Dennis McCarty receives prestigious Kentucky award 2022
Dennis McCarty, Ph.D., an Emeritus Professor in the School of Public Health at the Portland State University and Oregon Health & Science University, has been inducted to the University of Kentucky College of Arts & Sciences Hall of Fame 2022. This blog celebrates Dr McCarty‘s work and contribution to my research career. Please, see the event details below.
How to find non-academic mentors
Mentors facilitate professional development in academia. But non-academic mentors are equally important. Here, I acknowledge non-academic mentors and their contribution to my development as a professional and as a person.
Engage in not for profit organizations.
Two organizations jump started my work in non-profits, the University Pastoral Centre and a youth club. I learned the power of community building through youth activism with John Lesondak and taught team building for non-profits with Ivan Humenik. With Ivan and friends, we also had a musical band, JK& band. These activities inspired me to get involved in the community projects for people who use drugs. (more…)
America could relax opioid treatment access policies
Canada and the United States (U.S.) face an opioid use disorder and opioid overdose epidemic.
The most effective OUD treatment is opioid agonist therapy (OAT). It means buprenorphine (with and without naloxone) and methadone. Although federal approval for OAT occurred decades ago, in both countries, access to and use of OAT is low. Restrictive policies and complex regulations contribute to limited treatment access. (more…)
New paper out now: Psychosocial Interventions for Alcohol use among problem drug users
May 18th: Many people in methadone treatment receive it through their primary care provider. As many also drink alcohol excessively, there is a need to address alcohol use to improve health outcomes for these individuals. We examined problem alcohol use and its treatment among people attending primary care for methadone maintenance treatment, using baseline data from a feasibility study of an evidence-based complex intervention to improve care.
What have we found: Clinical records indicated that 24 patients (19%) were screened for problem alcohol use in the 12 months prior to data collection, with problem alcohol use identified in 14 (58% of those screened, 11% of the full sample). Of those who screened positive for problem alcohol use, five received a brief intervention by a GP, and none were referred to specialist treatment.
Scores on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) revealed the prevalence of hazardous, harmful and dependent drinking to be 25% (n=26), 6% (n=6), and 16% (n=17) respectively.
Only 12 (11.3%) AUDIT questionnaires concurred with corresponding clinical records that a patient had any/ no problem alcohol use. Regular use of primary care was evident, as 25% had attended their GP more than 12 times during the past three months.
What does this mean: Comparing clinical records with patients’ experience of SBIRT can shed light on the process of care. Alcohol screening of people who attend primary care for substance use treatment is not routinely conducted. Interventions that enhance the care of problem alcohol use among this high-risk group are a priority.
To read the full article, go to the website of the Journal of Dual Diagnosis: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15504263.2015.1027630#.VVtIBpO6eJY
Cite as: Klimas, J., Henihan, AM., McCombe, G., Swan, D., Anderson, R., Bury, G., Dunne, C., Keenan, E., Saunders, J., Shorter, GW., Smyth, B., Cullen, W. (2015) Psychosocial INTerventions for Alcohol use among problem drug users (PINTA): Baseline feasibility data. Journal of Dual Diagnosis 11(2):96-106
Cite as: Klimas, J., Henihan, AM., McCombe, G., Swan, D., Anderson, R., Bury, G., Dunne, C., Keenan, E., Saunders, J., Shorter, GW., Smyth, B., Cullen, W. (2015) Psychosocial INTerventions for Alcohol use among problem drug users (PINTA): Baseline feasibility data. Journal of Dual Diagnosis 11(2):96-106
Answer to Ethan #38: how to write a science blog
Ethan Siegel posed challenging questions in his post about science blogging. They prompted me to think about my own blog. If you’d ever been thinking about your own blog too, my thoughts might help.
 |
| Figure 1 Ethan’s blog. Photo credit scienceblogs.com |
1) What is it that you’d like to write about?
I started my blog without careful planning. Shortly after the start, I’ve read someone else’s blog and I realized that I could write about the research I’m doing and about our research group. Blogging was my way of publicising and highlighting my research work. There wasn’t much research to write about at that time. Or, perhaps, as a starting writer, I didn’t see the writing opportunities as I see them now. I started to write about many other topics, including my personal life, hobbies and interests. Sometimes midway my evolution as a blogger, I took stock and divided my topics into three main categories: science, academic and creative. The science and academic categories differed mainly by the language and style of writing. Creative group was everything else. For instance, travel, concerts, poetry, etc.
2) Who is your audience?
 |
| Figure 2 William Zinsser, photo credit: npr.org |
The first time I have been asked this question was when I talked to Rachel Dresbeck, PhD. I didn’t like that question because I was reading William Zinsser and he said to forget about writing for somebody. “Write for yourself”, I’ve read in his book (On writing well). I told Rachel that I’m writing for academics and psychiatrists who get bored on conferences and who check social media for amusement. She laughed. I laughed too. But there’s a grain of truth in that answer. I write for everybody who likes my posts and who shares my passions. As I grow, my passions develop too. With them, my target audience changes too – from enthusiast researchers and potential researchers to free spirits, artists and life lovers.
3) what are the goals of your writing?
To write a lot.
Some writing leads to more writing. It’s an amazing discovery; one topic leads to another.
To enjoy writing and like its results.
Some topics are easier to write about – on some days, my thoughts flow better. I find it really surprising to read posts that were difficult to write and see that I like them.
To share my ideas and see whether they spark some discussion.
In agreement with my point #1, I don’t write for a particular person or group. Nevertheless, I still want, need, and urge to share my writing with someone. Maybe it’s just the residual momentum from my blogging youth, or a continuing need for highlighting my work/life. Regardless of the motivation, I continue to write a public blog and assume that the silence of commentators = agreement and that “the vast majority of them simplywon’t comment or engage you.“
 |
| Figure 3 Portland, Oregon guide by Rachel Dresbeck photo credit abebooks.com |
4) what else is Ethan advising to science bloggers?
This is merely a summary of Ethan’s useful tips, some of which I mentioned above:
- write often
- be self-critical and honest about your own writing
- find your own style
- share your work with the online community
- be a real person
- be prepared for the kind of negativity that only the internet can heap upon you