172,802 research outputs found
On the Scanlon Plan and Servant-Leadership
No full textFor 75 years, Joe Scanlon, the Scanlon Plan, and Scanlon-led companies had a robust run in the world of business, aided by the Scanlon Leadership Network. Over time, the number of Scanlon companies declined, and in 2013 the Scanlon Leadership Network, Foundation, and Consultancy ceased to exist. And for the past 53 years, servant-leadership has been growing in practice and influence around the world. This article in The International Journal of Servant-Leadership is adapted from a book that we created and published in 2008 titled, Scanlon EPIC Leadership, published by the Scanlon Foundation. Sections of the paper include an overview of Scanlon thought, as well as servant-leadership; reflections on the significance of Scanlon by twenty leadership and business authors; commentary on Joe Scanlon by Warren Bennis; an analysis of the history of Scanlon practices by organizations, written by Paul W. Davis and Larry C. Spears; an Afterword by Max DePree; and, closing thoughts on the end of Scanlon companies after 75 years of practice. Joe Scanlon, the originator of what came to be called the Scanlon Plan, and Robert K. Greenleaf who coined the term “servant-leader” have each had a profound influence on leadership and management practices. What was once radical ideas have entered the mainstream. The following essay will delve into the ongoing impact of Scanlon thought through employee involvement, teams, labor-management cooperation, gainsharing, goal-sharing, profit-sharing, suggestion systems, open-book management, lean techniques, and Theory Y management; and also, how servant-leadership continues to shape our understanding of what it means to serve first, and then to lead
Lena Robitaille Collection
No full textPhotograph of James Robitaille, a Wyandotte. Photo by Scanlon, Wyandotte, KS, c.1886-1890
Delay in diabetic retinopathy screening increases the rate of detection of referable diabetic retinopathy.
No full textAIMS: To assess whether there is a relationship between delay in retinopathy screening after diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and level of retinopathy detected. METHODS: Patients were referred from 88 primary care practices to an English National Health Service diabetic eye screening programme. Data for screened patients were extracted from the primary care databases using semi-automated data collection algorithms supplemented by validation processes. The programme uses two-field mydriatic digital photographs graded by a quality assured team. RESULTS: Data were available for 8183 screened patients with diabetes newly diagnosed in 2005, 2006 or 2007. Only 163 with type 1 diabetes were identified and were insufficient for analysis. Data were available for 8020 with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Of these, 3569 were screened within 6 months, 2361 between 6 and 11 months, 1058 between 12 and 17 months, 366 between 18 and 23 months, 428 between 24 and 35 months, and 238 at 3 years or more after diagnosis. There were 5416 (67.5%) graded with no retinopathy, 1629 (20.3%) with background retinopathy in one eye, 753 (9.4%) with background retinopathy in both eyes and 222 (2.8%) had referable diabetic retinopathy. There was a significant trend (P = 0.0004) relating time from diagnosis to screening detecting worsening retinopathy. Of those screened within 6 months of diagnosis, 2.3% had referable retinopathy and, 3 years or more after diagnosis, 4.2% had referable retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of detection of referable diabetic retinopathy is elevated in those who were not screened promptly after diagnosis of type 2 diabetes
Screening attendance, age group and diabetic retinopathy level at first screen
No full textAIMS:
To report on the relationships between age at diagnosis of diabetes, time from registration with the screening programme to first diabetic eye screening and severity of diabetic retinopathy.
METHODS:
Data were extracted from four English screening programmes and from the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish programmes. Time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening and age at diagnosis were calculated.
