Suchergebnisse

Our research team documented the experiences of Russian Mennonite immigrants who settled on Pelee Island in the province of Ontario, Canada, between 1925 and 1950. We collected more than 200 historic photographs from over 60 former islanders or their families; interviewed 8 former residents of the Pelee Mennonite community; and synthesized selected photographs and stories into a virtual museum exhibit. Our experience of asking participants to respond to photographs of the Pelee Mennonite community prompted the provisional framework described in this article. This framework offers 8 possibilities for categorizing the stories that emerge when researchers bring photographs (or other visuals) into the inquiry. This article demonstrates the framework using stories from our Pelee Mennonite inquiry. The framework is a starting point for other researchers to use or further develop as the attention given to the visual in narrative inquiry continues to grow.

In meiner narrativen Studie befasse ich mich mit zwei von der Kritik gefeierten, in Kanada lebenden mennonitischen Autorinnen. Hierzu habe ich u.a. Interviews mit den Autorinnen geführt und deren Arbeiten mit narrativen Methoden ausgewertet. Zusätzlich habe ich eine weniger konventionelle Methode verwandt, nämlich das Schreiben von Gedichten: Durch diese Gedichte über meinen eigenen Hintergrund sowohl in mennonitischen Gemeinden als auch in der Pfingstbewegung (mennocostal) habe ich ein neues Verständnis meiner selbst, meiner zurückliegenden Erfahrungen und meiner Schreibpraktiken gewonnen, und es wurde mir auf diese Weise möglich, Erfahrungen und Schreibpraxen der Autorinnen, mit deren Werk ich mich befasste, besser zu verstehen. Zusammengefasst will ich etwas darüber wissen, wie persönliche Erzählungen zu Forschung – zu einem besseren Verständnis der Schreibenden und der Themen, mit denen diese sich beschäftigen – beitragen (können). Indem ich zu verstehen versuche, wie Schreiben für das Forschen genutzt werden kann, praktiziere ich Schreiben als Forschung. In dem Beitrag selbst präsentiere ich einige Gedichte in Audiodateien (http://natashagwiebe.googlepages.com/poeticperformances) und gebe Beispiele, die zeigen sollen, wie ich durch das Schreiben von Gedichten zu einer besseren Forschung gekommen bin. Ich beschreibe, wie die Teilnahme an Lesungen und Performances – sowohl als Zuhörerin wie als Akteurin – mir geholfen hat, meine Vorstellungen einer poetic inquiry zu präzisieren und mir neue Einsichten im Hinblick auf meine eigene narrative Studie gewährt hat.

Introduction: This study examined the use of helmets in adults, adolescents, and children in a western Canadian province that has no helmet legislation. Methods: A prospective survey of cyclists in two urban Alberta regions was completed. Cyclist demographics, helmet wearing and helmet use were recorded. Results: Helmets were observed in 2,259 (55%; 99% CI: 52–57) of 4,141 cyclists; however, only 75% (CI 71, 78) were wearing the helmet properly. Patterns of use varied according to age: 75% (CI 71, 78) of children, 29% (CI 23, 34) of adolescents, and 52% (CI 49, 55) of adults wore helmets. Percentages were higher in Calgary than Edmonton (63% vs. 45%; p<0.0001) and females wore helmets more often (64% vs. 50%; p<0.0001). Discussion: These results identify large within- and between-region variation in the use of cycling helmets in Alberta. Injury prevention planners need to use these data to adopt interventions that are focused on age groupings, gender, and place of residence

