Please note, due to essential maintenance online transactions will not be possible between 02:30 and 04:00 BST, on Tuesday 17th September 2019 (22:30-00:00 EDT, 17 Sep, 2019). We apologise for any inconvenience.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
More than 50 HTA agencies evaluate the clinical value of medicines in Europe, resulting in duplication of work for HTA agencies and manufacturers, and lengthy and variable time to reimbursement for patients across Europe. A consistent, single European relative clinical scientific benefit assessment of medicines could become a key element in ensuring patients get equitable and timely access across Europe. The European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) is responsible under Joint Action 3 (JA3, 2016–2020) to pilot more than 30 Relative Effectiveness Assessments (REAs) of medicines. The first EUnetHTA JA3 REA pilots are now being completed and Roche, with its participation in the REA pilot for alectinib, has gathered relevant experience.
The goal of this analysis is to summarize and reflect upon the experience with one of the first EUnetHTA REA assessments in JA3. The authors also propose potential process improvements.
The experience with the alectenib REA shows that EUnetHTA processes have improved compared to JA2. The timing of the assessment has been aligned with the EU regulatory marketing authorization process by shortening the duration of the scoping phase. More EUnetHTA members than in JA2 seem to be committed to use the reports in national HTA, pricing and reimbursement processes. At the same time, the REA pilots have identified other areas that could benefit from further refinement, for example the active engagement of patient group representatives and clinical experts, rules and principles related to the handling of confidential information.
Based on the limited number of REA pilots for medicines it is too early to draw final conclusions on the state of EU-level collaboration. But first signals indicate a positive development compared to REA pilots conducted in JA2. Interim evaluations are recommended to assess progress, and capture learnings for future pilots.
Syntactic awareness has been linked to word reading and reading comprehension. The predictive power of two syntactic awareness tasks (grammatical correction, word-order correction) for both aspects of reading was explored in 8- and 10-year-olds. The relative contributions of vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, and memory to each were assessed. After vocabulary, memory explained variance on the word-order correction task; in contrast, grammatical knowledge explained performance on the grammatical correction task. The relation between syntactic awareness and reading comprehension was mediated by vocabulary, grammatical knowledge, and memory; in contrast, word reading and syntactic awareness shared unique variance not explained by these controls. The implications for how we measure syntactic awareness and its relation with reading ability are discussed.
Two studies investigating young readers' use of conjunctions are reported. In Study One, 145 eight- to ten-year-olds completed one of two narrative cloze tasks in which different types of conjunction were deleted. Performance for additive conjunctions was not affected by age in this study, but older children were more likely to select the target conjunction than were younger children for temporal, causal, and adversative terms. Performance was superior in the cloze task in which they were given a restricted choice of responses (three vs. seven). In Study Two, 35 eight- and nine-year-old good and poor comprehenders completed the three-choice cloze task. The poor comprehenders were less likely to select the target terms in general. Sentence-level comprehension skills did not account for their poor performance. The results indicate that understanding of the semantic relations expressed by conjunctions is still developing long after these terms are used correctly in children's speech. The findings are discussed in relation to the role of conjunctions in text comprehension.
This study investigated young children's ability to use narrative contexts to infer the meanings of novel vocabulary items. Two groups of 15 seven- to eight-year olds participated: children with normally developing reading comprehension skill and children with weak reading comprehension skill. The children read short stories containing a novel word and were required to produce a meaning for the novel word, both before and after its useful defining context. The proximity of the novel word to this context was manipulated. The results supported the hypothesis that children with weak reading comprehension skills are impaired in their ability to integrate information within a text, particularly when that information is non-adjacent and the processing demands are, therefore, high. Analysis of the error data revealed a similar pattern of types of errors for both groups: children with poor reading comprehension were not more likely to produce a thematically inappropriate response than their skilled peers.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.