Search results

Restrictions on social interaction and travel due to the COVID-19 pandemic have affected how researchers approach fieldwork and data collection. Whilst online focus groups have received attention since the 2000s as a method for qualitative data collection, relatively little of the relevant literature appears to have made use of now ubiquitous video calling software and synchronous, interactive discussion tools. Our own experiences in organising fieldwork aimed at understanding the impact of different “future-proofing” strategies for the European agri-food system during this period resulted in several methodological changes being made at short notice. We present an approach to converting in-person focus group to a virtual methodology and provide a checklist for researchers planning their own online focus groups. Our findings suggest data are comparable to in-person focus groups and factors influencing data quality during online focus groups can be safeguarded. There are several key steps, both before and during the focus groups, which can be taken to ensure the smooth running of such events. We share our reflections on this approach and provide a resource for other researchers moving to online-only data collection.

Household food insecurity and poor well-being have increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and resulting lockdown measures. Home food growing has been associated with improved food access and well-being, but it is unknown what role it plays during food supply crises and lockdown. It is also unclear how home food growing and social restrictions may affect opinions about growing food in urban areas (i.e. urban agriculture; UA).

A cross-sectional online survey was conducted during the UK national lockdown in March-April 2020 to measure home food growing, perceived food insecurity, well-being, and opinions of UA. The participants were 477 UK-based adults (369 female, mean age 39.57 years ± 13.36); 152 participants were engaged in home food growing prior to the pandemic. Responses were compared to data collected from a separate sample of participants before the pandemic (N=583) to explore potential shifts in opinions about UA.

Participants who engaged in home food growing had lower levels of food insecurity (U_­=19894.50, z=−3.649, p<0.001, r=−0.167) and higher well-being (U=19566.50, z=−3.666, p<0.001, r=−0.168) than those not engaged in home food growing. Perceived food insecurity partially mediated the relationship between home food growing and well-being; home food growing was associated with less food insecurity, which in turn was associated with better well-being. There were no differences in opinions of UA compared to the sample of participants from before the pandemic.

Home food growing may have had a protective effect over perceived food security and well-being in the early stages the pandemic. Opinions of UA were positive and unchanged compared to data collected pre-pandemic. Policies that support home food growing and access to suitable growing spaces and resources may be beneficial for food system resilience and well-being.

The Violent Crime Linkage Analysis System (ViCLAS) is a computerised database which is used by law enforcement in several countries to find potential links between serial violent crimes. In 2012, Bennell, Snook, MacDonald, House and Taylor identified a number of assumptions that must be valid for these computerised systems to be effective.

This paper revisits and expands on these assumptions with specific reference to the use of ViCLAS, looking at research that has been conducted since this 2012 review and outlining where research is still outstanding.

The importance of evaluating ViCLAS is highlighted in this paper.

Particularly, the research agenda highlights how the practice of comparative case analysis when using ViCLAS could be improved.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first review of the research dedicated specifically to the evaluation of ViCLAS.

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are highly prevalent in people with developmental disorders who engage in offending behaviour. Many violence-based risk assessment tools include items pertaining to ACEs, and may inflate risk scores in trauma-exposed groups. This paper aims to explore the relationships between ACEs, risk assessment scores, incidents of risk and restrictive practices, in adolescents with developmental disorders in a forensic inpatient setting.

Secondary analysis was conducted on clinical data for 34 adolescents detained to a developmental disorder service. Data were extracted for Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) risk scores and risk behaviours and restrictive practices, as measures of observed risk.

Participants exposed to more ACEs had higher SAVRY risk scores (p < 0.001, two-tailed), with elevations specifically on the historical subscale (p < 0.001, two-tailed). Neither ACEs nor risk scores were associated with the frequency of risk behaviours. Nevertheless, participants exposed to four or more ACEs were secluded more frequently (p = 0.015, two-tailed), indicating a potential association between trauma and risk severity. Those with more complex developmental disorders experienced fewer ACEs (p = 0.02, two-tailed) and engaged in self-harm behaviours less frequently (p = 0.04, two-tailed).

The inclusion of ACEs in risk assessment tools may lead to the inadvertent stigmatization of trauma-exposed individuals. Further investigation is necessary to offer clarity on the impact of early adversity on risk assessment accuracy and levels of institutional risk, and the role of developmental disorders in this relationship.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the relative associations between ACEs, risk assessment scores and observed institutional risk and does so in a highly marginalized population.

This article examines the role of research dissemination in the development of the knowledge base that underpins the integration of care. It does so from the perspective of the university‐based social care research dissemination network Making Research Count (MRC). The author, who is the Research Director for MRC in London, looks at the experience of this project in the context of the surprisingly limited evidence on the effectiveness of different models of research dissemination.

Cherry Tree Nursery came about because users of mental health services in East Dorset wanted meaningful occupation which would enhance the quality of their lives. Many of us find gardening therapeutic and this project not only gives joy to its volunteers, but also contributes to the gardens (and mental health) of its thousands of gardening, plant‐buying customers in the Bournemouth area.

This paper discusses the relationship between minority ethnicity, well‐being and children's social capital in the light of data from a qualitative study on social capital among 32 British Punjabi primary school children. Through a broad overview of social capital literature on ethnic minorities and children's welfare, the case is made for placing children's well‐being in a contextual framework that acknowledges the variety and wealth of children's everyday experiences. Looking at the children's social networks and future aspirations, the discussion will draw out ways in which social capital processes interact with other aspects of children's identity, including ethnicity and gender, from a child‐centred perspective. Finally, some exploratory ideas are offered as to how bonding processes may affect children's psychological well‐being, and how they may be viewed through the concept of ‘emotional capital’.

Wonders whether companies actually have employees best interests at heart across physical, mental and spiritual spheres. Posits that most organizations ignore their workforce – not even, in many cases, describing workers as assets! Describes many studies to back up this claim in theis work based on the 2002 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference, in Cardiff, Wales.