Anxiety Among an Australian Sample of Young Girls Adopted From China
In: Adoption quarterly: innovations in community and clinical practice, theory, and research, Band 14, Heft 3, S. 161-180
ISSN: 1544-452X
8 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Adoption quarterly: innovations in community and clinical practice, theory, and research, Band 14, Heft 3, S. 161-180
ISSN: 1544-452X
In: Government information quarterly: an international journal of policies, resources, services and practices, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 81-84
ISSN: 0740-624X
In: Journal of relationships research, Band 2, Heft 1, S. 1-9
ISSN: 1838-0956
AbstractThis study explored the experiences of fathers during early parenthood, with a particular focus on relationships with their partners, their children and the impact of infertility treatment. Eight fathers who had a child conceived through in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) participated in in-depth interviews and responses were analysed using Modified Analytic Induction. Findings indicated that in the first year of their child's life fathers deferred primary caretaking to their partners, as they perceived them as more able to meet the needs of the child at that developmental stage. However, as the child grew older, and fathers could interact more they came to view themselves as the friend or playmate of the child, a role they experienced as highly rewarding. Reasons that may have accounted for deferring the primary caretaker role in the first year included low self-efficacy beliefs about their ability to care for a newborn infant, perceived partner criticism of their parenting abilities, and the complementary parenting roles adopted in their family. Findings also revealed that fathers experienced relationship concerns due to increased parenting responsibilities limiting the time and energy they had to engage in companionate activities with their partners. Fathers in this research explicitly reported that the difficulties associated with conception and IVF treatment had no impact on early parenthood.
Listening to speech in noise is effortful, particularly for people with hearing impairment. While it is known that effort is related to a complex interplay between bottom-up and top-down processes, the cognitive and neurophysiological mechanisms contributing to effortful listening remain unknown. Therefore, a reliable physiological measure to assess effort remains elusive. This study aimed to determine whether pupil dilation and alpha power change, two physiological measures suggested to index listening effort, assess similar processes. Listening effort was manipulated by parametrically varying spectral resolution (16- and 6-channel noise vocoding) and speech reception thresholds (SRT; 50% and 80%) while 19 young, normal-hearing adults performed a speech recognition task in noise. Results of off-line sentence scoring showed discrepancies between the target SRTs and the true performance obtained during the speech recognition task. For example, in the SRT80% condition, participants scored an average of 64.7%. Participants true performance levels were therefore used for subsequent statistical modelling. Results showed that both measures appeared to be sensitive to changes in spectral resolution (channel vocoding), while pupil dilation only was also significantly related to their true performance levels (%) and task accuracy (i.e., whether the response was correctly or partially recalled). The two measures were not correlated, suggesting they each may reflect different cognitive processes involved in listening effort. This combination of findings contributes to a growing body of research aiming to develop an objective measure of listening effort. ; Funding Agencies|Australian Hearing Hub, an initiative of Macquarie University; Australian Government; Business Cooperative Research Centres Programme of the Australian Government
BASE
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 97, Heft 10, S. 699-710
ISSN: 1564-0604
Abstract: Background: The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency. Methods: We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe. Results: From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75–224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074). Conclusion: We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries.
BASE