scholarly journals One step forward and two steps back? The ‘20 Principles’ for questioning vulnerable witnesses and the lack of an evidence-based approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 392-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny Cooper ◽  
Coral Dando ◽  
Thomas Ormerod ◽  
Michelle Mattison ◽  
Ruth Marchant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Advocacy Training ◽  
One Step

It is a widely held belief that questioning vulnerable witnesses is a specialist skill. In England and Wales vulnerable witness advocacy training built around ‘20 Principles’ has been developed and is being delivered. The 20 Principles do not cite a tested theoretical framework(s) or empirical evidence in support. This paper considers whether the 20 Principles are underpinned by research evidence. It is submitted that advocacy training and the approach to questioning witnesses in the courtroom should take into account the already available research evidence. The authors make recommendations for revision of the training and for a wider review of the approach taken to the handling of witness evidence.

scholarly journals Challenging the Reductionism of “Evidence-Based” Youth Justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1735
Author(s):  
Stephen Case
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
Youth Justice ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Integral Means ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
Policy Practice

The generation of empirical evidence to explain offending by children and young people has been a central driver of criminological and sociological research for more than two centuries. Across the international field of youth justice, empirical research evidence has become an integral means of complementing and extending the knowledge and understanding of offending offered by the official enquiries and data collection of professional stakeholders and an essential tool for informing ‘evidence-based’ policy, practice and ‘effective intervention’. However, it will be argued that the hegemonic empirical evidence-base created by youth justice research over the past two decades has been generated through methodological reductionism - the oversimplification of complexity, the restriction of conceptual lens and the relative exclusion of competing explanatory paradigms and empirical methodologies, which in turn, has reduced the scope and validity of the policy and practice recommendations derived from it.

scholarly journals An Updated Theoretical Framework for Vocal Hyperfunction

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 2254-2260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Hillman ◽  
Cara E. Stepp ◽  
Jarrad H. Van Stan ◽  
Matías Zañartu ◽  
Daryush D. Mehta
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Studies ◽  
Clinical Management ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Fundamental Structure ◽  
Multiple Factors ◽  
Vocal Hyperfunction ◽  
New Knowledge

Purpose The purpose of this viewpoint article is to facilitate research on vocal hyperfunction (VH). VH is implicated in the most commonly occurring types of voice disorders, but there remains a pressing need to increase our understanding of the etiological and pathophysiological mechanisms associated with VH to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of VH-related disorders. Method A comprehensive theoretical framework for VH is proposed based on an integration of prevailing clinical views and research evidence. Results The fundamental structure of the current framework is based on a previous (simplified) version that was published over 30 years ago (Hillman et al., 1989). A central premise of the framework is that there are two primary manifestations of VH—phonotraumatic VH and nonphonotraumatic VH—and that multiple factors contribute and interact in different ways to cause and maintain these two types of VH. Key hypotheses are presented about the way different factors may contribute to phonotraumatic VH and nonphonotraumatic VH and how the associated disorders may respond to treatment. Conclusions This updated and expanded framework is meant to help guide future research, particularly the design of longitudinal studies, which can lead to a refinement in knowledge about the etiology and pathophysiology of VH-related disorders. Such new knowledge should lead to further refinements in the framework and serve as a basis for improving the prevention and evidence-based clinical management of VH.

What Does Evidence-Based Practice Mean to You? A Follow-Up Study Examining School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists' Perspectives on Evidence-Based Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
Katrina Fulcher-Rood ◽  
Anny Castilla-Earls ◽  
Jeff Higginbotham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
School Based ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Ebp Implementation

