Developing Models for Day Services

This paper reports an evaluation of a rural activity project for people with learning difficulties. The project is situated in (but not a regular part of) an agriculture college. Both statutory and voluntary interests are represented in the management of the scheme, which is funded by the All Wales Strategy for the Mentally Handicapped through the local authority. Despite the widespread presence of ideas about normalization and carer participation, key stakeholders in the project appeared to draw on various aspects of three different models in describing, assessing and participating in the work of the scheme: a training for work model, a personal and social growth model, and an education for life model. We explore the question of whether such contrasting views can be tolerated in a single project, and their implications for policy and practice decisions. Each model has its distinctive consequences for project aims, selection, programme planning, staffing requirements, future development objectives and desirable project outcomes. The debate has implications for the way in which policies of normalization are operationalized in and beyond the field of learning difficulties.     

Are antidepressant and antipsychotic drug trials registered? A cross-sectional analysis of registration and reporting of methodologic characteristics

Introduction: In 2005, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) proposed that all submitted trials in all 11 member journals must be prospectively registered in order to be considered for publication. Registering drug trials was meant to reduce the likelihood of selective reporting. The aim was to determine the proportion of antipsychotic and antidepressant trials that were registered.

Methods: We searched in Pubmed for all randomized controlled trials of any antidepressant or antipsychotic published between July and December 2014. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of trials that were registered. Secondary objectives included comparing the reporting of methodological details and positive study findings between registered and unregistered trials.

Results: Of the 67 studies identified, 58% were registered. 75% of the antipsychotic trials and 51% of the antidepressant trials were registered, respectively. Registered trials were more likely to report important methodological details associated with risk of bias in RCTs. There was no significant difference in trials reporting positive outcomes for the study intervention between registered and unregistered trials.

Conclusion: Approximately 60% of published antidepressant and antipsychotic drug trials during July to December 2014 were registered. Unregistered trials were less likely to report important methodological details.