Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

31 results

Page 1 of 2

  • P57: The ENGAGED study: dementia prevention co-design for people living with depression

  • Eleanor Curran, Victoria Palmer, Charles Abraham, Terence W.H. Chong, Tom Rego, Kali Godbee, Barry Baulch, Sabah Khalid, Robyn Garlick, Nicola Lautenschlager
  • Journal:
    International Psychogeriatrics / Volume 35 / Issue S1 / December 2023
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 February 2024, pp. 116-117
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Background:

    People living with depression are at increased risk of poor health outcomes, including dementia. Interventions to reduce dementia risk (dementia risk reduction (DRR)), include physical activity, diet and vascular health interventions. These can also benefit depressive symptoms and broader health, making DRR an important part of holistic mental health care for depression. However, enabling engagement and adherence, and embedding interventions in mental health clinician practice are ongoing challenges that limit the impact of interventions and implementation in clinical practice. Improved intervention tailoring and new approaches to intervention design and implementation are urgently needed. Co-design approaches have been shown to improve engagement and the impact of complex interventions in diverse fields, but have not previously been used in DRR.

    Objective:

    The ENGAGED study will examine DRR intervention needs specifically for people living with depression, then co-design a tailored DRR intervention for use in mental health clinical settings.

    Methods:

    The study will adapt a co-design model for mental health settings that emphasizes lived-expertise, and incorporate processes and evidence from behavioral science. Participants will include middle-aged and older people living with depression, and mental health clinicians.

    Semi-structured interviews with both participant groups will examine unmet intervention needs. Illuminated shared experiences and themes will be explored further through focus group discussions to develop consensus intervention priorities. They will also be analyzed to produce a contextualized model of relevant behavior change. Participants and researchers will then work together to co-design intervention components and refine prototypes. Finally, mixed methods survey will evaluate the co- design process and participant experiences.

    Results:

    This study will provide two key outputs to enhance future intervention tailoring and engagement:

    1. 1. 1) a pragmatic blueprint for DRR intervention with people experiencing depression across diverse mental health clinical settings, ready for evaluation and implementation

    2. 2. 2) a model of DRR behavior change that is specified to this population.

    Evaluation findings will support methods development for applying co-design to cognitive and mental health research.

    Conclusion:

    This research addresses the need for new approaches to tailored, integrated mental, physical and cognitive healthcare for people living with depression that emphasize stakeholder expertise and engagement to facilitate holistic support.

Critical Perspectives in Transitional Justice
  • Edited by Nicola Palmer, Phil Clark, Danielle Granville
  • Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    22 December 2020
    Print publication:
    10 February 2012
  • In the last twenty years, the field of transitional justice has gone from being a peripheral concern to an ubiquitous feature of societies recovering from mass conflict or repressive rule. In both policy and scholarly realms, transitional justice has proliferated rapidly, with ever-increasing variety in terms of practical processes and analytical approaches. The sprawl of transitional justice, however, has not always produced concepts and practices that are theoretically sound and grounded in the empirical realities of the societies in question. Critical Perspectives in Transitional Justice takes stock of this burgeoning field and, in gathering the views of scholars and practitioners from a wide range of national and methodological backgrounds, explores four key concerns with current trends in transitional justice: the under-theorisation of the field, its disconnect from core academic disciplines, its tendency towards advocacy rather than analysis, and its emphasis on technical institutional responses without clear articulations of their objectives. This vital book - edited by Oxford Transitional Justice Research - is designed to deepen theoretical and empirical discussions within transitional justice by providing critical perspectives on common concepts, issues, methodologies, institutions and mechanisms. Its purpose is to clarify key terms, challenge core assumptions and highlight important tensions, inconsistencies and disagreements in the field with the ultimate aim of harnessing the enormous energy of transitional justice for more fruitful ends. The breadth of debates in this volume highlights the scope, inclusiveness and ambition of this field but also underscores that - despite its geographical, conceptual and disciplinary expanse - consistent questions arise regarding contextually appropriate objectives, the balance between individual and collective needs and interests, and securing the legitimacy of transitional processes among those affected by past violations.

  • 435 - Perspectives of the general public on dementia risk reduction (DRR) and implications for implementation: a qualitative evidence synthesis

  • Eleanor Curran, Kali Godbee, Terence W.H. Chong, Charles Abraham, Nicola T. Lautenschlager, Victoria J. Palmer
  • Journal:
    International Psychogeriatrics / Volume 32 / Issue S1 / October 2020
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    04 November 2020, pp. 152-153
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • There is limited understanding of which factors most influence take-up of DRR behaviour in the general population. This evidence gap may limit the effectiveness of DRR implementation and, hence, impede translation of increasing evidence for DRR1 into real-world public health benefits.

