Kualitas Hidup Pasien Diabetes Melitus Tipe 2 di Puskesmas Se Kota Kupang

Diabetes Mellitus is well known as a chronic disease which can lead to a decrease in quality of life in all domains. The study aims to explore the diabetic type 2 patient\u27s quality of life and find out the factors affecting in type 2 diabetic mellitus patients. The cross-sectional study design is used that included 65 patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus, in 11 public health centers of Kupang City. Data were collected by using Short Form Survey (SF-36) that assessed 8-scale health profile. Independent sample t-test is used to analyze the correlation between the factors affecting and the quality of life. the study showed that the QoL of DM patients decreased in all 8- health profile including physical functioning, social functioning, mental health, general health, pain, change in the role due to physical problems and emotional problems. The Study also showed there was a relationship between gender, duration of suffering from Diabetes mellitus, and complications to the quality of life. Male perceived a better quality of life than female

Understanding conflict among experts working on controversial species: A case study on the Australian dingo

Funder: Australian Dingo Foundation; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007400Funder: Australian Government Research Training Program scholarshipExpert elicitation can be valuable for informing decision‐makers on conservation and wildlife management issues. To date, studies eliciting expert opinions have primarily focused on identifying and building consensus on key issues. Nonetheless, there are drawbacks of a strict focus on consensus, and it is important to understand and emphasize dissent, too. This study adopts a dissensus‐based Delphi to understand conflict among dingo experts. Twenty‐eight experts participated in three rounds of investigation. We highlight disagreement on most of the issues explored. In particular, we find that disagreement is underpinned by what we call “conflict over values” and “conflict over evidence.” We also note the broader role played by distrust in influencing such conflicts. Understanding and recognizing the different elements shaping disagreement is critical for informing and improving decision‐making and can also enable critique of dominant paradigms in current practices. We encourage greater reflexivity and open deliberation on these aspects and hope our study will inform similar investigations in other contexts