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a significant health problem in Canada. Understanding the capacity of the Canadian health-care system to deliver kidney care is important to provide optimal care. OBJECTIVE: To compare Canada's position in relation to countries of similar economic standing. DESIGN: Cross-sectional electronic survey. SETTING: Member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that participated in the survey. PARTICIPANTS: Nephrologists, other physicians, policymakers, and other professionals with relevant expertise in kidney care. MEASUREMENTS: Not applicable. METHODS: A survey administered by the International Society of Nephrology assessed the global capacity of kidney care delivery. Data from participating OECD countries were analyzed using descriptive statistics to compare Canada's position. RESULTS: Of the participating countries, most funded kidney care services (non-medication) by government (transplantation: 85%, dialysis: 81%, acute kidney injury (AKI): 77%). Most countries covered medication. Canada reported a public funding model for kidney services and a mix of public and private sources for medication. Nephrologists and nephrology trainee densities were lower in Canada compared to the median (15.33 vs. 25.82 and 1.74 vs. 3.94, respectively). CKD was recognized as a health priority in five countries, but not in Canada. Registries for CKD did not exist in most (24/26) countries. Canada followed a national strategy for noncommunicable diseases, but this was not specific to CKD care, dialysis, or transplantation. LIMITATIONS: Risks of recall bias or social desirability bias are present. Differences in a number of factors could influence discrepancies among countries and were not explored. Responses reflected the existence of practices, policies, and strategies, and may not necessarily describe action or impact. Capacity of care is not equal across all regions and provinces within Canada; however, the findings are reported on a national level ...

An international survey led by the International Society of Nephrology in 2016 assessed the current capacity of kidney care worldwide. To better understand how governance and leadership guide kidney care, items pertinent to government priority, advocacy, and guidelines, among others, were examined. Of the 116 responding countries, 36% (n = 42) reported CKD as a government health care priority, which was associated with having an advocacy group (χ2 = 11.57; P = 0.001). Nearly one-half (42%; 49 of 116) of countries reported an advocacy group for CKD, compared with only 19% (21 of 112) for AKI. Over one-half (59%; 68 of 116) of countries had a noncommunicable disease strategy. Similarly, 44% (48 of 109), 55% (57 of 104), and 47% (47 of 101) of countries had a strategy for nondialysis CKD, chronic dialysis, and kidney transplantation, respectively. Nearly one-half (49%; 57 of 116) reported a strategy for AKI. Most countries (79%; 92 of 116) had access to CKD guidelines and just over one-half (53%; 61 of 116) reported guidelines for AKI. Awareness and adoption of guidelines were low among nonnephrologist physicians. Identified barriers to kidney care were factors related to patients, such as knowledge and attitude (91%; 100 of 110), physicians (84%; 92 of 110), and geography (74%; 81 of 110). Specific to renal replacement therapy, patients and geography were similarly identified as a barrier in 78% (90 of 116) and 71% (82 of 116) of countries, respectively, with the addition of nephrologists (72%; 83 of 116) and the health care system (73%; 85 of 116). These findings inform how kidney care is currently governed globally. Ensuring that guidelines are feasible and distributed appropriately is important to enhancing their adoption, particularly in primary care. Furthermore, increasing advocacy and government priority, especially for AKI, may increase awareness and strategies to better guide kidney care.

An international survey led by the International Society of Nephrology in 2016 assessed the current capacity of kidney care worldwide. To better understand how governance and leadership guide kidney care, items pertinent to government priority, advocacy, and guidelines, among others, were examined. Of the 116 responding countries, 36% (n = 42) reported CKD as a government health care priority, which was associated with having an advocacy group (χ2 = 11.57; P = 0.001). Nearly one-half (42%; 49 of 116) of countries reported an advocacy group for CKD, compared with only 19% (21 of 112) for AKI. Over one-half (59%; 68 of 116) of countries had a noncommunicable disease strategy. Similarly, 44% (48 of 109), 55% (57 of 104), and 47% (47 of 101) of countries had a strategy for nondialysis CKD, chronic dialysis, and kidney transplantation, respectively. Nearly one-half (49%; 57 of 116) reported a strategy for AKI. Most countries (79%; 92 of 116) had access to CKD guidelines and just over one-half (53%; 61 of 116) reported guidelines for AKI. Awareness and adoption of guidelines were low among nonnephrologist physicians. Identified barriers to kidney care were factors related to patients, such as knowledge and attitude (91%; 100 of 110), physicians (84%; 92 of 110), and geography (74%; 81 of 110). Specific to renal replacement therapy, patients and geography were similarly identified as a barrier in 78% (90 of 116) and 71% (82 of 116) of countries, respectively, with the addition of nephrologists (72%; 83 of 116) and the health care system (73%; 85 of 116). These findings inform how kidney care is currently governed globally. Ensuring that guidelines are feasible and distributed appropriately is important to enhancing their adoption, particularly in primary care. Furthermore, increasing advocacy and government priority, especially for AKI, may increase awareness and strategies to better guide kidney care.