    Reviews of quantitative studies have identified poor knowledge and persistence of myths about ageing2,3 as important. However, these findings are limited by the scope of included questionnaires.

    Qualitative literature reporting the perspectives of the general public offers an opportunity to increase this understanding. Qualitative studies can examine poorly understood phenomena in greater depth and with fewer a priori assumptions. Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is increasingly recognised as valuable, particularly in relation to complex interventions like DRR.

    We will present a QES regarding the perspectives of dementia- free members of the general public towards DRR. Searches indicate that no QES for this topic currently exists.

    Systematic searches of Medline, PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL for studies published since 1995 that have used qualitative methods to explore DRR perspectives in the general public were undertaken, supplemented by hand searches of included studies’ reference lists. Following independent screening by two reviewers, 41 publications based on 37 individual studies meeting inclusion criteria have been identified.

    Data will be analysed using thematic synthesis, as outlined by Thomas and Harden (2008)4 and recommended for QES regarding complex health interventions5. ‘Line-by-line’ inductive coding and development of descriptive themes across studies will produce a summary of the perspectives of the general public for DRR. A conceptual framework explaining the relationships between key themes and considering the implications for implementation will be proposed.

    The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool will be used to appraise included studies. Rather than imposing an arbitrary quality cut-off point for inclusion, sensitivity analyses will be used to examine the influence of lower quality studies on review findings. Finally, the Confidence in the Evidence from Qualitative Reviews (CERQual) approach will facilitate assessment of confidence in review findings to aid future use. Data extraction is ongoing.

    Findings from this synthesis will support better targeted quantitative examination of DRR implementation determinants and more strategic intervention design.

    1. 1. World Health Organisation. Risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia: WHO guidelines. World Health Organisation. 2019. Geneva. Licence CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO

    2. 2. Cahill, S., Pierce, M., Werner, P., Darley, A., Bobersky, A. A systematic review of the public’s knowledge and understanding of Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. Alz Dis Assoc Disord. 2015; 29:255-275

    3. 3. Cations, M., Radisic, G., Crotty, M., Laver, K.E. What does the general public understand about prevention and treatment of dementia? A systematic review of population-based surveys. PLoS One. 2018, 13(4):e0196085

    4. 4. Thomas, J. and Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews, BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2008 July; 8:45. doi 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45

    5. 5. Noyes, J., Booth, A., Cargo, M., et al. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series – paper 1: introduction. J of Clin Epidemiol. 2018; 97:35-38

  • International criminal law and border control: The expressive role of the deportation and extradition of genocide suspects to Rwanda

  • Nicola Palmer
  • Journal:
    Leiden Journal of International Law / Volume 33 / Issue 3 / September 2020
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    02 June 2020, pp. 789-807

  • The use of criminal law in border control has gained increasing and warranted scholarly attention. International criminal law is no exception, although the orientation of the debates in international law is different from that at the national level. While scholarship on domestic border control is characterized by a deep scepticism of the use of criminal sanction, the focus in international criminal law has been on the exclusion of individuals suspected of involvement in an international crime from the protective sphere of refugee law. The divergence of this scholarship does not fully account for how responses to allegations of involvement in an international crime are often embedded within domestic immigration laws, making concerns regarding domestic border control relevant for discussions in international criminal law. To examine these domestic entanglements, this article analyses an independently generated dataset of 122 cases in 20 countries concerning 102 individuals alleged to have participated in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. This dataset enables an empirical analysis of the role that international criminal law is playing in their extradition, deportation or domestic prosecution. It argues that these cases are underpinned by plural types of expressive work. They communicate not only an ongoing commitment to recognizing the universal wrong of genocide, but also more ambiguous messaging about what constitutes a fair trial in Rwanda, who constitutes a ‘criminal migrant’ and, to a Rwandan audience, the transnational penal reach of the Rwandan state.

