also be a useful tool for general practitioners to assess their patients' educational needs.

The evidence for intervention for preschool children with SSD is focused on seven out of 11 subcategories of interventions. Although all the studies included in the review were good quality as defined by quality appraisal checklists, they mostly represented lower-graded evidence. Higher-graded studies are needed to understand clearly the strength of evidence for different interventions.

Objectives: To assess whether NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP) mammogram readers could effectively interpret first post-contrast acquisition subtracted (FAST) MRI, for intended use in screening for breast cancer. Methods: Eight NHSBSP mammogram readers from a single centre (four who also read breast MRI (Group 1) and four who do not (Group 2)) were given structured FAST MRI reader training (median 4 h: 32 min). They then prospectively interpreted 125 FAST MRIs (250 breasts: 194 normal and 56 cancer) comprising a consecutive series of screening MRIs enriched with additional cancer cases from 2015, providing 2000 interpretations. Readers were blinded to other readers’ opinions and to clinical information. Categorisation followed the NHSBSP MRI reporting categorisation, with categories 4 and 5 considered indicative of cancer. Diagnostic accuracy (reference standard: histology or 2 years’ follow-up) and agreement between readers were determined. Results: The accuracy achieved by Group 2 (847/1000 (85%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 82–87%)) was 5% less than that of Group 1 (898/1000 (90%; 95% CI 88–92)). Good inter-reader agreement was seen between both Group 1 readers (κ = 0.66; 95% CI 0.61–0.71) and Group 2 readers (κ = 0.63; 95% CI 0.58–0.68). The median time taken to interpret each FAST MRI was Group 1: 34 s (range 3–351) and Group 2: 77 s (range 11–321). Conclusion: Brief structured training enabled multiprofessional mammogram readers to achieve similar accuracy at FAST MRI interpretation to consultant radiologists experienced at breast MRI interpretation. Advances in knowledge: FAST MRI could be feasible from a training-the-workforce perspective for screening within NHSBSP.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT• Safe prescribing is a core competency in undergraduate medical education.• A large proportion of undergraduate medical students and recently graduated doctors in the UK are not confident in their ability to prescribe effectively and safely.• Errors are common in all healthcare settings and prescribing errors are the most common type. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS• This study produced twelve valid and statistically reliable assessments of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) knowledge and prescribing skills in areas that pose a high risk to patient safety. • The findings show that a large proportion of foundation year 1 (FY1) doctors fail to demonstrate the level of CPT knowledge and prescribing ability judged by a subject matter expert (SME) panel to be required at this stage of their careers.• We suggest strategies and areas where teaching can be focused to improve the safety and effectiveness of prescribing by FY1 doctors. AIMSRecent studies suggest a worryingly high proportion of final year medical students and new doctors feel unprepared for effective and safe prescribing. Little research has been undertaken on UK junior doctors to see if these perceptions translate into unsafe prescribing practice. We aimed to measure the performance of foundation year 1 (FY1) doctors in applying clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CPT) knowledge and prescribing skills using standardized clinical cases. METHODSA subject matter expert (SME) panel constructed a blueprint, and from these, twelve assessments focusing on areas posing high risk to patient safety and deemed as essential for FY1 doctors to know were chosen. Assessments comprised six extended matching questions (EMQs) and six written unobserved structured clinical examinations (WUSCEs) covering seven CPT domains. Two of each assessment types were administered over three time points to 128 FY1 doctors. RESULTSThe twelve assessments were valid and statistically reliable. Across seven CPT areas tested 51-75% of FY1 doctors failed EMQs and 27-70% failed WUSCEs. The WUSCEs showed three performance trends; 30% of FY1 doctors consistently performing poorly, 50% performing around the passing score, and 20% performing consistently well. Categorical rating of the WUSCEs revealed 5% (8/161) of scripts contained errors deemed as potentially lethal. CONCLUSIONSThis study showed that a large proportion of FY1 doctors failed to demonstrate the level of CPT knowledge and prescribing ability required at this stage of their careers. We identified areas of performance weakness that posed high risk to patient safety and suggested ways to improve the prescribing by FY1 doctors.

