Edinburgh Napier University

About: Edinburgh Napier University is a education organization based out in Edinburgh, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 2665 authors who have published 6859 publications receiving 175272 citations.

A comparison of nanoparticle and fine particle uptake by Daphnia magna.

Abstract: The use of nanoparticles in various applications is steadily on the rise, with use in a range of applications, including printer toner, sunscreen, medical imaging, and enhanced drug delivery. While research on human effects via, for example, inhalation is relatively well developed, the environmental assessment of nanoparticles is in its infancy. In the present study, we assessed the uptake and quantitative accumulation, as well as the depuration, of a model nanoparticle, a 20-nm fluorescent carboxylated polystyrene bead, in the aquatic invertebrate Daphnia magna and compared it to a larger, 1,000-nm particle. Using confocal microscopy, rapid accumulation in the gastrointestinal tract was observed within an hour of exposure to both particle sizes in both adults and neonates. Fluorescence could also be observed in the oil storage droplets, suggesting that both particle sizes have crossed the gut's epithelial barrier. Quantification of fluorescence of both sizes of particles showed that although uptake of the 20-nm particles was lower in terms of mass it was equal to or greater than 1000-nm particle uptake when expressed as surface area or particle number. Depuration was relatively rapid for the 1000-nm beads, decreasing by more than 90% over 4 h. In contrast, depuration of the 20-nm beads was less extensive, reaching 40% over 4 h. Transmission electron microscopy confirmed uptake of 1,000-nm beads, but uptake of 20-nm beads was inconclusive since similar-sized inclusions could be observed in control treatments.

Instruments to measure patient experience of health care quality in hospitals: a systematic review protocol

Abstract: Improving and sustaining the quality of hospital care is an international challenge. Patient experience data can be used to target improvement and research. However, the use of patient experience data has been hindered by confusion over multiple instruments (questionnaires) with unknown psychometric testing and utility. We conducted a systematic review and utility critique of questionnaires to measure patient experience of healthcare quality in hospitals. Databases (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Psychological Information (PsychINFO) and Web of Knowledge until end of November 2013) and grey literature were scrutinised. Inclusion criteria were applied to all records with a 10 % sample independently checked. Critique included (1) application of COSMIN checklists to assess the quality of each psychometric study, (2) critique of psychometric results of each study using Terwee et al. criteria and (3) development and critique of additional aspects of utility for each instrument. Two independent reviewers completed each critique. Synthesis included combining findings in a utility matrix. We obtained 1157 records. Of these, 26 papers measuring patient experience of hospital quality of care were identified examining 11 international instruments. We found evidence of extensive theoretical/development work. The quality of methods and results was variable but mostly of a high standard. Additional aspects of utility found that (1) cost efficiency was mostly poor, due to the resource necessary to obtain reliable samples; (2) acceptability of most instruments was good and (3) educational impact was variable, with evidence on the ease of use, for approximately half of the questionnaires. Selecting the right patient experience instrument depends on a balanced consideration of aspects of utility, aided by the matrix. Data required for high stakes purposes requires a high degree of reliability and validity, while those used for quality improvement may tolerate lower levels of reliability in favour of other aspects of utility (educational impact, cost and acceptability). PROSPERO CRD42013006754

Limits of teacher delivered sex education: interim behavioural outcomes from randomised trial

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a theoretically based sex education programme for adolescents (SHARE) delivered by teachers reduced unsafe sexual intercourse compared with current practice. DESIGN: Cluster randomised trial with follow up two years after baseline (six months after intervention). A process evaluation investigated the delivery of sex education and broader features of each school. SETTING: Twenty five secondary schools in east Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: 8430 pupils aged 13-15 years; 7616 completed the baseline questionnaire and 5854 completed the two year follow up questionnaire. INTERVENTION: SHARE programme (intervention group) versus existing sex education (control programme). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self reported exposure to sexually transmitted disease, use of condoms and contraceptives at first and most recent sexual intercourse, and unwanted pregnancies. RESULTS: When the intervention group was compared with the conventional sex education group in an intention to treat analysis there were no differences in sexual activity or sexual risk taking by the age of 16 years. However, those in the intervention group reported less regret of first sexual intercourse with most recent partner (young men 9.9% difference, 95% confidence interval -18.7 to -1.0; young women 7.7% difference, -16.6 to 1.2). Pupils evaluated the intervention programme more positively, and their knowledge of sexual health improved. Lack of behavioural effect could not be linked to differential quality of delivery of intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional sex education this specially designed intervention did not reduce sexual risk taking in adolescents.

Effect of aspirin and NSAIDs on risk and survival from colorectal cancer

Abstract: Background Previous studies have shown that aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) lower colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. However, the lowest effective NSAID dose, treatment duration, and effects on survival are not defined. In a large population-based caseecontrol study, we have explored the relationship between NSAID dose and duration, CRC risk and overall CRC-specific survival. Methods The relationship between NSAID use and CRC risk was examined in 2279 cases and 2907 controls. Subjects completed food-frequency and lifestyle questionnaires. NSAID categories were low-dose aspirin (75 mg), non-aspirin NSAIDs (NA-NSAIDs) and any NSAID. Users were defined as taking >4 tablets/week for >1 month. ORs were calculated by logistic regression models and adjusted for potential confounding factors. Effect of NSAID use on all-cause and CRCspecific mortality was estimated using Logrank tests and Cox’s hazard models. Results In all, 354 cases (15.5%) were taking low-dose aspirin compared to 526 controls (18.1%). Low-dose aspirin use was associated with decreased CRC risk (OR 0.78 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92, p¼0.004), evident after 1 year and increasing with duration of use (ptrend¼0.004). NANSAID and any NSAID use were also inversely associated with CRC. There was no demonstrable effect of NSAIDS on all-cause (HR 1.11, p¼0.22, 0.94e1.33) or CRC-specific survival (HR 1.01, p¼0.93, 0.83e1.23). Conclusion This is the first study to demonstrate a protective effect against CRC associated with the lowest dose of aspirin (75 mg per day) after only 5 years use in the general population. NSAID use prior to CRC diagnosis does not influence survival from the disease.