An Ecological Approach to Evaluating Collaborative Practice in NSF Sponsored Partnership Projects: The SPARC Model.

From co-authored publications to sponsored projects involving multiple partner institutions, collaborative practice is an expected part of work in the academy. As evaluators of a National Science Foundation (NSF) Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) grant awarded to four university partners in a large southern state, the authors recognized the increasing value of collaborative practice in the design, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination of findings in the partnership over time. When planning a program among partnering institutions, stakeholders may underestimate the need for, and value of, collaborative practice in facilitating partnership functioning. This method paper outlines an evaluative model to increase the use of collaborative practice in funded academic partnership programs. The model highlights collaborative practice across multiple stakeholder groups in the academic ecology: Sponsors of funded programs (S), Program partners and participants (P), Assessment and evaluation professionals (A), academic researchers (R), and the national and global Community (C). The SPARC model emphasizes evidence-based benefits of collaborative practice across multiple outcome domains. Tools and frameworks for evaluating collaborative practice take a view of optimizing partnership operational performance in achieving stated goals. Collaborative practice can also be an integral element of program activities that support the academic success and scholarly productivity, psychosocial adjustment, and physical and psychological well-being of stakeholders participating in the program. Given the goal of our alliance to promote diversification of the professoriate, the model highlights the use of collaborative practice in supporting stakeholders from groups historically underrepresented in STEM fields across these outcome domains. Using data from a mixed-methods program evaluation of our AGEP alliance over 4 years, the authors provide concrete examples of collaborative practice and their measurement. Results discuss important themes regarding collaborative practice that emerged in each stakeholder group. Authors operationalize the SPARC model with a checklist to assist program stakeholders in designing for and assessing collaborative practice in support of project goals in funded academic partnership projects, emphasizing the contributions of collaborative practice in promoting diversification of the professoriate.

New insights into diabetes burnout and its distinction from diabetes distress and depressive symptoms: A qualitative study.

AIMS: This study aimed to corroborate the main hypotetized dimensions of diabetes burnout, and its distinction from diabetes distress and depressive symptoms among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was employed to collect data from 31 eligible participants using semi-structured individual phone interviews. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling among a larger sample of adults with T1D in a previous study. Data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis including immersion, reduction, and interpretation. RESULTS: Exhaustion and detachment were frequent manifestations of diabetes burnout that often accompanied by instances during which participants experienced a loss of control over diabetes. Whereas individuals' support systems could either help or hinder diabetes burnout. Participants saw burnout as separate but closely related to distress and depressive symptoms, with some suggesting correlations among burnout, distress, and depressive symptoms, while others expressed that distress caused their burnout and depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes burnout reflects a significant yet unexplored concept which might explain the complexities of suboptimal self-management and poor diabetes outcomes. Emerging evidence suggesting diabetes burnout as a distinct concept calls for more studies to mitigate diabetes burnout as an obstacle to optimal diabetes care.

Burnout, distress, and depressive symptoms in adults with type 1 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: We identified established scales and subscales related to the hypostatized dimensions of diabetes burnout (exhaustion, detachment, powerlessness) emerging from our preliminary qualitative studies, and examined the relationship of diabetes burnout with diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and diabetes outcomes. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, adults with type 1 diabetes (n = 111) completed an online survey including measures of diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and proposed measures of diabetes burnout. Participants also answered questions related to diabetes outcomes (i.e., last reported HbA1c, missed appointments) as well as other clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. Items related to diabetes burnout were identified and analyzed in an exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The items retained through the EFA were then used in a series of regression analyses to estimate the relationships of the diabetes burnout measure with participants' background characteristics, diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and diabetes outcomes. RESULTS: The EFA provided mixed results. The proposed measures of powerlessness were consistent with the original hypothesis. However, the identified measures of exhaustion and detachment did not load onto the anticipated factors. After revising the subscales based on the results of the factor analysis, the measures of diabetes burnout demonstrated strong internal consistency with Cronbach alphas (all subscales and total scale ≥0.85). Diabetes burnout was significantly associated with both depression (es = 0.70; p < .01) and diabetes distress (es = 0.80; p < .01). While measures of diabetes burnout, distress, and depressive symptoms were significant predictors of multiple diabetes outcomes, overall diabetes burnout was no longer significantly related to these outcomes after controlling for diabetes distress and depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: The results of the study provide a first step toward identifying a reliable, valid measure of diabetes burnout. Further research is needed to identify additional items to supplement/replace existing measures and to further differentiate diabetes burnout from diabetes distress and depressive symptoms.

The Differentiating Role of State and Trait Hopelessness in Suicidal Ideation and Suicide Attempt.

With suicide being a leading cause of death in the United States, research must aim to increase efficacious prevention methods. The purpose of the present study was to gain greater understanding of the difference between suicidal ideation and suicide attempt. Previous research emphasizes the role of hopelessness in attempts and ideation (Bagge, Lamis, Nadorff, & Osman, 2014 ). Yet while hopelessness offers predictive value to suicide attempt, it fails in discriminating between suicide attempters and suicide ideators. Thus the goal was to examine the possible influence of different types of hopelessness on suicidal ideation and attempt. The experience of hopelessness as a temporary feeling, or state, versus as an enduring emotion, or trait, was examined in this study. The State-Trait Hopelessness Scale and 4 suicidal thought and suicidal behavior questions were assessed. Results of logistic regression analysis supported the hypothesis that state and trait hopelessness were differentially associated with ideation and attempt. While trait hopelessness was significantly positively associated with responses to all 4 suicidality questions (p's < 0.001), state hopelessness was only positively related to responses to 1 ideation question (p < 0.01). In all, these results point to the importance of understanding the role of different types of hopelessness in differentiating suicidal ideation and attempt.