1,720,996 research outputs found
Evidence-based health policy in Germany: lack of communication and coordination between academia and health authorities?
No full textAbstract Health-care decision making should consider the best available evidence, often in the form of systematic reviews (SRs). The number of existing SRs and their overlap make their identification and use difficult. Decision makers often rely on de novo SRs instead of using existing SRs. We describe two cases of duplicate reviews (minimum volume threshold of total knee arthroplasties and lung cancer screening) and one case of duplicate primary data analysis (transcatheter aortic valve implantation). All cases have in common that unintended duplication of research occurred between health authorities and academia, demonstrating a lack of communication and coordination between them. It is important to note that academia and health authorities have different incentives. Academics are often measured by the number of peer-reviewed publications and grants awarded. In contrast, health authorities must comply with laws and are commissioned to deliver a specific report within a defined period of time. Most replication is currently unintended. A solution may be the collaboration of stakeholders commonly referred to as integrated knowledge translation (IKT). The IKT approach means that research is conducted in collaboration with the end users of the research. It requires active collaborations between researchers and decision-makers or knowledge users (clinicians, managers, policy makers) throughout the research process. Wherever cooperation is possible in spite of requirements for independence or confidentiality, legal regulations should facilitate and support collaborative approaches between academia and health authorities
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
the influence of reimbursement mechanisms on the adoption and diffusion of new health technologies
No full textDie Finanzierung neuer Gesundheitstechnologien im stationären Sektor erfolgt oft über Entgelte für Neue Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden (NUB-Entgelte) als temporäres Erstattungsinstrument. Mehr als zehn Jahre nach ihrer Einführung gibt es kaum Studien über NUB-Entgelte und wie sie die Anwendung und Verbreitung von neuen Gesundheitstechnologien beeinflussen. Auch die Ergänzung einer Nutzenbewertung bei Anfrage bestimmter NUB-Entgelte wurde bislang nicht näher untersucht.
Ziel dieser Arbeit ist, Wissen über die Anwendung und Wirkung von NUB-Entgelten in der stationären Versorgung zu generieren und Anreize sowie Fehlanreize des Erstattungsinstruments zu identifizieren. Vor dem Hintergrund der Nutzenbewertung bestimmter Technologien bei Anfrage als NUB-Entgelt soll die Ausgestaltung der Regelung analysiert werden. Abschließend soll diese Arbeit aufzeigen, an welchen Stellen die Regelungen zur Erstattung von Leistungen zu Schwierigkeiten in der Patientenversorgung führen können und einer besseren Ausgestaltung bedürfen. Die Arbeit basiert auf sekundär und primär erhobenen Daten, die unter Anwendung und Weiterentwicklung von quantitativen und qualitativen Methoden analysiert wurden.
Die Studien legen dar, dass zusätzliche Erstattungsmechanismen grundsätzlich geeignet sind, Anreize des Vergütungssystems, die zur Nicht-Anwendung teurerer Technologien führen können, in der Versorgung auszugleichen. Der Wechsel von zusätzlichen Erstattungsmechanismen setzt dabei seinerseits Anreize, die zur Mehranwendung einer Technologie im Jahr nach dem Erstattungswechsel führt. Hinsichtlich der an NUB-Entgelte angeschlossenen Nutzenbewertung bleibt unklar, ob die Ausgestaltung der Regelung die Evidenz über den Nutzen neuer Gesundheitstechnologien wirklich erhöht. Auch die Analyse von Rechtsprechungen zu Gesundheitstechnologien legt dar, dass nach vielen Jahren der Anwendung von Technologien Unsicherheit über deren Nutzen und damit über deren Erstattung besteht. Dabei kamen Sozialgerichte zu unterschiedlichen Kostenerstattungs-entscheidungen bei inhaltlich und zeitlich ähnlichen Fällen.
Demnach fördern NUB-Entgelte die Adoption und Diffusion neuer Gesundheitstechnologien, wobei manche Krankenhäuser Wettbewerbsvorteile haben, sie zu vereinbaren und die Erstattung bislang nicht zu einer ausreichenden Datengrundlage hinsichtlich Evidenz zur Wirksamkeit der Technologien führt.New medical technologies in German inpatient care are often reimbursed with innovation payments as additional reimbursement mechanism. More than ten years after their introduction there have been barely any studies on the effect of innovation payments on the utilisation of new medical technologies. Furthermore, the benefit assessment attached to these payments have not received much research attention.
Aim of this work is to generate knowledge on the use and effect of innovation payments in inpatient care and to identify incentives and disincentives of this payment instrument. In the context of a benefit assessment of certain technologies with innovation payments, the design of the regulation will be analysed. Finally, this work aims to reveal areas where the regulations in place lead to difficulties in patient care and require a better regulation. The work is based on secondarily and primarily gathered data, that were analysed by using and further developing quantitative and qualitative methods.
The studies suggest that additional reimbursement instruments are generally suitable to balance disincentives of the reimbursement system that could lead to the non-adoption of more expensive new technologies. The change of additional reimbursement instruments itself incentivises the increasing use of a technology in the year after the change.
Regarding the benefit assessment in this context, it is unclear whether the design of the regulation will in fact increase the available evidence on the benefit of new technologies. Also the analysis of jurisdiction on health technologies suggests that uncertainty on the benefit and thus on the reimbursement of technologies after many years of utilisation. Judicial decisions differed in their results regarding reimbursement, despite deciding on the same technology at a similar point in time.
In effect, innovation payments facilitate the adoption and diffusion of new medical technologies, while some hospitals have competition advantages in negotiating them and furthermore, the reimbursement does not yet lead to a sufficient data base regarding evidence on the effectiveness of the technologies
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Stenting versus Ballondilatation bei koronarer Herzkrankheit systematische Übersichten zur medizinischen Effektivität und zur Kosten-Effektivität
No full text- …
