Re: Digest Number 2204

[Guest guest]

Kay,

Your comments about the lab test are usually true, however in my case those 2

came back normal. Had LFT's in the 1800 and 2000 range. Liver biopsy and

response to prednisone is what finally clinched the diagnosis for me.

.

[Guest guest]

Rhonda, I did a search on CMV and came only with Cytomegalovirus. Is this

what you mean? Did you have a liver biopsy or an intestinal biopsy? From

everything I've read, I can't fathom how the two could be confused. Were

you tested for an antinuclear antibody? A liver biopsy usually makes a

diagnosis pretty clear. Do you have problems with retinitis, colitis or

encephalitis? If you are referring to something else when you say CMV, I

apologize. The ASMA test should be helpful in a diagnosis, particularly

when accompanied by an ANA test.

Anyway, best of luck. KayK in Austin

[Guest guest]

Hi Kay,

Yes it is cytomegaloviris hepatitis. I did have a liver biopsy in

Nov. and the results showed similarities to both cmv and AIH. I was

told the symptoms are very similar to both.

I have had difficulty in finding info. on cmv as it relates to me.

Apparently, it is so varied and usually appears in children and

those with HIV. But the info. isn't hepatitis specific. Because the

dr. isn't sure, he is currently running a slew of tests including

the antismooth muscle antibody tests and others. I was supposed to

have the results back today, but when I called they said he had

added a lot of others to the list so I won't have them back until

next Wed.

Because of this unsurety I began doing more research on AIH and can

relate with alot of the common symptoms.

Thanks,

Rhonda/TN

> Rhonda, I did a search on CMV and came only with Cytomegalovirus.

Is this

> what you mean? Did you have a liver biopsy or an intestinal

biopsy? From

> everything I've read, I can't fathom how the two could be

confused. Were

> you tested for an antinuclear antibody? A liver biopsy usually

makes a

> diagnosis pretty clear. Do you have problems with retinitis,

colitis or

> encephalitis? If you are referring to something else when you say

CMV, I

> apologize. The ASMA test should be helpful in a diagnosis,

particularly

> when accompanied by an ANA test.

> Anyway, best of luck. KayK in Austin

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/11/02 4:00:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, writes:

Hi all,

to those of you who have experienced joint pain from AIH...is it a "dull ache" (that can be pretty painful), or a sharper, burning pain? Does it affect only a couple of joints at a time, or do they all ache at the same time? Do you take any meds for the joint pain? What kind? I've been thinking that all this joint pain was lupus related, but it finally dawned on my fuzzy little brain that it's different than the pain I usually get. So I was wondering if it's from the AIH? Thanks so much. Laurie

Could be AIH. Joint and muscle pain aren't unusual. They tend to be worse when you first reduce a Prednisone dosage (in tapering).

Harper

[Guest guest]

