Iowa Agriculturist 82.02

Udderances 4 ISU Traditions 7 Antiques 8 Mechanization 10 Old Recipes 11 Draft horse-power 12 Collectables 17 Reminders of the past 18 Family Farms.. 19 Abandoned farms 20 One-room school house 22 Come to the fair 24 Africa\u27s agriculture 26 Before and after 29 Old idea rekindled 31 Cider time 33 Fox on the run 34 Home butchering 36 Farm-Op program 38https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/iowaagriculturist/1070/thumbnail.jp

Iowa Agriculturist Fall 1980

Udderances 4 British Wool Board 8 To shear a sheep 12 Looking at life... 13 Brazilian style 15 English cheddar 16 Bull vs. steers 19 International programs 20 Farmer\u27s daughter 22 Students earn credit 24 Exotic diseases 26 Horticulture 27 Ag careers promoted 29 Family Farm 30https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/iowaagriculturist/1069/thumbnail.jp

Exploring patients’ views toward giving web-based feedback and ratings to general practitioners in England : a qualitative descriptive study

Background: Patient feedback websites or doctor rating websites are increasingly being used by patients to give feedback about their health care experiences. There is little known about why patients in England may give Web-based feedback and what may motivate or dissuade them from giving Web-based feedback. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore patients’ views toward giving Web-based feedback and ratings to general practitioners (GPs), within the context of other feedback methods available in primary care in England, and in particular, paper-based feedback cards. Methods: A descriptive exploratory qualitative approach using face-to-face semistructured interviews was used in this study. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 18 participants from different age groups in London and Coventry. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Results: Half of the participants in this study were not aware of the opportunity to leave feedback for GPs, and there was limited awareness about the methods available to leave feedback for a GP. The majority of participants were not convinced that formal patient feedback was needed by GPs or would be used by GPs for improvement, regardless of whether they gave it via a website or on paper. Some participants said or suggested that they may leave feedback on a website rather than on a paper-based feedback card for several reasons: because of the ability and ease of giving it remotely; because it would be shared with the public; and because it would be taken more seriously by GPs. Others, however, suggested that they would not use a website to leave feedback for the opposite reasons: because of accessibility issues; privacy and security concerns; and because they felt feedback left on a website may be ignored. Conclusions: Patient feedback and rating websites as they currently are will not replace other mechanisms for patients in England to leave feedback for a GP. Rather, they may motivate a small number of patients who have more altruistic motives or wish to place collective pressure on a GP to give Web-based feedback. If the National Health Service or GP practices want more patients to leave Web-based feedback, we suggest they first make patients aware that they can leave anonymous feedback securely on a website for a GP. They can then convince them that their feedback is needed and wanted by GPs for improvement, and that the reviews they leave on the website will be of benefit to other patients to decide which GP to see or which GP practice to join

Recruiting general practitioners in England to participate in qualitative research : challenges, strategies, and solutions

In 2012, I conducted my first PhD study exploring general practitioners’ attitudes toward online patient feedback. After designing the research questions and topic guide to conduct the interviews, I reviewed existing literature where authors described recruiting general practitioners to take part in research. I found there was some focus in the literature on the challenges associated with low general practitioner participation in survey-based and intervention studies, but little that described the process, experience, and challenges associated with recruiting general practitioners to take part in qualitative research. Although general practitioners are known to be a difficult group to recruit to take part in research, the recruitment process I experienced was much more challenging than I had anticipated. This case study sheds light on my experience of recruiting 20 general practitioners in England to an interview-based study, and outlines a critical reflection on the eight strategies used for recruitment. I started by using traditional methods such as postal invitations and faxes to recruit general practitioners. Due to the very low success rate, I resorted to using more inexpensive and creative methods, such as sending an invitation letter through email, advertising in general practitioner Email Newsletters, seeking help from existing research networks, recruiting through friends and acquaintances, and using social media. In this case study, I also describe the participants’ (general practitioners’) motivations for taking part in the study, and I conclude with offering suggestions on how to maximize response rates to general practitioner-based qualitative studies in England

Public awareness, usage and predictors for the use of doctor rating websites : a cross-sectional study in England

