scholarly journals Lineups

Psychology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Bull Kovera ◽  
Jacqueline Katzman
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
Correct Identification ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Police Investigations ◽  
Additional Section ◽  
Lineup Procedures ◽  
Mistaken Identification

Lineups are conducted in the course of police investigations when a crime has been witnessed by one or more people. A lineup typically consists of a person whom the police believe committed the crime (i.e., the suspect) and some number of people who are known to be innocent of the crime (i.e., fillers). When the police have developed a suspect, they show witnesses a lineup to test whether they will claim that the suspect is the person who committed the crime (i.e., the perpetrator). If so, the witness is said to have made a positive identification of the suspect. What is not clear, at least in real-world investigations, is whether that identification is correct, because sometimes suspects are guilty and sometimes they are innocent. Since the late 1970s, psychologists have conducted experiments to find lineup procedures that decrease the likelihood that witnesses will mistakenly identify innocent suspects. These experiments are typically conducted in laboratory settings in which researchers expose participants to a simulated crime, often on videotape. After the participant-witnesses have viewed the crime, they are asked to attempt an identification from a lineup. In the laboratory, researchers can vary whether the perpetrator appears in that lineup. When the perpetrator is present in the lineup (i.e., a target-present lineup), the witness can identify the suspect (a correct identification), identify a filler, or say that the perpetrator is not there (an incorrect rejection of the lineup). When the perpetrator is not present (i.e., a target-absent lineup), the witness can make a mistaken identification of the suspect, identify a filler, or correctly reject the lineup. Using this method, researchers have identified lineup procedures that decrease mistaken identifications, which are the leading cause of wrongful convictions among those who have been exonerated by DNA tests conducted after trial. This article contains sections describing comprehensive General Overviews of research on lineups, research demonstrating that Live Lineups Are Equivalent to Photo Lineups, and Policy Recommendations and Best Practice Guidelines. The remaining sections describe many of these policy recommendations, including how Lineups Are Superior to Showups, having an Evidence-Based Suspicion for placing a suspect in a lineup, unbiased Lineup Composition, Double-Blind Administration, proper Lineup Instructions, collecting witnesses’ Confidence Statements in the accuracy of their identification immediately after the initial identification, Video Recording Identification Procedures, and avoiding Repeated Lineups. An additional section addresses special issues that need to be considered when Conducting Lineups with Children.

Differences in Force Levels, Word Recognition in Quiet, Sentence Reception Threshold in Noise, and Subjective Outcomes for a Bone-Anchored Hearing Device Programmed Using Manufacturer First-Fit, Aided Sound-Field Thresholds and Programmed to DSL-BCD Using a Skull Simulator

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (07) ◽  
pp. 395-404
Author(s):  
Adam Voss ◽  
Alison Brockmeyer ◽  
Michael Valente ◽  
John Pumford ◽  
Cameron C. Wick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Word Recognition ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Hearing Devices ◽  
Subjective Outcomes

Abstract Background Best practice guidelines for verifying fittings of bone-anchored hearing devices (BAHD) recommend using aided sound-field thresholds (ASFT), but express caution regarding the variables impacting obtaining valid and reliable ASFTs.1 Recently, a skull simulator was introduced to facilitate programming BAHD devices in force level (FL) to desired sensation level-bone conduction devices (skull simulator/DSL-BCD)2 3 targets in a hearing aid analyzer. Currently, no evidence is available reporting if differences in measured FL using the manufacturer first-fit (FF) and word recognition in quiet, sentence reception threshold in noise, and subjective outcomes are present for a BAHD programmed using ASFT versus programmed using skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Purpose The aim of this study was to examine if significant differences were present in FL using the FF and word recognition in quiet at 50 and 65 decibel of sound pressure level (dB SPL), sentence reception threshold in noise and subjective outcomes using the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB), and speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing (SSQ) between a BAHD fit using ASFT or skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Research Design A double-blind randomized crossover design with 15 adults having unilateral sensorineural hearing loss. All participants were successful users of the Cochlear America Baha 5. Data Collection and Analysis Baha Power 5 devices were fit using FF, ASFT, and skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Order of the three fitting strategies was randomly assigned and counter-balanced. Results No significant differences were found for a BAHD device programmed using ASFT versus skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets for consonant-nucleus-consonant words in quiet at 50 or 65 dB SPL, sentence reception threshold in noise, the APHAB or SSQ. There were, however, significant differences, at primarily 500 to 2,000 Hz in measured FLs between the FF, ASFT, and skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets at 50 and 65 dB SPL. Conclusions There were no significant differences in subject performance with two speech measures and subjective responses to two questionnaires for BAHD fittings using ASFT versus using skull simulator/DSL-BCD targets. Differences in FL between the three fitting strategies were present primarily at 500 to 2,000 Hz. Limitations of the study are highlighted along with situations where the skull simulator can play a significantly beneficial role when fitting BAHD devices.

