12 research outputs found
Current State of Conservation Knowledge on Threatened Amphibian Species in Peru
This study documents the current state of conservation knowledge on threatened amphibian species in Peru. Following the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) classification system, we considered species in the following categories: Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, and Near Threatened. Even though only the first three categories are regarded as threatened by IUCN, we included the fourth category to make comparisons with the list of threatened species issued by the Peruvian government. We used the Global Amphibian Assessment\u27s database and the list issued in Peru for this comparison. We conducted separate field surveys in 17 regions of Peru to evaluate the presence/absence of threatened amphibian species and species that are potentially threatened. We also used the Declining Amphibian Database-DAPTF, to compare our results with previous assessments on population declines, and the World Wildlife Fund\u27s Wildfinder database, to determine in which Neotropical ecoregion each species occurs. We compiled data on 83 species, 44 of which are recognized as threatened by the IUCN and/or the Peruvian government. The remaining 39 species should be re-assessed as they face various threats. A re-evaluation of current estimates is needed as only 8% of all species recorded in Peru are recognized as threatened by the government, whereas the global estimate of threatened species is about 32%. In addition to using IUCN criteria, this re-assessment should follow national guidelines standardized in Peru and be in accordance with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Because the habitat of almost 40% of threatened species reported herein still remains unprotected, and data on chytridiomycosis and other threats are lacking for most taxa, it is crucial to develop strategies for habitat conservation and research on disease dynamics in natural populations
Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries
Background
Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres.
Methods
This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and lowâmiddle-income countries.
Results
In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of âsingle-useâ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for lowâmiddle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia.
Conclusion
This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both highâ and lowâmiddleâincome countries
Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries
Abstract
Background
Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres.
Methods
This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and lowâmiddle-income countries.
Results
In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of âsingle-useâ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for lowâmiddle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia.
Conclusion
This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both highâ and lowâmiddleâincome countries
Assessment of Angiogenesis and Cell Survivability of an Inkjet Bioprinted Biological Implant in an Animal Model
The rapidly growing field of tissue engineering hopes to soon address the shortage of transplantable tissues, allowing for precise control and fabrication that could be made for each specific patient. The protocols currently in place to print large-scale tissues have yet to address the main challenge of nutritional deficiencies in the central areas of the engineered tissue, causing necrosis deep within and rendering it ineffective. Bioprinted microvasculature has been proposed to encourage angiogenesis and facilitate the mobility of oxygen and nutrients throughout the engineered tissue. An implant made via an inkjet printing process containing human microvascular endothelial cells was placed in both B17-SCID and NSG-SGM3 animal models to determine the rate of angiogenesis and degree of cell survival. The implantable tissues were made using a combination of alginate and gelatin type B; all implants were printed via previously published procedures using a modified HP inkjet printer. Histopathological results show a dramatic increase in the average microvasculature formation for mice that received the printed constructs within the implant area when compared to the manual and control implants, indicating inkjet bioprinting technology can be effectively used for vascularization of engineered tissues
CSES Module 5 Full Release