I agree with you, , that we would not stand a cat in hell's chance of getting this and I am not sure (like Margaret) whether we would want it. I know that Birkbeck are going for it, possibly collaborating with others. They stand the greatest chance since they have been doing all the initial work. Only someone with a large capacity will be able to get this off the ground in a relatively short time scale. I have major concerns against comparing it with 'normal' health visiting. Quite apart from the variety in what is offered around the country what we found in the evaluaiton of the First Parent Health Visiting Programme was that health visitors felt that being given permission to spend additional time enabled them to do 'proper' health visiting. In addition, even with teh FPHV, HVs felt that it was too prescriptive let along what the NFP stipulates. The evaluation should really be comparing health visiting where the time spent with each family is equal to that spend within the NFP. We would then see whether it is the NFP or the additional time that is beneficial. Even better would be to have 3 arms whereby these two are compared with another, UK based, intervention/programme. I can't see it happening thought because the government want this to be successful. Looking at how the NFP is carried out, whether it is stuck to and to what extent (another concern of mine since HVs are known to be v good at doing their own thing!) should be slightly easier and less problematic to do - I would v much hope that this will be included by whomever is sucessful. b/wToity Dr Toity DeaveResearch FellowCentre for Child & Adolescent HealthHampton HouseCotham HillBristol BS6 6JS Tel: 0117 3310893 (direct: 0117 3310752)Fax: 0117 3310891Web: www.bristol.ac.uk/ccah-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] Sent: 25 April 2008 13:57 Subject: Digest Number 2204SENATE FOR HEALTH VISITING AND SCHOOL NU Messages In This Digest (8 Messages) 1a. Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley 1b. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Caan, Woody 1c. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley 1d. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Maggie Fisher 1e. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Margaret Buttigieg 1f. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley 1g. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Margaret Buttigieg 1h. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Sheelah Seeley View All Topics | Create New Topic Messages 1a. Family Nurse Partnership again Posted by: " Cowley" sarahcowley183@... senatehvsn1 Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:15 am (PDT) The 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley.I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or on http://www.nihr.ac.uk/ calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishessarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack'>http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to top Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8) 1b. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again Posted by: "Caan, Woody" Woody.Caan@... Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:57 am (PDT) ,Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover thismulti-centre Evaluation?There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites inLondon, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with expertiselike yours and Jane Sandall's?Woody.________________________________From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 24 April 2008 15:15 Subject: Family Nurse Partnership againThe 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announcedin March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out.The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull,Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North EastLincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother,Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton;the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets,Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley. I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issuesfor commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots.These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for theevaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't getattachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the researchevaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or onhttp://www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishesEmail has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' emailmanagement service <http://www.altman.co.uk/emailsystems> In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by Ruskin. Visit www.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information.This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system.Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University.Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communicationsBack to top Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8) 1c. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again Posted by: " Cowley" sarahcowley183@... senatehvsn1 Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:13 am (PDT) Nice idea, Woody, but I think we would be seriously outclassed if we were not able to work with the 'big guns' in multi-site complex evaluations. Also, timing is quite tight, so most will already have worked out a lot of their thinking. My suspicion is that it will go to Birkbeck, as they already have a head start having done the pilot stage evaluation and Sure Start evaluation. Oxford and IoE are also big players in the field. Sadly, practice knowledge/experience doesn't count for much here. The areas that will participate in the evaluations have already been identified, as well, as condition of the funding they receive - South East Essex is there.On 24 Apr 2008, at 15:57, Caan, Woody wrote:>> ,> Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover this > multi-centre Evaluation?> There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites > in London, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with > expertise like yours and Jane Sandall's?> Woody.>> From: [mailto:SENATE- > HVSN ] On Behalf Of Cowley> Sent: 24 April 2008 15:15> > Subject: Family Nurse Partnership again>> The 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were > announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation > study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, > Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, > Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, > Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton > Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; > the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower > Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE > Essex, Barnsley.>> I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed > issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint > from giving the initial 'implementation results' > from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so > that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the > same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are > available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call > (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or on http:// > www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspx>> best wishes>> > Email has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email > management service>>> In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by > Ruskin. Visit www.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information.>> This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named > recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you > in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy > or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight > the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system.>> Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not > necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin > University.>> Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and > attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with > good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are > actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent > over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communications>>> sarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to top Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8) 1d. Re: Family Nurse Partnership again Posted by: "Maggie Fisher" mfisher2241@... maggie891498 Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:05 am (PDT) Many thanks for this , very useful to haveVery best wishesMaggie Re: Family Nurse Partnership againNice idea, Woody, but I think we would be seriously outclassed if we were not able to work with the 'big guns' in multi-site complex evaluations. Also, timing is quite tight, so most will already have worked out a lot of their thinking. My suspicion is that it will go to Birkbeck, as they already have a head start having done the pilot stage evaluation and Sure Start evaluation. Oxford and IoE are also big players in the field. Sadly, practice knowledge/experience doesn't count for much here. The areas that will participate in the evaluations have already been identified, as well, as condition of the funding they receive - South East Essex is there. On 24 Apr 2008, at 15:57, Caan, Woody wrote:,Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover this multi-centre Evaluation?There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites in London, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with expertise like yours and Jane Sandall's?Woody.----------------------------------------------------------From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 24 April 2008 15:15 Subject: Family Nurse Partnership againThe 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley.I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or on http://www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishesEmail has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email management service----------------------------------------------------------In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by Ruskin. Visitwww.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information. This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system. Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University. Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communications sarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnsarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to top Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8) Recent Activity 2 New MembersVisit Your Group HealthMemory LossAre you at riskfor Alzheimers?Meditation andLovingkindnessA Groupto share and learn.Dog Zoneon Join a Groupall about dogs.Need to Reply?Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar Change settings via the Web ( ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Terms of Use | Unsubscribe This incoming email to UWE has been independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were detected