Purpose The current investigation is a follow-up from a previous study examining child language diagnostic decision making in school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to examine the SLPs' perspectives regarding the use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in their clinical work. Method Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs who previously participated in an earlier study by Fulcher-Rood et al. 2018). SLPs were asked questions regarding their definition of EBP, the value of research evidence, contexts in which they implement scientific literature in clinical practice, and the barriers to implementing EBP. Results SLPs' definitions of EBP differed from current definitions, in that SLPs only included the use of research findings. SLPs seem to discuss EBP as it relates to treatment and not assessment. Reported barriers to EBP implementation were insufficient time, limited funding, and restrictions from their employment setting. SLPs found it difficult to translate research findings to clinical practice. SLPs implemented external research evidence when they did not have enough clinical expertise regarding a specific client or when they needed scientific evidence to support a strategy they used. Conclusions SLPs appear to use EBP for specific reasons and not for every clinical decision they make. In addition, SLPs rely on EBP for treatment decisions and not for assessment decisions. Educational systems potentially present other challenges that need to be considered for EBP implementation. Considerations for implementation science and the research-to-practice gap are discussed.

Stuttering mHealth Applications: A Qualitative Rubric Assessment (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fazwa M. Fadzilah ◽  
Noreen Izza Arshad ◽  
Izuddin Zainal-Abidin ◽  
Hui Min Low ◽  
Ahmad Kamil Mahmood ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Evidence ◽  
Mobile Apps ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Standard Form ◽  
Mobile App ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evaluation Instrument ◽  
Collective Effort ◽  
Speech Therapists

BACKGROUND Mobile applications (apps) that offer a variety of techniques to improve stuttering have been flourishing in the digital marketplace. In evidence-based clinical practice, speech therapists will recommend audio-enriched mobile apps to individuals with stuttering problems based on empirical research evidence. Unfortunately, many stuttering mobile apps available in the market are developed without a substantial research base. Hence, speech therapists necessitate a guideline which they could use to assess the quality of a stuttering mobile app before recommending the app to stutterers. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to develop a rubric for assessing the quality of the stuttering mobile app in assisting speech therapists to make informed recommendations METHODS The rubric was initially developed based on a set of criteria reviewed from the literature. Online surveys and focused group discussion were then conducted for results verification. RESULTS The outcome of this study is a rubric designed with four categories and 18-evaluative dimensions tailored to analyze the quality of stuttering mobile apps. The stuttering mobile app assessment rubric presented in the serve multiple purposes, including an evaluation instrument, providing guidelines for developing stuttering mobile apps and for creating a standard form that can be shared with professionals to facilitate a collective effort. CONCLUSIONS This rubric also offers a guidance to steer drive the future development of stuttering mobile apps that are evidence-based, and theoretically grounded

scholarly journals Levels of research evidence in health policy assessment in Malawi

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 226-250
Author(s):  
Patrick Mapulanga ◽  
Jaya Raju ◽  
Thomas Matingwina
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Health Policies ◽  
Services Research ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Policy Systems

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine levels of health research evidence in health policies in Malawi. Design/methodology/approach The study selected a typology of health policies in Malawi from 2002 to 2017. The study adopted the SPIRIT conceptual framework and assessed the levels of research evidence in health policy, systems and services research using the revised SAGE policy assessment tool. Documentary analysis was used to assess levels of health research evidence in health policies in Malawi. Findings In 29 (96.7 per cent) of the health policies, policy formulators including healthcare directors and managers used generic search engines such as Google or Google Scholar to look for heath research evidence. In 28 (93.3 per cent) of the health policies, they searched for grey literature and other government documents. In only 6 (20 per cent) of the heath policy documents, they used academic literature in a form of journal articles and randomised controlled trials. No systematic reviews or policy briefs were consulted. Overall, in 23 (76.7 per cent) of the health policy documents, health research evidence played a minimal role and had very little influence on the policy documents or decision-making. Research limitations/implications The empirical evidence in the health policy documents are limited because of insufficient research citation, low retrievability of health research evidence in the policy documents and biased selectivity of what constitutes health research evidence. Practical implications The study indicates that unfiltered information (data from policy evaluations and registries) constitutes majority of the research evidence in health policies both in health policy, systems and services research. The study seeks to advocate for the use of filtered information (peer reviewed, clinical trials and data from systematic reviews) in formulating health policies. Originality/value There is dearth of literature on the levels of health research evidence in health policy-making both in health policy, systems and services research. This study seeks to bridge the gap with empirical evidence from a developing country perspective.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document