CSES Module 5 (2016-2021) focuses on the politics of populism. It explores the relationship between the rise of populist parties and the distribution of populist attitudes cross-nationally. The main objective of the module is to examine citizensâ perceptions of political elites, âout-groupsâ and national identity, and the implications for electoral democracy. The module enables researchers to account for variation in the contestation of political elites and âpopulistâ attitudes across democracies and to examine how such perceptions shape citizens electoral behavior.The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) is a collaborative program of research among election study teams from around the world. Participating countries include a common module of survey questions in their post-election studies. The resulting data are deposited along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables. The studies are then merged into a single, free, public dataset for use in comparative study and cross-level analysis. The CSES project focuses on respondentsÂŽ behavior and attitudes during the time of a national election, with a particular emphasis on voting and turnout. Each CSES Module consists of a nationally-representative post-election survey and additional variables about the context of the overall country and electoral system within which the respondents find themselves. Every five years a new CSES Module is designed with a different substantive theme selected to address essential questions in electoral studies and social science. CSES Module 5 focuses on the examination of so-called ÂŽpopulist attitudesÂŽ in the population and how they shape electoral behavior. It focuses on the the measurement of three core themes: attitudes towards political elites, attitudes towards representative democracy and majority rule, and attitudes towards out-groups. More information regarding the theme of Module 5 can be found in the CSES Module 5 Theoretical Statement available on the CSES website. Topics: MICRO-LEVEL DATA: Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors; election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post-election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); study context (CSES conducted as part of a larger study or as stand-alone study); mode of interview; self-selection into mode of interview; duration of interview; interviewer ID; sex of interviewer; number of days fieldwork started after the election; duration of fieldwork; date questionnaire administered; number of days the interview was conducted after the 1st and 2nd round of election; language of questionnaire administration; questionnaire version. Demography: year and month of birth; sex; education; marital status; union membership; current employment status; main occupation; socio economic status; employment type - public or private; household income; number of persons in household; attendance at religious services; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; region of residence; race; ethnicity; rural or urban residence; primary electoral district; country of birth; migration background. Survey variables: political interest; interest in politics in the media; internal efficacy; attitude towarnds political elites; attitude towards out-groups (minorities should adapt to the customs and traditions of the country, the will of the majority should always prevail, immigrants are generally good the countryâs economy, countryâs culture is generally harmed by immigrants, immigrants increase crime rates); criteria for national identity (e.g. born in country, ancestry, to be able to speak country national languages, to follow customs and traditions of the country); spread of corruption; government action: government should take measures to reduce differences in income levels; attitude towards redistribution; evaluation of the governmentâs performance in general; any of the parties that represents respondentâs views; party that represents respondentâs views best; state of economy; respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; vote choice (presidential, lower house and upper house elections) at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the current election; vote choice for the outgoing government in the current main election; difference who is in power and who people vote for; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of parties on the left-right-scale and/or an optional alternative scale; self-assessment on a left-right-scale and an optional alternative scale; satisfaction with democracy; closeness to any political party; party identification; party the respondent feels closest to; intensity of party identification. DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA: number of seats contested in electoral district/ nationwide electoral district; number of candidates (district/ nationwide electoral district); number of party lists (district/ nationwide electoral district); percent vote of different