  • Implementing dementia risk reduction in primary care: a preliminary conceptual model based on a scoping review of practitioners’ views

  • Part of
  • Kali Godbee, Jane Gunn, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Eleanor Curran, Victoria J Palmer
  • Journal:
    Primary Health Care Research & Development / Volume 20 / 2019
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    23 October 2019, e140
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • Primary care practitioners (PCPs) do not routinely promote dementia risk reduction. The purpose of this study was to map the published literature on the views of PCPs about dementia risk reduction, in order to identify implementation constructs and strategies crucial to the development of an implementation intervention to support dementia risk reduction in primary care. We undertook a scoping review of the PCPs’ views about promoting brain health for reducing dementia risk. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Embase for English-language articles published between 1995 and December 2017. We then applied the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and matched Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change to the scoping review findings in order to develop a preliminary implementation model. Eight articles reported views of PCPs about dementia prevention. Study findings were mapped to 5 of the 39 CFIR constructs: (i) knowledge and beliefs about dementia risk reduction, (ii) evidence strength and quality, (iii) relative priority, (iv) available resources, and (v) external policy and incentives. The findings suggest implementation strategies to consider in our preliminary model include (i) educational meetings, (ii) identifying and preparing champions, (iii) conducting local consensus discussions, (iv) altering incentive structures, and (v) capturing and sharing local knowledge. There have been few studies about the views of PCPs about dementia risk reduction. Implementation in the primary care setting is fundamental to early identification of risk and supporting preventive practices, but it needs to focus on more than just education for PCPs. We need more up-to-date and in-depth data on the views of PCPs about dementia risk reduction and context-specific analyses of implementation needs. Further research into effective primary care interventions to reduce dementia risk is expected to support implementation efforts.

Law and Policy in Modern Family Finance
  • Property Division in the 21st Century
  • Edited by Jessica Palmer, Nicola Peart, Margaret Briggs, Mark Henaghan
  • Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    29 September 2018
    Print publication:
    27 December 2017
  • Law and Policy in Modern Family Finance - Property Division in the 21st Century adopts a conceptual approach to address key questions about the legal division of property when a marriage, civil union, de facto relationship, or other close personal relationship ends. These questions include: which relationships should be subject to a statutory regime; which property should be shared; whether property held on trust should be included; how property should be shared; how economic disparity caused by the division of functions within the relationship should be addressed, if at all; whether, and if so to what extent, the interests of children of the relationship should be considered; whether parties should be allowed to contract out of a statutory regime and, if so, whether such contracts should be binding; and whether death should be treated in the same way as relationship break-down.The authors use New Zealand's current legislative framework as a basis for critical analysis and reflection. Despite New Zealand's Property (Relationships) Act 1976 being hailed as socially progressive legislation when it was enacted, there is concern in New Zealand that its property sharing regime no longer meets society's needs and expectations. However, issues of fairness, equality, and modern complexities in the division of relationship property are not unique to New Zealand. Other jurisdictions are facing similar problems, including Australia, England and some continental European countries.The inclusion of internationally recognised relationship property experts from England, Australia and Germany ensures the utility of the book for international audiences, making it of interest to law reformers, academics, the judiciary, the legal profession, and law students everywhere in the world.

  • Chapter 1 - Introduction

    • By Nicola Peart, Professor of Law, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, Jessica Palmer, Associate Professor of Law, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, Margaret Briggs, Professor of Law, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
  • Edited by Jessica Palmer, Nicola Peart, Margaret Briggs, Mark Henaghan
  • Book:
    Law and Policy in Modern Family Finance
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    29 September 2018
    Print publication:
    27 December 2017, pp 1-10

  • Summary

    Marriage traditionally gives rise to property consequences, sometimes during the marriage, but nowadays more often when the marriage ends either during the lifetime of the parties or because one of them has died. In the European civil law jurisdictions, the property consequences take the form of an entitlement to an equal share of property classed as matrimonial property. These regimes, commonly referred to as community property systems, apply in default of agreement between the parties on divorce as well as on death.

    The common law approach to the property consequences of marriage differs significantly from the civilian approach. Following the abolition of the unitary principle of marriage by the Married Women ’ s Property statutes in the late nineteenth century, a separate property system applied in the common law jurisdictions. Each spouse was entitled to retain assets he or she had brought in to, or acquired during, the marriage. Marriage did not give rise to a property interest in any of the assets of the other spouse, not even the family home. However, by the mid-twentieth century, concerns about the adverse effects of the separate property system, particularly for women and dependent children, persuaded the legislatures in Australia, New Zealand, and England and Wales to pass legislation giving the courts discretion to adjust title to property between former spouses on separation and divorce. Australia and England and Wales still operate this individualised system of property adjustment, based on principles developed by the courts.

