In: Journal of sport and social issues: the official journal of Northeastern University's Center for the Study of Sport in Society, Band 47, Heft 2, S. 126-157
This article investigates the experiences of Black males who play sports and aspire to achieve athletic and non-athletic careers. In-depth interviews and observations highlight the experiences, beliefs, and aspirations of a group of Black males who play sports in their Chicago neighborhoods and schools. Critical Race Theory, Yosso's communities of cultural wealth, and the athletic/academic paradox frame this study. The research study examines how the experiences of Black male students who play high school football and basketball challenge and conform to the expectations of others in consideration of how they think about academic, educational, and sociocultural goals, interests, and beliefs in U.S. schools and communities. The article concludes with implications for education, policy, and educational outcomes, specifically for Black male students who play sports.
Road infrastructure is crucial to farmers' productivity, transportation, marketing of food produce and food security. Therefore, this study examined the effects of road infrastructure to plantain production among farmers in Ekiti South Local Government Area. Multistage sampling procedure was used to select 103 respondents for the study; data were collected using structured interview schedule. Data on respondents' personal characteristics, perceived contribution of road infrastructure to plantain enterprise and constraints to plantain production and marketing were analysed with descriptive statistics, Chisquare and Pearson Product Moment Correlation statistical tools. Majority (75.7%) of the respondents were males, large percent (70.8%) were ageing (50-70years), 71.8% cultivated 4-6 acres with a majority (79.6%) having more than 20years of farming and marketing experience. Almost half (47.6%) of the respondents earned between #31,000-#40,000 monthly and majority (78.6%) indicated that their farms to the market were far and not motorable. About (65%) indicated that poor road infrastructure had negative implication on production and marketing of plantain. Educational level (χ2=14.13), farm size (χ2=0.932), monthly income (χ2=7.938), farming experience (χ2=11.831), marketing experience (χ2=10.609), farmers age (r = -0.375) and constraints to production and marketing (r = 0.261) were significantly related to effects of road infrastructure on plantain production. Hence, it is recommended that government should ensure quality rural feeder roads linking urban areas for sustainable farming practices, reduction of postharvest losses and efficient plantain marketing.
In this paper the impacts of biodiesel feedstock production in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa is assessed through the application of a Partial Equilibrium Model to the Eastern Cape Social Accounting Matrix, using canola production in the Province as an 'external shock'. Six economic indicators were estimated. The results show that investment in biodiesel production in the Eastern Cape will generate, in 2007 terms, an additional GDP of R18.1 million and 410 employment opportunities per annum, R24.3 million per annum over an assumed lifetime of 20 years in capital formation, R2.1 million additional income generated in low income households, increase in government revenue, and a positive balance of payment. These indicators imply that, given the parameters that are accounted for in a Partial Equilibrium Model, every Rand invested in canola projects in the Eastern Cape will, overall, be of socio-economic advantage to the Province. It is envisaged that further applications of such models may lead to a better understanding of the implications of biofuels in the South African economy, and thereby inform decision- and policy-making in terms of the sustainability of biofuels production systems in general.
Safe childbirth is crucial to farmers' productivity and food security as farm labour plays a pivotal role for farming in most rural communities. Analysing gender roles on maternal health care (MHC) decision is of major concern in ensuring safe motherhood and poverty reduction in rural homes. Therefore, this study analysed gender concerns of MHC among rural farmers. Multistage sampling procedure was used to select 124 respondents for the study; data were collected using structured interview schedule, Focus Group Discussion, descriptive and inferential statistics. Respondents (χ = 29 years) were in their youthful and procreating stage with average family size of 4 members. Husbands (64.5%) mainly decided the MHC utilised for childbirth. More females (54.8%) belonged to cooperative society. About (56.5%) of males and females (53.2%), respectively were crop producers having average monthly earning of #19,000. Most predicating factors to MHC decision were family tradition ( χ= 2.21) and social capital (χ = 2.18). Males (61.3%) had high level of MHC decision unlike the females (54.8%) with low contribution to MHC decision. Monthly income (r=0.521), responsibility for decision making (r=0.668) were significantly related to respondents decision on MHC. There was a significant difference in the level of decision making between males and females (t=5.28, df =31). Hence, it is recommended that non-governmental organisation should collaborate with the government to aggressively sensitise rural communities on safe motherhood and men should sufficiently empower women to contribute and participate actively in decisions on maternal health care in rural families for sustainable food production and supply.
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.