parties (electoral district/ nationwide electoral district); official voter turnout in electoral district/ nationwide electoral district. MACRO-LEVEL DATA: size of electorate or population in the electoral district /nationwide electoral district; election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout (as a percentage of registered voters/ of the voting age of population); electoral management: electoral administration model (independent body, government, mixed); compulsory voter registration; kind of voting operations; party of the president and the prime minister before and after the election; number of portfolios held by each party in cabinet, prior to and after the most recent election; size of the cabinet after the most recent election; ideological families of parties; left-right position of parties assigned by experts and alternative dimensions; populism by party; populism-scale of parties; most salient factors in the election; fairness of the election; formal complaints against national level results; election irregularities reported; scheduled and held date of election; irregularities of election date; extent of election violence and post-election violence; geographic concentration of violence; post-election protest; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; electoral alliances in practice; did any electoral alliances form; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement and types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; votes cast; voting procedure; voting rounds; party lists close, open, or flexible; transferable votes; cumulated votes if more than one can be cast; compulsory voting; party threshold; unit for the threshold; freedom house rating; age of the current regime; regime: type of executive; number of months since last lower house and last presidential election; electoral formula for presidential elections; electoral formula in all electoral tiers (majoritarian, proportional or mixed); for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; linked electoral segments; dependent formulae in mixed systems; subtypes of mixed electoral systems; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; number of seats above the first segment (lower house); fused vote; size of the lower house; constitutional federal structure; number of legislative chambers; percentage of women in parliament; party funding: direct or indirect public funding; number of parties participating in election; effective number of electoral parties and parliamentary parties; direct democracy (referendum mandatory, optional, by citizen initiative, referendum result binding or consultive); freedom houseâs rating of freedom in the country at three time periods (the election year, one year before election, and two years before election); democracy-autocracy polity IV rating; Gini coefficient of equalized disposable income in the year of election; GDP growth (annual percent â World Bank-); GDP per capita; inflation, GDP Deflator (annual percent); Central Government debt, total (percent GDP); Human development index; total population; unemployment rate (percent of total labor force); unemployment rate for people aged 15-24 years (percent of total labor force); country is subject to International Monetary Fund conditionality at election; Transparency International corruption perception index; control of corruption index; expert judgment of public sector: firms that provide the most favorable kickbacks to public servants; public sector employees and how the treat society; frequency that public sector employees treat cases impartially, and strive to follow rules; net migration rate (2000-2005, 2005-2010, 2010-2015, 2015-2020); population by citizenship: percentage of population who are citizens, foreigners, unknown citizenship status; linguistic fractionalization index; religious fractionalization index, ethnic fractionalization index; polity fragmentation index; percentage of individuals using the internet; mobile phone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants; fixed telephone lines per 100 inhabitants; party identification codes from the Manifesto Research on Political Representation project (MARPOR/CMP); party identification codes from the Parliament and Government Database (ParlGov) project.Das CSES Module 5 (2016-2021) legt den Schwerpunkt auf âthe politics of populismâ, also auf Populismus. Es erforscht lĂ€nderĂŒbergreifend den Zusammenhang zwischen dem Aufstieg von populistischen Parteien und der Verteilung von âpopulistischenâ Einstellungen innerhalb der Bevölkerung. Hauptziel des Moduls ist es, die Auffassungen der BĂŒrgerInnen von politischen Eliten, gesellschaftlichen âOut-Groupsâ und nationaler IdentitĂ€t sowie die sich hieraus ergebenden Implikationen fĂŒr