Keele University

About: Keele University is a education organization based out in Newcastle-under-Lyme, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Stars. The organization has 11318 authors who have published 26323 publications receiving 894671 citations. The organization is also known as: Keele University.

Spasticity: Clinical perceptions, neurological realities and meaningful measurement

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to review briefly our understanding of the phenomenon of spasticity based in current evidence.

Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers

Abstract: Laptops are commonplace in university classrooms. In light of cognitive psychology theory on costs associated with multitasking, we examined the effects of in-class laptop use on student learning in a simulated classroom. We found that participants who multitasked on a laptop during a lecture scored lower on a test compared to those who did not multitask, and participants who were in direct view of a multitasking peer scored lower on a test compared to those who were not. The results demonstrate that multitasking on a laptop poses a significant distraction to both users and fellow students and can be detrimental to comprehension of lecture content.

The National Service Framework for Older People: England's approach to ending age discrimination in services and therapeutics.

Abstract: In 1997, the new Labour Government in the UK embarked on an ambitious programme of reform. One of the key changes has been the publication of a series of National Service Frameworks. The National Service Framework for Older People (NSFOP) sets out a 10-year programme that has as its principal standard rooting out age discrimination. Together with its companion documents, a series of robust milestones and standards are set out that have to be met. Although generally welcomed by the profession, the NSFOP has been criticised by some because it mandates the initiation of new ‘intermediate care’ services that may be seen as denying older people the opportunity for admission to mainstream hospital care. Monitoring tools covering both procedures and prescribing have been developed. The government-produced frameworks mirror guidelines produced by the profession and include a number of prescribing recommendations, e.g. the use of antihypertensives and aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) in the prevention of stroke, and the use of calcium, vitamin D and bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis. In tackling age discrimination, both direct and indirect barriers to effective prescribing need to be considered. The evidence base on the effectiveness of medication in older people is more limited due to the previous systematic exclusion of older people from clinical trials. The consequent lack of evidence of efficacy, coupled with perhaps a natural reluctance to prescribe potentially toxic medication, may lead to underprescribing. Other indirect causes of age discrimination may include difficulties for older people attending hospitals for drug monitoring, and the difficulties of translating the results of trials into meaningful endpoints that older patients can understand and thus make valid decisions about whether they wish to take the particular drug or not. At the same time as the NSFOP argues against age discrimination, other government policies may operate in a contradictory manner. Examples include the trend to make drugs available over the counter in pharmacies and for which the patient has to pay rather than receive them free, the restriction of some prescription-only drugs from the health service, and the need for referral to specialist services for some drugs, e.g. sildefanil, which older people may be reluctant to access. Successfully combating age discrimination is likely to require a regulatory framework, continued monitoring, tackling indirect forms of discrimination, as well as embedding antidiscrimination policies in all facets of health education.

Political opportunity structures and right‐wing extremist party success

Abstract: West European right-wing extremist parties have received a great deal of attention over the past two decades due to their electoral success. What has received less coverage, however, is the fact that these parties have not enjoyed a consistent level of electoral support across Western Europe during this period. This article puts forward an explanation of the variation in the right-wing extremist party vote across Western Europe that incorporates a wider range of factors than have been considered previously. It begins by examining the impact of socio-demographic variables on the right-wing extremist party vote. Then, it turns its attention to a whole host of structural factors that may potentially affect the extreme right party vote, including institutional, party-system and conjunctural variables. The article concludes with an assessment of which variables have the most power in explaining the uneven electoral success of right-wing extremist parties across Western Europe. The findings go some way towards challenging the conventional wisdom as to how the advance of the parties of the extreme right may be halted.