Implementation of the United Nations Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (UN CRPD) requires countries to harmonise their legislative frameworks with it. This paper investigates the national legislative frameworks of four Asian countries to see the extent to which they provide support services in accordance with Article 19 of the UN CRPD. The UN CRPD requires persons with disabilities to have access to and choice and control over support services. To analyse the policy alignment with the UN CRPD, an analytical framework based on the Capability Approach (CA) was developed. The results show that most countries address support services, including assistive devices, only from the perspective of a social security measure for persons with disabilities living in poverty, failing to uphold the rights of those not meeting those eligibility criteria. However, while support services are inseparably linked to social security, they also are a right for persons with disabilities. Therefore, a paradigm shift is required in the approach of support services and the distributive systems of countries, from one that addresses persons with disabilities as those requiring care considered a burden, to one that considers them rights holders with equal opportunities, for which, support services are a pre-requisite.
DOCUMENT
Background: Honorary authorship refers to the practice of naming an individual who has made little or no contribution to a publication as an author. Honorary authorship inflates the output estimates of honorary authors and deflates the value of the work by authors who truly merit authorship. This manuscript presents the protocol for a systematic review that will assess the prevalence of five honorary authorship issues in health sciences. Methods: Surveys of authors of scientific publications in health sciences that assess prevalence estimates will be eligible. No selection criteria will be set for the time point for measuring outcomes, the setting, the language of the publication, and the publication status. Eligible manuscripts are searched from inception onwards in PubMed, Lens.org, and Dimensions.ai. Two calibrated authors will independently search, determine eligibility of manuscripts, and conduct data extraction. The quality of each review outcome for each eligible manuscript will be assessed with a 14-item checklist developed and piloted for this review. Data will be qualitatively synthesized and quantitative syntheses will be performed where feasible. Criteria for precluding quantitative syntheses were defined a priori. The pooled random effects double arcsine transformed summary event rates of five outcomes on honorary authorship issues with the pertinent 95% confidence intervals will be calculated if these criteria are met. Summary estimates will be displayed after back-transformation. Stata software (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA) version 16 will be used for all statistical analyses. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using Tau2 and Chi2 tests and I2 to quantify inconsistency. Discussion: The outcomes of the planned systematic review will give insights in the magnitude of honorary authorship in health sciences and could direct new research studies to develop and implement strategies to address this problem. However, the validity of the outcomes could be influenced by low response rates, inadequate research design, weighting issues, and recall bias in the eligible surveys. Systematic review registration: This protocol was registered a priori in the Open Science Framework (OSF) link: https://osf.io/5nvar/.
DOCUMENT
Background Insufficient postmatch recovery in elite players may cause an increased risk of injuries, illnesses and non-functional over-reaching.Objective To evaluate postmatch recovery time courses of physical performance and biochemical markers in team ball sport players.Study design Systematic review.Data sources PubMed and Web of Science.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies This systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews andMeta-Analyses guidelines. The Critical Review Form for Quantitative Studies was used to evaluate quality. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) Original research evaluated players’ physical recovery postmatch;(2) team/intermittent sports; and (3) at least two postmeasurements were compared with baseline values. Results Twenty-eight studies were eligible. Meanmethodological quality was 11.2±1.11. Most used performance tests and biochemical markers were the countermovement jump test, sprint tests and creatine kinase (CK), cortisol (C) and testosterone (T), respectively.Summary/conclusions The current evidence demonstrates that underlying mechanisms of muscle recovery are still in progress while performance recoveryis already reached. CK recovery time courses are up to ≥72 hours. Soccer and rugby players need more time to recover for sprint performance, CK and C in comparison to other team ball sports. There are more high-quality studies needed regarding recovery in various team sports and recovery strategies on an individual level should be evaluated. Clinical relevance Ongoing insufficient recovery can be prevented by the use of the presented recovery time courses as specific practical recovery guidelines.
LINK
