Gina Dolan

Exploring doctor and patient views about risk communication and shared decision-making in the consultation.

Background  There have been significant conceptual developments regarding shared decision‐making (SDM) and assessments of peoples hypothetical preferences for involvement in treatment or care decisions. There are few data on the perceptions of patients and professionals about SDM in actual practice.

Originality and the PhD: what is it and how can it be demonstrated?

AIM To explore the concept of originality in doctoral research and outline ways in which doctoral candidates can begin to identify, formulate and articulate their individual contributions to knowledge. BACKGROUND Originality is a major feature of doctoral research but considerable confusion exists regarding what can and cannot constitute originality in the PhD and how the contribution to knowledge can be demonstrated clearly. DATA SOURCES This is a discussion paper. REVIEW METHODS A review of relevant, published literature relating to originality in the PhD. DISCUSSION Many doctoral candidates merely outline why they believe their work to be original, instead of demonstrating critically how and in what way their research makes a meaningful contribution to the body of knowledge. CONCLUSION The concept of originality in the PhD is complex and multi-faceted. Identifying and conveying originality in doctoral research takes considerable time, contemplation and effort. This process is, however, integral to the PhD itself, and the skills acquired are essential for post-doctoral development. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH/PRACTICE A good doctoral thesis should clearly outline the different ways in which the work is original. A succinct, focused, critical appraisal of the specific contribution to knowledge is preferable to an exhaustive list.

Public Attitudes to Human Gene Therapy: A Pilot Study in Wales

Objective: This study aimed to explore some factors influencing perceptions of human gene therapy. Method: A small qualitative study using two semi-structured interviews per participant (n = 22). The groups comprised (1) people with cystic fibrosis and members of their family (n = 9), and (2) students from a science evening class as well as lay members of the public selected from the practice list of a local general practitioner (n = 13). Results: This pilot study demonstrates support for somatic gene therapy and ambivalence about germline gene therapy. A clear distinction is drawn between therapy and enhancement, with the majority opposing gene enhancement. Conclusions: Attitudes towards the acceptability of gene therapy are not necessarily determined by experience of, or exposure to, a genetic condition. More research is needed with the general public to determine what is perceived to be acceptable public policy in this field.