Background Collaboration between parents and speech and language therapists (SLTs) is seen as a key element in family‐centred models. Collaboration can have positive impacts on parental and children's outcomes. However, collaborative practice has not been well described and researched in speech and language therapy for children and may not be easy to achieve. It is important that we gain a deeper understanding of collaborative practice with parents, how it can be achieved and how it can impact on outcomes. This understanding could support practitioners in daily practice with regard to achieving collaborative practice with parents in different contexts. Aims To set a research agenda on collaborative practice between parents and SLTs in order to generate evidence regarding what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Methods & Procedures A realist evaluation approach was used to make explicit what collaborative practice with parents entails. The steps suggested by the RAMESES II project were used to draft a preliminary programme theory about collaborative practice between parents and SLTs. This process generates explicit hypotheses which form a potential research agenda. Discussion & Conclusions A preliminary programme theory of collaborative practice with parents was drafted using a realist approach. Potential contextual factors (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O) were presented which could be configured into causal mechanisms to help explain what works for whom in what circumstances. CMO configurations were drafted, based on the relevant literature, which serve as exemplars to illustrate how this methodology could be used. In order to debate, test and expand our hypothesized programme theory for collaborative practice with parents, further testing against a broader literature is required alongside research to explore the functionality of the configurations across contexts. This paper highlights the importance of further research on collaborative practice with parents and the potential value of realist evaluation methodology. What this paper adds Current policy in education, health and social care advocates for family‐centred care and collaborative practice with parents. Thereby, collaborative practice is the preferred practice for SLTs and parents. In this paper, we explore collaborative practice and use a realist evaluation approach to achieve the aim of setting a research agenda in this area. Researchers use realist evaluation, a methodology originally developed by Pawson and Tilley in the 1990s, to explore the causal link between interventions and outcomes, summarized as what works, how, for whom, in what circumstances and to what extent. Realist evaluation provides a framework to explore configurations between contexts (C), mechanisms (M) and outcomes (O). We used this methodology to take a first step at making expli...

Suboptimal sleep causes cognitive decline and probably accelerates Alzheimer's Disease (AD) progression. Several sleep interventions have been tested in established AD dementia cases. However early intervention is needed in the course of AD at Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or mild dementia stages to help prevent decline and maintain good quality of life. This systematic review aims to summarize evidence on sleep interventions in MCI and mild AD dementia. Seven databases were systematically searched for interventional studies where ≥ 75% of participants met diagnostic criteria for MCI/mild AD dementia, with a control group and validated sleep outcome measures. Studies with a majority of participants diagnosed with Moderate to Severe AD were excluded. After removal of duplicates, 22,133 references were returned in two separate searches (August 2019 and September 2020). 325 full papers were reviewed with 18 retained. Included papers reported 16 separate studies, total sample (n = 1,056), mean age 73.5 years. 13 interventions were represented: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy – Insomnia (CBT‐I), A Multi‐Component Group Based Therapy, A Structured Limbs Exercise Programme, Aromatherapy, Phase Locked Loop Acoustic Stimulation, Transcranial Stimulation, Suvorexant, Melatonin, Donepezil, Galantamine, Rivastigmine, Tetrahydroaminoacridine and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP). Psychotherapeutic approaches utilising adapted CBT‐I and a Structured Limbs Exercise Programme each achieved statistically significant improvements in the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index with one study reporting co‐existent improved actigraphy variables. Suvorexant significantly increased Total Sleep Time and Sleep Efficiency whilst reducing Wake After Sleep Onset time. Transcranial Stimulation enhanced cortical slow oscillations and spindle power during daytime naps. Melatonin significantly reduced sleep latency in two small studies and sleep to wakefulness transitions in a small sample. CPAP demonstrated efficacy in participants with Obstructive Sleep Apnoea. Evidence to support other interventions was limited. Whilst new evidence is emerging, there remains a paucity of evidence for sleep interventions in MCI and mild AD highlighting a pressing need for high quality experimental studies exploring alternative sleep interventions.