This email was independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were found

[Guest guest]

Thanks Toity, this is helpful.  You are right, a three-arm trial would be ideal, but like you, I suspect it would be too complex and expensive and not what the government would want.  It is interesting (thinking back to the 'helping new families' document produced by the Conservatives for their spring conference) that they are proposing a sort of 'Olds-lite' programme for everyone:  two antenatal visits, six hours in  the first fortnight after birth, fortnightly visits for all for six months, then monthly to a year.  It would be very interesting to compare that to the prescribed Olds programme.  On 25 Apr 2008, at 14:39, Toity Deave wrote:I agree with you, , that we would not stand a cat in hell's chance of getting this and I am not sure (like Margaret) whether we would want it. I know that Birkbeck are going for it, possibly collaborating with others. They stand the greatest chance since they have been doing all the initial work. Only someone with a large capacity will be able to get this off the ground in a relatively short time scale. I have major concerns against comparing it with 'normal' health visiting. Quite apart from the variety in what is offered around the country what we found in the evaluaiton of the First Parent Health Visiting Programme was that health visitors felt that being given permission to spend additional time enabled them to do 'proper' health visiting. In addition, even with teh FPHV, HVs felt that it was too prescriptive let along what the NFP stipulates. The evaluation should really be comparing health visiting where the time spent with each family is equal to that spend within the NFP. We would then see whether it is the NFP or the additional time that is beneficial. Even better would be to have 3 arms whereby these two are compared with another, UK based, intervention/programme. I can't see it happening thought because the government want this to be successful. Looking at how the NFP is carried out, whether it is stuck to and to what extent (another concern of mine since HVs are known to be v good at doing their own thing!) should be slightly easier and less problematic to do - I would v much hope that this will be included by whomever is sucessful. b/wToity   Dr Toity DeaveResearch FellowCentre for Child & Adolescent HealthHampton HouseCotham HillBristol BS6 6JS Tel: 0117 3310893(direct: 0117 3310752)Fax: 0117 3310891Web: www.bristol.ac.uk/ccah-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] Sent: 25 April 2008 13:57 Subject: Digest Number 2204SENATE FOR HEALTH VISITING AND SCHOOL NUMessages In This Digest (8 Messages)1a.Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley1b.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Caan, Woody1c.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley1d.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Maggie Fisher1e.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Margaret Buttigieg1f.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Cowley1g.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Margaret Buttigieg1h.Re: Family Nurse Partnership again From: Sheelah SeeleyView All Topics | Create New TopicMessages1a.Family Nurse Partnership againPosted by: " Cowley" sarahcowley183btinternet  senatehvsn1Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:15 am (PDT)The 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley.I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or on http://www.nihr.ac.uk/ calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishessarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack'>http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to topReply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8)1b.Re: Family Nurse Partnership againPosted by: "Caan, Woody" Woody.Caananglia (DOT) ac.ukThu Apr 24, 2008 7:57 am (PDT),Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover thismulti-centre Evaluation?There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites inLondon, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with expertiselike yours and Jane Sandall's?Woody.________________________________From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 24 April 2008 15:15 Subject: Family Nurse Partnership againThe 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announcedin March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out.The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull,Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North EastLincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother,Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton;the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets,Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley. I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issuesfor commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots.These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for theevaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't getattachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the researchevaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or onhttp://www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishesEmail has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' emailmanagement service <http://www.altman.co.uk/emailsystems> In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by Ruskin. Visit www.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information.This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system.Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University.Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communicationsBack to topReply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8)1c.Re: Family Nurse Partnership againPosted by: " Cowley" sarahcowley183btinternet  senatehvsn1Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:13 am (PDT)Nice idea, Woody, but I think we would be seriously outclassed if we were not able to work with the 'big guns' in multi-site complex evaluations. Also, timing is quite tight, so most will already have worked out a lot of their thinking. My suspicion is that it will go to Birkbeck, as they already have a head start having done the pilot stage evaluation and Sure Start evaluation. Oxford and IoE are also big players in the field. Sadly, practice knowledge/experience doesn't count for much here. The areas that will participate in the evaluations have already been identified, as well, as condition of the funding they receive - South East Essex is there.On 24 Apr 2008, at 15:57, Caan, Woody wrote:>> ,> Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover this > multi-centre Evaluation?