RESULTS:
Time from registration with the screening programme to first screening episode is strongly related to age at registration. Within 18 months of registration 89% of 3958 young people under 18 years of age and 81% of 391 293 people over 35 years of age were seen. In 19 058 people between 18 and 34 years of age, 80% coverage was not reached until 2 years and 9 months. The time from diagnosis of diabetes to first screening is positively associated with severity of disease (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS:
This report is the first that to demonstrate that those in the 18-34 year age group are least likely to attend promptly for screening after registration with a higher risk of referable diabetic retinopathy being present at the time of first screen. Date of diagnosis should be recorded and prodigious efforts made to screen all people promptly after diagnosis. Screening programmes should collect data on those who have not attended within one year of registration
Photograph - Conferring - Solicitors: G. Harvey, D. Rechtman, S. Fry and C. Scanlon, Carmel Byrne and Prof Yeomans . 1991
No full textThis record was harvested from a previous catalogue system and will be withdrawn in 2025. Information in this record may be superseded or incomplete. Visit this record in UMA's new catalogue at: https://archives.library.unimelb.edu.au/nodes/view/290040Conferring - Solicitors: G. Harvey, D. Rechtman[?], S. Fry and C. Scanlon (in frame B12), Carmel Byrne (in frame B16) and Prof Yeomans (in frame B19). 1991309428
Item: [2003.0003.07103] "Photograph - Conferring - Solicitors: G. Harvey, D. Rechtman, S. Fry and C. Scanlon, Carmel Byrne and Prof Yeomans . 1991
i Table of Contents
No full textThe contents of this report (including figures and tables) document the work of the following licensed Texas geoscientists: Bridget Scanlon, Ph.D., P.G. No. 1645 Dr. Scanlon was responsible for the introductory material and parts of the methods and discussion. The seal appearing on this document was authorize
Author Correction: Global water resources and the role of groundwater in a resilient water future
No full textIn the version of this article originally published, reference 9 was incorrectly cited in the last sentence of the second paragraph under ‘Introduction’ and in the first sentence of the second paragraph under the ‘Water scarcity’ subsection. Scanlon et al. (Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1748-9326/ac3bfc, 2022) was incorrectly cited in the last sentence under ‘Drivers of water-resource variability’ but is now replaced with reference 38, and Figure 3 was wrongly stated to be adapted from reference 19 instead of reference 36. Reference 40 was mistakenly cited in the last sentence of the second paragraph under the ‘Increasing water access and supplies’ subsection, and reference 37 was inadvertently duplicated in the reference list. References 28 (now reading ‘Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L. and Alley, W. M. Ground Water and Surface Water: A Single Resource. Circular 1139 (United States Geological Survey, 1998)’) and 94 (now reading ‘Scanlon, B. R., Reedy, R. C., Faunt, C. C., Pool, D. and Uhlman, K. Enhancing drought resilience with conjunctive use and managed aquifer recharge in California and Arizona. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 035013 (2016)’) initially referred to incorrect sources. Lastly, the name of author Hannes Müller Schmied was incorrectly spelled Hannes Mueller Schmied, and an affiliation for him was missing: Senckenberg Leibniz Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), Frankfurt am Main, Germany. The errors have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article
Author Correction: Global water resources and the role of groundwater in a resilient water future
No full textIn the version of this article originally published, reference 9 was incorrectly cited in the last sentence of the second paragraph under ‘Introduction’ and in the first sentence of the second paragraph under the ‘Water scarcity’ subsection. Scanlon et al. (Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1748-9326/ac3bfc, 2022) was incorrectly cited in the last sentence under ‘Drivers of water-resource variability’ but is now replaced with reference 38, and Figure 3 was wrongly stated to be adapted from reference 19 instead of reference 36. Reference 40 was mistakenly cited in the last sentence of the second paragraph under the ‘Increasing water access and supplies’ subsection, and reference 37 was inadvertently duplicated in the reference list. References 28 (now reading ‘Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L. and Alley, W. M. Ground Water and Surface Water: A Single Resource. Circular 1139 (United States Geological Survey, 1998)’) and 94 (now reading ‘Scanlon, B. R., Reedy, R. C., Faunt, C. C., Pool, D. and Uhlman, K. Enhancing drought resilience with conjunctive use and managed aquifer recharge in California and Arizona. Environ. Res. Lett. 11, 035013 (2016)’) initially referred to incorrect sources. Lastly, the name of author Hannes Müller Schmied was incorrectly spelled Hannes Mueller Schmied, and an affiliation for him was missing: Senckenberg Leibniz Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre (SBiK-F), Frankfurt am Main, Germany. The errors have been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article
The use of statistical methodology to determine the accuracy of grading within a diabetic retinopathy screening programme
No full textAIMS:
We aimed to use longitudinal data from an established screening programme with good quality assurance and quality control procedures and a stable well-trained workforce to determine the accuracy of grading in diabetic retinopathy screening.
METHODS:
We used a continuous time-hidden Markov model with five states to estimate the probability of true progression or regression of retinopathy and the conditional probability of an observed grade given the true grade (misclassification). The true stage of retinopathy was modelled as a function of the duration of diabetes and HbA1c .
RESULTS:
The modelling dataset consisted of 65 839 grades from 14 187 people. The median number [interquartile range (IQR)] of examinations was 5 (3, 6) and the median (IQR) interval between examinations was 1.04 (0.99, 1.17) years. In total, 14 227 grades (21.6%) were estimated as being misclassified, 10 592 (16.1%) represented over-grading and 3635 (5.5%) represented under-grading. There were 1935 (2.9%) misclassified referrals, 1305 were false-positive results (2.2%) and 630 were false-negative results (11.0%). Misclassification of background diabetic retinopathy as no detectable retinopathy was common (3.4% of all grades) but rarely preceded referable maculopathy or retinopathy.
CONCLUSION:
Misclassification between lower grades of retinopathy is not uncommon but is unlikely to lead to significant delays in referring people for sight-threatening retinopathy
Wladyslaw Kubiak and George T. Scanlon : Fustat expedition Final Report, vol. 2 : Fustat C. American Research Center in Egypt Reports, vol. 11, 1989
No full textHardy-Guilbert Claire. Wladyslaw Kubiak and George T. Scanlon : Fustat expedition Final Report, vol. 2 : Fustat C. American Research Center in Egypt Reports, vol. 11, 1989. In: Bulletin critique des annales islamologiques, n°10, 1993. pp. 218-220
- …
