In 2003/2007 a randomised controlled trial (RCT) was undertaken into the efficacy of aromatherapy in reducing levels of anxiety amongst palliative care patients. In the study patients were randomised into one of three treatment groups. The participating aromatherapists treated patients according to a strict research protocol. As the trial commenced, the therapists indicated a concern about a potential loss of their holistic principles while undertaking the trial. These genuine concerns formed the impetus to undertake a qualitative study to illuminate the aromatherapists' experience of changing their practice. Findings and discussions are through the themes that emerged. It appears that participating in a RCT does impact on aromatherapists' holistic practice but equally important is their commitment to undertake the research. 相似文献
Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is a program that has been shown to be beneficial for clinical and non-clinical populations. While much attention has been paid to participants' outcomes, little work has been published concerning processes underlying improvements. Herein, women who had finished medical treatment for breast cancer completed questionnaires pre- and post-MBSR and were interviewed using focus group methodology such that quantitative and qualitative data were combined to explore potential mechanisms underlying changes. It was found that the Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale was a useful process measure to assess changes in mindfulness and that the Coping with Health Injuries and Problems questionnaire was useful in documenting changes in palliative (self-care) coping over the course of the 8 week program. Moreover, the Sense of Coherence questionnaire suggested that the women viewed life as more meaningful and manageable following MSBR. Our findings fit with Shapiro et al.'s theory that, over time, participants in an MBSR program "reperceive" what they encounter in their daily experiences. 相似文献
The real-life practice of ‘healing’ for cancer in the community as perceived by clients and healers was investigated in a multi-method pilot study. Fifteen clients received six weekly healing sessions. Pre- and post-changes in perception towards well-being and client experience were assessed by EuroQol (EQ-5D), measure yourself concerns and well-being (MYCaW) and a client satisfaction tool. Qualitative methods, including focus groups, explored the perceived effects of healing in more depth and the participants’ experience of taking part in research. The study was not designed to test the effect of healing on disease.
Quantitative data showed perceived significant improvements in ‘concerns/problems’ for which clients wanted help (p<0.01), well-being (p<0.01) and anxiety/depression (p<0.05) over the course of healing. Significant effects were not seen in all areas of quality of life. Qualitative analysis showed clients mainly sought help for psychological and emotional concerns and reported only beneficial effects of healing. Clients attributed many of the quantitative improvements to healing itself. Despite some concerns, healers and clients engaged fully with the research process, and were enthusiastic about the importance of research into healing.
Our study suggests that, while there are some confounding issues and study limitations to address, clients and healers perceive healing to have a range of benefits, particularly in terms of coping with cancer, and regard it as a useful approach that can be applied in a community setting alongside conventional medicine. 相似文献
With teams growing in all areas of scientific and scholarly research, we explore the relationship between team structure and the character of knowledge they produce. Drawing on 89,575 self-reports of team member research activity underlying scientific publications, we show how individual activities cohere into broad roles of 1) leadership through the direction and presentation of research and 2) support through data collection, analysis, and discussion. The hidden hierarchy of a scientific team is characterized by its lead (or L) ratio of members playing leadership roles to total team size. The L ratio is validated through correlation with imputed contributions to the specific paper and to science as a whole, which we use to effectively extrapolate the L ratio for 16,397,750 papers where roles are not explicit. We find that, relative to flat, egalitarian teams, tall, hierarchical teams produce less novelty and more often develop existing ideas, increase productivity for those on top and decrease it for those beneath, and increase short-term citations but decrease long-term influence. These effects hold within person—the same person on the same-sized team produces science much more likely to disruptively innovate if they work on a flat, high-L-ratio team. These results suggest the critical role flat teams play for sustainable scientific advance and the training and advancement of scientists. 相似文献