> There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites > in London, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with > expertise like yours and Jane Sandall's?> Woody.>> From: [mailto:SENATE- > HVSN ] On Behalf Of Cowley> Sent: 24 April 2008 15:15> > Subject: Family Nurse Partnership again>> The 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were > announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation > study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, > Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, > Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, > Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton > Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; > the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower > Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE > Essex, Barnsley.>> I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed > issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint > from giving the initial 'implementation results' > from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so > that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the > same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are > available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call > (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or on http:// > www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspx>> best wishes>> > Email has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email > management service>>> In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by > Ruskin. Visit www.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information.>> This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named > recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you > in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy > or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight > the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system.>> Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not > necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin > University.>> Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and > attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with > good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are > actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent > over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communications>>> sarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to topReply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8)1d.Re: Family Nurse Partnership againPosted by: "Maggie Fisher" mfisher2241btinternet  maggie891498Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:05 am (PDT)Many thanks for this , very useful to haveVery best wishesMaggie Re: Family Nurse Partnership againNice idea, Woody, but I think we would be seriously outclassed if we were not able to work with the 'big guns' in multi-site complex evaluations. Also, timing is quite tight, so most will already have worked out a lot of their thinking. My suspicion is that it will go to Birkbeck, as they already have a head start having done the pilot stage evaluation and Sure Start evaluation. Oxford and IoE are also big players in the field. Sadly, practice knowledge/experience doesn't count for much here. The areas that will participate in the evaluations have already been identified, as well, as condition of the funding they receive - South East Essex is there. On 24 Apr 2008, at 15:57, Caan, Woody wrote:,Should there be a national, collaborative SENATE bid to cover this multi-centre Evaluation?There is only one in my Region (Southend is in the EoE) but 4 sites in London, so perhaps Kings should lead on this collaborative, with expertise like yours and Jane Sandall's?Woody.----------------------------------------------------------From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 24 April 2008 15:15 Subject: Family Nurse Partnership againThe 20 'Wave 2' sites for the Family Nurse Partnership were announced in March, and a call for proposals for the evaluation study has now come out. The 20 new sites are Sunderland, Cumbria, Liverpool, Blackpool, Leeds, Hull, Nottingham, Calderdale, Stockport, South Birmingham, Coventry, North East Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Islington, Lambeth, Hastings and Rother, Milton Keynes, Plymouth, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Southampton; the original 10 (Wave 1) were Somerset, Manchester, Slough, Tower Hamlets, Derby, Walsall, Southwark, County Durham/Darlington, SE Essex, Barnsley.I attach details of a seminar held in January, which discussed issues for commissioning the evaluation study, and a powerpoint from giving the initial 'implementation results' from the Wave 1 pilots. These have only just been released, so that all researchers bidding for the evaluation get them at the same time. For anyone who doesn't get attachments, they are available as part of an annexe to the research evaluation call (which is too big to attach), on the DCFS website, or onhttp://www.nihr.ac.uk/calls_for_proposals.aspxbest wishesEmail has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email management service----------------------------------------------------------In 2008 we are celebrating 150 years since our foundation by Ruskin. Visitwww.anglia.ac.uk/150years for more information. This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named recipient(s) only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone: please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and then immediately delete the e-mail from your system. Any opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University. Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which may not be a 100% secure communications sarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnsarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnBack to topReply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post Messages in this topic (8)Recent Activity 2New MembersVisit Your Group HealthMemory LossAre you at riskfor Alzheimers?Meditation andLovingkindnessA Groupto share and learn.Dog Zoneon Join a Groupall about dogs.Need to Reply?Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the WebMessages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar Change settings via the Web ( ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Terms of Use | UnsubscribeThis incoming email to UWE has been independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were detectedThis email was independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were found sarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn