Academic Mobility Assessment: the Strengths and Limitations of Different Approaches

The article discusses methodological approaches to measuring academic mobility when a researcher changes his place of work within the academic environment. Researchers’ academic mobility is a factor of their productivity, it provides knowledge transfer, renews scientific ideas, and in general contributes to the active development of higher education and science. However, in Russia the phenomenon of academic mobility is not studied sufficiently and demands an estimation of both mobility as a whole, and its factors, and its consequences. There are not many data sources on mobility, and getting corresponding information is often problematic – these factors make it difficult to empirically measure researchers’ academic mobility. This review might be the first step towards filling the gap in empirical research on academic mobility in Russia. The author suggests a detailed analysis of academic mobility assessment methodologies, including surveys, CVs, bibliometric and combined approaches. The article summarizes the experience of practical approaches application, identifies advantages and disadvantages of each of them, and provides their comparative analysis. The author comes to the conclusion that in the absence of a unique approach to measuring the academic mobility, the bibliometric approach, which provides large representative samplings, research results reproducibility, and greater possibilities of mobility factors assessment, best meets the goals of modern research on causality of academic mobility. This paper should help those who study science and higher education in selecting the most suitable approach to academic mobility measurement and in considering a number of nuances of each approach as practically applied in the research planning process.

Lymphoedema in advanced cancer: does subcutaneous needle drainage improve quality of life?

PurposeLower limb lymphoedema in the palliative care population has limited treatment options. Subcutaneous needle drainage is an underused procedure that has previously been described in the literature for refractory lymphoedema. This study will quantify the potential improvements to quality of life and the adverse outcomes for this group of patients.MethodsThis was a multicentre, non-randomised, observational trial using a validated questionnaire before and after the procedure. A tailored mobility measurement was also used. It extends a published pilot previously undertaken.ResultsThirty-two procedures were performed on 31 patients across three sites. The average drainage volume was 5.5 L. The domain of appearance (3.2 vs 2.8 vs 2.6) improved significantly and was sustained. All of the domains, except appearance, showed a significant improvement at 2 weeks. The cellulitis rate was 6%.ConclusionSubcutaneous needle drainage appears to improve quality of life in those with lower limb lymphoedema facing a life-limiting illness.

Evaluating Mobility in Advanced Dementia: A Scoping Review and Feasibility Analysis

Background and Objectives Mobility decline is a symptom of advanced dementia that affects function, safety, caregiving, and quality of life. Monitoring mobility status is essential for initiating timely and targeted interventions aimed at preventing excess disability in people with dementia (PWD). The physical, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms of dementia however, present unique challenges for mobility assessment. The goals of this review were to (a) identify and describe measures of mobility used for PWD and (b) assess measures’ feasibility for use in people with advanced dementia; a group whose degree of cognitive impairment results in severe functional deficits. Research Design and Methods Electronic searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychInfo databases were conducted using keywords related to dementia, mobility, measurement, and validation. Descriptive characteristics were extracted and measures coded for mobility components. Tools were also evaluated for feasibility of use in advanced dementia and those deemed feasible, screened for psychometric strength. Results Thirty-eight measures were included and 68% of these tools were performance-based. Elements of mobility evaluated were walking (53% of measures), postural transitions (42%), standing (40%), mobility-related behavioral/psychological symptoms (24%), transfers (10%), bed mobility (5%), and wheeled mobility (3%). 36% of studies included people with advanced dementia. Only 18% of tools received high scores for feasibility. Discussion and Implications Existing measures provide only partial information regarding mobility and few target elements that become relevant as dementia progresses. Most measures are not feasible for people with advanced dementia, and the psychometric evaluation of these measures is limited. Further research is needed to develop a comprehensive, dementia-specific, mobility assessment tool.