Evidence-based policing in Australia: an examination of the appropriateness and transparency of lineup identification and investigative interviewing practices

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-98
Author(s):  
Hayley J. Cullen ◽  
Lisanne Adam ◽  
Celine van Golde
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Investigative Interviewing ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
Police Investigations ◽  
American Psychology ◽  
Lineup Identification ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Evidence Based Policing

Psychological research has been pivotal in influencing the way police forces globally approach and undertake criminal investigations. Increasing psychological research in recent years has led to the development of best-practice guidelines for conducting police investigations, across a number of key areas of criminal investigation. For example, procedures for creating and conducting lineups as recommended by the American Psychology-Law Society, and the UK-developed PEACE model for investigative interviewing, have both been of influence in Australia. However, the extent to which these evidence-based recommendations have been incorporated into policing practice within Australia is unclear. In this article, we conducted an exploratory review of publicly available policing documents within Australian states and territories, to determine the extent to which best practice lineup identification and investigative interviewing procedures have been adopted into police practice. The review revealed that for lineup identification procedures, many of the basic recommendations for conducting lineups were not incorporated into publicly available policing manuals. For investigative interviewing, it appeared on the surface that elements of the PEACE model were implemented within most Australian jurisdictions, albeit this was often not explicitly stated within policing documents. A key issue identified was a lack of (understandable) public transparency of policing procedure, as a number of Australian jurisdictions failed to have publicly available policing manuals or handbooks against which to evaluate their procedures. Therefore, we argue that there is a need for better collaboration between researchers and law enforcement in order to achieve evidence-based, transparent policing within Australia.

Opioid crisis in primary care? An audit of high-dose opioid prescribing at Bangholm GP Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711581
Author(s):  
Charlotte Greene ◽  
Alice Pearson
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Opioid Prescription ◽  
Opioid Prescribing ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines

BackgroundOpioids are effective analgesics for acute and palliative pain, but there is no evidence base for long-term pain relief. They also carry considerable risks such as overdose and dependence. Despite this, they are increasingly prescribed for chronic pain. In the UK, opioid prescribing more than doubled between 1998 and 2018.AimAn audit at Bangholm GP Practice to understand the scale of high-strength opioid prescribing. The aim of the audit was to find out if indications, length of prescription, discussion, and documentation at initial consultation and review process were consistent with best-practice guidelines.MethodA search on Scottish Therapeutics Utility for patients prescribed an average daily dose of opioid equivalent ≥50 mg morphine between 1 July 2019 and 1 October 2019, excluding methadone, cancer pain, or palliative prescriptions. The Faculty of Pain Medicine’s best-practice guidelines were used.ResultsDemographics: 60 patients (37 females), average age 62, 28% registered with repeat opioid prescription, 38% comorbid depression. Length of prescription: average 6 years, 57% >5 years, 22% >10 years. Opioid: 52% tramadol, 23% on two opioids. Indications: back pain (42%), osteoarthritis (12%), fibromyalgia (10%). Initial consultation: 7% agreed outcomes, 35% follow-up documented. Review: 56% 4-week, 70% past year.ConclusionOpioid prescribing guidelines are not followed. The significant issues are: long-term prescriptions for chronic pain, especially back pain; new patients registering with repeat prescriptions; and no outcomes of treatment agreed, a crucial message is the goal is pain management rather than relief. Changes have been introduced at the practice: a patient information sheet, compulsory 1-month review for new patients on opioids, and in-surgery pain referrals.