Background: With the advent and popularity of social media and consumer rating websites, as well as the emergence of the digitally engaged patient, there has been an increased interest in doctor rating websites or online patient feedback (OPF) websites, both inside and outside academia. There is however little known about how the public across England view such rating websites as a medium to give patient experience feedback. Objective: The aim was to measure and understand public awareness and usage of doctor rating websites as a mode to give experiential feedback about GPs in general practice in England, within the context of other feedback methods, so that the value of OPF websites from the patients’ perspective could be determined. Methods: A mixed methods population questionnaire was designed, validated and implemented face to face using a cross-sectional design with a representative sample of the public (n=844) in England. The results of the questionnaire were analysed using chi square tests, binomial logistic regressions and content analysis. Results: Public awareness of OPF websites as a channel to leave experiential feedback about GPs was found to be low at 15% (128/844); however, usage and future consideration to use OPF websites was found to be extremely low, with current patient usage at just 0.36% (3/844), and patient intention to use OPF in the future at 18% (150/844). Furthermore, only 4-5% of those who would consider leaving feedback in the future selected doctor rating websites as their most preferred method to leave feedback about a GP, and more than half of patients said they would consider leaving feedback about GPs using another method, but not using an OPF website. Conclusions: The findings appear to suggest that OPF websites may not be an effective channel for collecting feedback on patient experience in general practice, and feedback on OPF websites is not likely to be representative of the patient experience in the near future. This challenges the use of OPF not just as a mode for collecting patient experience data, but for patient choice and monitoring too. We recommend the NHS to channel its investment and resources towards providing more direct and private feedback methods in general practice (such as opportunities for face-to-face feedback, email-based feedback and web-based private feedback forms), as these are much more likely to be used currently by the majority of patients in England. Keywords: online reviews; Physician quality; Primary Care; Internet; Quality patient empowerment; quality transparency; public reporting

Feature weighting techniques for CBR in software effort estimation studies: A review and empirical evaluation

Context : Software effort estimation is one of the most important activities in the software development process. Unfortunately, estimates are often substantially wrong. Numerous estimation methods have been proposed including Case-based Reasoning (CBR). In order to improve CBR estimation accuracy, many researchers have proposed feature weighting techniques (FWT). Objective: Our purpose is to systematically review the empirical evidence to determine whether FWT leads to improved predictions. In addition we evaluate these techniques from the perspectives of (i) approach (ii) strengths and weaknesses (iii) performance and (iv) experimental evaluation approach including the data sets used. Method: We conducted a systematic literature review of published, refereed primary studies on FWT (2000-2014). Results: We identified 19 relevant primary studies. These reported a range of different techniques. 17 out of 19 make benchmark comparisons with standard CBR and 16 out of 17 studies report improved accuracy. Using a one-sample sign test this positive impact is significant (p = 0:0003). Conclusion: The actionable conclusion from this study is that our review of all relevant empirical evidence supports the use of FWTs and we recommend that researchers and practitioners give serious consideration to their adoption

A Mixed-Methods Investigation of Factors and Scenarios Influencing College Students’ Decision to Complete Surveys at Five Mid-Western Universities

Achieving respectable response rates to surveys on university campuses has become increasingly more difficult, which can increase non-response error and jeopardize the integrity of data. Prior research has focused on investigating the effect of a single or small set of factors on college students’ decision to complete surveys. We used a concurrent mixed-method design to examine (1) college students’ rationales for choosing to complete or not complete a survey presented to them and (2) their perceptions on the importance of multiple factors on their decision to complete or not complete surveys in a higher education setting. A total of 837 undergraduate and graduate students across five institutions in the state of Ohio completed the qualitative survey component, 808 completed the 72-scenario close-ended survey component, and 701 completed the rank- order component. The survey was administered in the classroom either at the beginning or end of the class period. The college students reported that the person administering, topic, incentives, length, and method of administration are the factors most influencing their decision to complete a survey. The undergraduate students were significantly more likely than graduate students to include incentives as one of the top three important factors in deciding to complete a survey. Qualitative results additionally revealed that the students felt day/time and location of survey request plays an important role in their decision. Recommendations are provided to survey administrators regarding potential effective and ineffective survey recruitment strategies