    England ’ s Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 lists a number of matters to which the court must have regard when making property adjustment orders on divorce, of which the welfare of any minor child of the family is the ‘ first consideration ’. The Act does not state what the aim of the court ’ s exercise of discretion should be. The courts have inferred that the implicit objective of their power is ‘ to achieve a fair outcome ’ for the parties involved.

  • Foreword

  • Edited by Jessica Palmer, Nicola Peart, Margaret Briggs, Mark Henaghan
  • Book:
    Law and Policy in Modern Family Finance
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    29 September 2018
    Print publication:
    27 December 2017, pp v-vi

  • Summary

    If there ever was a period of maturity in my professional life it was largely devoted to family finances either in silk, as a trial judge, or in the Court of Appeal. So when Mark Henaghan asked me to write a foreword for this book of collected papers I did not hesitate to agree, partly from my familiarity with the territory and partly from my regard for Mark and his ability to conceal his scholarship in waves of warmth and irreverence.

    The Introduction explains the context in which the papers were written:

    November 2015: the New Zealand Minister of Justice refers to the Law Commission a comprehensive review of the Property (Relationships) Act 1976 and requests recommendations for reform.

    December 2016: the four editors convene the International Colloquium at which the papers were presented.

    Ahead, as I write, lies the publication of the papers and the Law Commission's report and recommendations. I am in no doubt that this is how family law reform should be managed: Law Reform Commission expertise supplemented by international and comparative expertise to guide the legislators.

    New Zealand seems to have a healthy readiness to legislate in this dangerous territory: dangerous because many politicians have had personal experience and leaders fear that public reaction to legislation will depress their prospects of re-election. New Zealand seems to follow the precept instilled in children here: if at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again. Would that the Westminster parliament would embrace the same spirit of adventure. For the UK, excepting Scotland, we have been 45 years without major reform and it has had to be the judges who have re-interpreted the 1970 statute to reflect social and other change.

    As the editors write in their Introduction, the relevance of the themes analysed in the 15 papers is unrestricted:

    ‘ [T]he wider discussion to which this book contributes is an important one that must be ongoing. While the context in which these chapters were written was the reform of New Zealand's rather unique approach to the sharing of property in intimate relationships, we are confident that the ideas and debates discussed in this book will be of value beyond the shores of Aotearoa New Zealand.

  • Understandings of International Law in Rwanda: A Contextual Approach

  • Edited by Edda Kristjansdottir, André Nollkaemper, Cedric Ryngaert
  • Book:
    International Law in Domestic Courts: Rule of Law Reform in Post-Conflict States
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    16 December 2020
    Print publication:
    22 February 2012, pp 153-174

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The Rwandan Prosecutor General, Martin Ngoga, leant forward to emphasize his point, ‘Justice in this country has been contextual. What they call double standards is justice in a contextual environment.’ He was responding to the 2007 decision by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) not to transfer genocide-related cases to the Rwandan domestic courts. Rule 11 bis of the Rules of Evidence and Procedure of the ICTR governs the transfer, to competent national jurisdictions, of individuals indicted but not yet tried by the ICTR. This rule was intended to create a bridge between the practice of international criminal law and domestic criminal justice processes, by ensuring that domestic courts had an adequate legal framework to try international crimes and provide suitable fair trial guarantees. However, on 8 October 2008, the Appeals Chamber of the ICTR upheld the decision not to transfer the case of Yussuf Munyakazi from the jurisdiction of the ICTR to the Rwandan national courts. This was followed by two consistent decisions relating to Gaspard Kanyarukiga and Ildephonse Hategekimana, respectively.

    The Trial Chambers were not persuaded that the accused would receive a fair trial in Rwanda. Supported by an influential amicus curiae brief from Human Rights Watch (HRW), it was successfully argued that the accused would be unable to raise an effective defence before the Rwandan national courts. This occurred despite the promulgation of specific legislation in Rwanda governing the transfer of cases from the ICTR and the extensive domestic prosecution of the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes at a national level through the formal criminal courts, both civilian and military, and on every hill across the country through the gacaca courts. Given Rwanda's use of international criminal law within its own legal structures, the decision by the ICTR judges not to transfer cases to the national courts suggests that, from the Tribunal's perspective, the promulgation and application of such laws has not secured the country's domestic rule of law. Meanwhile, inside Rwanda, these decisions raise the important question as to what role has international law played in their domestic setting?

Page 1 of 2