scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Warwick

EducationCoventry, Warwickshire, United Kingdom
About: University of Warwick is a education organization based out in Coventry, Warwickshire, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 26212 authors who have published 77127 publications receiving 2666552 citations. The organization is also known as: Warwick University & The University of Warwick.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is confirmed that exercise-based CR reduces cardiovascular mortality and provides important data showing reductions in hospital admissions and improvements in quality of life.

1,213 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs and can provide a more efficient appraisal.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging. To address this challenge, a critical appraisal tool was developed: the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The aim of this paper is to present the enhancements made to the MMAT. DEVELOPMENT: The MMAT was initially developed in 2006 based on a literature review on systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. It was subject to pilot and interrater reliability testing. A revised version of the MMAT was developed in 2018 based on the results from usefulness testing, a literature review on critical appraisal tools and a modified e-Delphi study with methodological experts to identify core criteria. TOOL DESCRIPTION: The MMAT assesses the quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. It focuses on methodological criteria and includes five core quality criteria for each of the following five categories of study designs: (a) qualitative, (b) randomized controlled, (c) nonrandomized, (d) quantitative descriptive, and (e) mixed methods. CONCLUSION: The MMAT is a unique tool that can be used to appraise the quality of different study designs. Also, by limiting to core criteria, the MMAT can provide a more efficient appraisal.

1,208 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Particle-in-cell (PIC) methods have a long history in the study of laser-plasma interactions as discussed by the authors, and they have been widely used in the literature.
Abstract: Particle-in-cell (PIC) methods have a long history in the study of laser-plasma interactions. Early electromagnetic codes used the Yee staggered grid for field variables combined with a leapfrog EM-field update and the Boris algorithm for particle pushing. The general properties of such schemes are well documented. Modern PIC codes tend to add to these high-order shape functions for particles, Poisson preserving field updates, collisions, ionisation, a hybrid scheme for solid density and high-field QED effects. In addition to these physics packages, the increase in computing power now allows simulations with real mass ratios, full 3D dynamics and multi-speckle interaction. This paper presents a review of the core algorithms used in current laser-plasma specific PIC codes. Also reported are estimates of self-heating rates, convergence of collisional routines and test of ionisation models which are not readily available elsewhere. Having reviewed the status of PIC algorithms we present a summary of recent applications of such codes in laser-plasma physics, concentrating on SRS, short-pulse laser-solid interactions, fast-electron transport, and QED effects.

1,203 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders.
Abstract: The PARiHS framework (Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services) has proved to be a useful practical and conceptual heuristic for many researchers and practitioners in framing their research or knowledge translation endeavours. However, as a conceptual framework it still remains untested and therefore its contribution to the overall development and testing of theory in the field of implementation science is largely unquantified. This being the case, the paper provides an integrated summary of our conceptual and theoretical thinking so far and introduces a typology (derived from social policy analysis) used to distinguish between the terms conceptual framework, theory and model – important definitional and conceptual issues in trying to refine theoretical and methodological approaches to knowledge translation. Secondly, the paper describes the next phase of our work, in particular concentrating on the conceptual thinking and mapping that has led to the generation of the hypothesis that the PARiHS framework is best utilised as a two-stage process: as a preliminary (diagnostic and evaluative) measure of the elements and sub-elements of evidence (E) and context (C), and then using the aggregated data from these measures to determine the most appropriate facilitation method. The exact nature of the intervention is thus determined by the specific actors in the specific context at a specific time and place. In the process of refining this next phase of our work, we have had to consider the wider issues around the use of theories to inform and shape our research activity; the ongoing challenges of developing robust and sensitive measures; facilitation as an intervention for getting research into practice; and finally to note how the current debates around evidence into practice are adopting wider notions that fit innovations more generally. The paper concludes by suggesting that the future direction of the work on the PARiHS framework is to develop a two-stage diagnostic and evaluative approach, where the intervention is shaped and moulded by the information gathered about the specific situation and from participating stakeholders. In order to expedite the generation of new evidence and testing of emerging theories, we suggest the formation of an international research implementation science collaborative that can systematically collect and analyse experiences of using and testing the PARiHS framework and similar conceptual and theoretical approaches. We also recommend further refinement of the definitions around conceptual framework, theory, and model, suggesting a wider discussion that embraces multiple epistemological and ontological perspectives.

1,188 citations


Authors

Showing all 26659 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
David Miller2032573204840
Daniel R. Weinberger177879128450
Kay-Tee Khaw1741389138782
Joseph E. Stiglitz1641142152469
Edmund T. Rolls15361277928
Thomas J. Smith1401775113919
Tim Jones135131491422
Ian Ford13467885769
Paul Harrison133140080539
Sinead Farrington133142291099
Peter Hall132164085019
Paul Brennan132122172748
G. T. Jones13186475491
Peter Simmonds13182362953
Tim Martin12987882390
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Manchester
168K papers, 6.4M citations

95% related

University of Oxford
258.1K papers, 12.9M citations

95% related

University of Bristol
113.1K papers, 4.9M citations

94% related

University of Cambridge
282.2K papers, 14.4M citations

94% related

University College London
210.6K papers, 9.8M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023195
2022734
20214,817
20204,927
20194,602
20184,132