scholarly journals Introducing New Guidelines on Geoheritage Conservation in Protected and Conserved Areas

Geoheritage ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Crofts ◽  
Dan Tormey ◽  
John E. Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Communication To The Public ◽  
The Public ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines ◽  
The World ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
The Many ◽  
Ethical Basis ◽  
Improve Practice

AbstractThis paper introduces newly published guidelines on geoheritage conservation in protected and conserved areas within the “IUCN WCPA Best Practice Guidelines” series. It explains the need for the guidelines and outlines the ethical basis of geoheritage values and geoconservation principles as the fundamental framework within which to advance geoheritage conservation. Best practice in establishing and managing protected and conserved areas for geoconservation is described with examples from around the world. Particular emphasis is given to the methodology and practice for dealing with the many threats to geoheritage, highlighting in particular how to improve practice for areas with caves and karst, glacial and periglacial, and volcanic features and processes, and for palaeontology and mineral sites. Guidance to improve education and communication to the public through modern and conventional means is also highlighted as a key stage in delivering effective geoconservation. A request is made to geoconservation experts to continue to share best practice examples of developing methodologies and best practice in management to guide non-experts in their work. Finally, a number of suggestions are made on how geoconservation can be further promoted.

scholarly journals Development of the “Hamburg Best Practice Guidelines for ICV−Enzyme Replacement therapy (ERT) in CLN2 Disease” Based on 6 Years Treatment Experience in 48 Patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 088307382198915
Author(s):  
Christoph Schwering ◽  
Gertrud Kammler ◽  
Eva Wibbeler ◽  
Martin Christner ◽  
Johannes K.-M. Knobloch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Safety ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Enzyme Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Vision Loss ◽  
Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis ◽  
Enzyme Replacement ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines

Intracerebroventricular enzyme replacement therapy (ICV-ERT) for CLN2 disease represents the first approved treatment for neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis (NCL) diseases. It is the first treatment where a recombinant lysosomal enzyme, cerliponase alfa, is administered into the lateral cerebral ventricles to reach the central nervous system, the organ affected in CLN2 disease. If untreated, CLN2 children show first symptoms such as epilepsy and language developmental delay at 2-4 years followed by rapid loss of motor and language function, vision loss, and early death. Treatment with cerliponase alfa has shown to slow the rapid neurologic decline. However, the mode of administration by 4 hour-long intracerebroventricular infusions every 14 days represents a potentially greater risk of infection compared to intravenous enzyme replacement therapies. The Hamburg NCL Specialty Clinic was the first site worldwide to perform intracerebroventricular enzyme replacement therapy in children with CLN2 disease. In order to ensure maximum patient safety, we analysed data from our center from more than 3000 intracerebroventricular enzyme replacement therapies in 48 patients over 6 years with regard to the occurrence of device-related adverse events and device infections. Since starting intracerebroventricular enzyme replacement therapy, we have also developed and continuously improved the “Hamburg Best Practice Guidelines for ICV–Enzyme Replacement Therapy (ERT) in CLN2 Disease.” Results from this study showed low rates for device-related adverse events and infections with 0.27% and 0.33%, respectively. Therefore, following our internal procedural guidelines has shown to improve standardization and patient safety of intracerebroventricular enzyme replacement therapy for CLN2 disease.

scholarly journals Global leadership in IPECP research; an intro to co-creation of best practice guidelines

2021 ◽  
pp. 100445
Author(s):  
Hossein Khalili ◽  
Anthony Breitbach ◽  
Gail Jensen ◽  
Sharla King ◽  
Barbara Maxwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Global Leadership ◽  
Best Practice Guidelines
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document