1,721,157 research outputs found
The hazards of correcting myths about health care reform
No full textContext: Misperceptions are a major problem in debates about health care reform and other controversial health issues.Methods: We conducted an experiment to determine if more aggressive media fact-checking could correct the false belief that the Affordable Care Act would create “death panels.” Participants from an opt-in Internet panel were randomly assigned to either a control group in which they read an article on Sarah Palin’s claims about “death panels” or an intervention group in which the article also contained corrective information refuting Palin.Findings: The correction reduced belief in death panels and strong opposition to the reform bill among those who view Palin unfavorably and those who view her favorably but have low political knowledge. However, it backfired among politically knowledgeable Palin supporters, who were more likely to believe in death panels and to strongly oppose reform if they received the correction.Conclusions: These results underscore the difficulty of reducing misperceptions about health care reform among individuals with the motivation and sophistication to reject corrective information
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
Price Transparency in American Healthcare: Public Policies to Support Market-Based Solutions
Get PDFThe United States has the most expensive healthcare system in the world. We pay more money per capita for care than any other country – around three times the OECD average. Healthcare accounts for nearly a quarter of our federal budget, and the average family of four in America pays over $20,000 out-of-pocket each year for care. And yet, our health outcomes are no better than those of countries that spend far less money on care; we receive considerably less bang for our buck.
As prices rise and we spend both more public and private dollars on healthcare, policy makers and other stakeholders must find ways to build more rational economic decision-making into the system. Unfortunately, the fee-for-service model makes this change difficult because it fundamentally misaligns incentives between patients, payers, and providers. Absent a complete overhaul of fee-for-service, several regulatory reforms and market innovations are essential to bending the healthcare cost curve.
Health policy experts agree that lack of price transparency is a major part of the problem. Patients often do not know the amount they will pay for care until they receive a bill, weeks or even months later. As consumer-driven healthcare becomes more the norm and patients pay more out-of-pocket for care, their ability to make value-based decisions is severely limited by the absence of treatment cost information. Functional, competitive markets require that all participants have access to complete, correct information regarding their choices. The American healthcare market is far from this ideal.
This paper reviews the price transparency problem in four parts. Part One explains the issue in more detail and provides a basic economic framework through which to understand the problem. Part Two presents an overview of government involvement in healthcare price transparency and includes policy initiatives at both the state and federal levels. Part Three covers private market involvement in the price transparency movement and shows how digital, cloud-based private market tools are making patients better healthcare consumers. Part Four looks ahead to future challenges in healthcare price transparency and outlines policy recommendations to ensure the movement’s success.
The following chart summarizes these key policy recommendations. State governments may be better positioned to implement some of these changes, such as establishing all-payer claims databases, whereas federal policy makers should enact others, such as Medicare data disclosure guidelines. These policies can all support market-based healthcare price transparency reforms and effectively allow for public-private incentive alignment and collaboration. As long as fee-for-service payment remains in United States healthcare, these types of policies and partnerships are essential to creating more competitive markets and ultimately improving population health.
Policy Recommendations to Support Healthcare Price Transparency:
➢ Mandate disclosure of physician quality and patient outcomes data alongside price information to illustrate value or cost-effectiveness
➢ Simplify payment models and offer clinical decision aids to help patients – particularly those with high deductible insurance plans – understand financial toxicity of treatment options and make decisions as savvy consumers
➢ Use value-based insurance design to better align payers’ and patients’ incentives and nudge patients towards higher value care
➢ Ban gag clauses in contractual agreements between insurers and providers
➢ Establish mandatory all-payer claims databases in every state
➢ Revise the Qualified Entity program under ACA Section 10332 to ensure all entities – public, private, or nonprofit – access to Medicare claims data
➢ Standardize public disclosure process and clarify data management guidelines to prevent abuse and misunderstanding of medical claims data
➢ Limit time period or scope of financial data released to prevent provider collusion around healthcare prices
➢ Provide additional resources to study the effects of price transparency on patients’ treatment and insurance purchasing decision
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
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
- …