reprĂ€sentative Demokratien zu analysieren. Die Daten erlauben es Forschenden somit, die Variation im Wettbewerb politischer Eliten und âpopulistischerâ Einstellungen ĂŒber Demokratien hinweg mit einzubeziehen, und zu untersuchen, wie solche Wahrnehmungen das Wahlverhalten von BĂŒrgerInnen beeinflussen.Die Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) ist eine weltweite Kooperation von Wahlforschern. Teilnehmende LĂ€nder implementieren einen einheitlichen Fragenkomplex in ihre Nachwahlstudien. Die erhoben Daten umfassen das individuelle Wahlverhalten, politische Einstellungen und sozio-demographische Merkmale sowie Angaben zu den Wahlbezirken, den nationalen Wahlergebnissen und dem nationalen politischen System. Die einzelnen LĂ€nderstudien werden in einen gemeinsamen Datensatz integriert und stehen der Wissenschaft fĂŒr vergleichende und lĂ€nderĂŒbergreifende Untersuchungen frei zur VerfĂŒgung. Das CSES-Projekt konzentriert sich auf das Verhalten und die Einstellungen von Befragten wĂ€hrend einer nationalen Wahl, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf Abstimmung und Wahlbeteiligung liegt. Jedes CSES-Modul besteht aus einer national-reprĂ€sentativen Umfrage nach den Wahlen und zusĂ€tzlichen Variablen ĂŒber den Kontext des Landes und des Wahlsystems, in dem sich die Befragten befinden. Alle fĂŒnf Jahre wird ein neues CSES-Modul mit einem anderen inhaltlichen Thema entwickelt, das fĂŒr die Behandlung wesentlicher Fragen der Wahl- und Sozialwissenschaften ausgewĂ€hlt wurde. CSES Modul 5 konzentriert sich auf die Untersuchung der so genannten ÂŽpopulistischen EinstellungenÂŽ in der Bevölkerung und wie sie das Wahlverhalten beeinflussen. Es konzentriert sich auf die Messung von drei Kernthemen: Einstellungen gegenĂŒber politischen Eliten, Einstellungen gegenĂŒber reprĂ€sentativer Demokratie und Mehrheitsregierung sowie Einstellungen gegenĂŒber AuĂengruppen. Weitere Informationen zum Thema des Moduls 5 finden Sie in der theoretischen ErklĂ€rung zum CSES-Modul 5, die auf der CSES-Website verfĂŒgbar ist. Themen: DATEN AUF MIKROEBENE: Identifizierungs- und Studienadministrationsvariablen: Gewichtungsfaktoren; Art der Wahl; Datum der Wahl der ersten und zweiten Runde; Zeitpunkt der Studie (Nachwahlstudie, Vor- und Nachwahlstudie, zwischen den Runden der Mehrheitswahl); Studienkontext (CSES als Teil einer gröĂeren Studie oder als eigenstĂ€ndige Studie durchgefĂŒhrt); Art des Interviews; Selbstauswahl Interviewmodus; Dauer des Interviews; Interviewer-ID; Geschlecht des Interviewers; Anzahl der Tage nach der Wahl fĂŒr den Beginn der Datenerhebung; Dauer der Feldarbeit; Datum des Fragebogens; Anzahl der Tage, an denen das Interview nach der ersten und zweiten Wahlrunde durchgefĂŒhrt wurde; Sprache der Fragebogenadministration; Fragebogenversion. Demographie: Geburtsjahr und -monat; Geschlecht; Bildung; Familienstand; Gewerkschaftszugehörigkeit; aktueller Erwerbsstatus; Hauptberuf; sozioökonomischer Status; BeschĂ€ftigungsart - öffentlich oder privat; Haushaltseinkommen; Anzahl der Personen im Haushalt; KirchgangshĂ€ufigkeit; Konfession; Sprache, die ĂŒblicherweise zu Hause gesprochen wird; Wohnregion; Rasse; ethnische Zugehörigkeit; lĂ€ndlicher oder stĂ€dtischer Wohnsitz; Hauptwahlkreis; Geburtsland; Migrationshintergrund. Umfragevariablen: politisches Interesse; Interesse an der Politik in den Medien; innere Wirksamkeit; Einstellung zu politischen Eliten; Einstellung zu AuĂengruppen (Minderheiten sollten sich den BrĂ€uchen und Traditionen des Landes anpassen, der Wille der Mehrheit sollte immer vorherrschen, Einwanderer sind im Allgemeinen gut fĂŒr die Wirtschaft des Landes, die Kultur des Landes wird generell von Einwanderern geschĂ€digt, Einwanderer erhöhen die KriminalitĂ€tsrate); Kriterien fĂŒr nationale IdentitĂ€t (z.B. im Land geboren, Abstammung, Landessprachen sprechen können, BrĂ€uche und Traditionen des Landes befolgen); Verbreitung von Korruption; RegierungsmaĂnahmen: Forderung nach RegierungsmaĂnahmen zum Abbau von Einkommensunterschieden; Einstellung gegenĂŒber Umverteilung; Bewertung der Leistung der Regierung im Allgemeinen; Parteien, die die Ansichten des Befragten vertreten; Partei, die die Ansichten des Befragten am besten vertritt; Zustand der Wirtschaft; Befragte hat bei der aktuellen und der vorherigen Wahl eine Stimme abgegeben; Wahl (PrĂ€sidentschafts-, Unterhaus- und Oberhauswahlen) bei der aktuellen und der vorherigen Wahl; Befragte hat bei der aktuellen Wahl eine Vorzugsentscheidung abgegeben; Stimmenwahl fĂŒr die scheidende Regierung bei der aktuellen Hauptwahl; Unterschied, wer an der Macht ist und fĂŒr wen die Menschen stimmen; Sympathie-Skala fĂŒr ausgewĂ€hlte Parteien und politische FĂŒhrer; Bewertung von Parteien auf einer Links-Rechts-Skala und einer optionalen alternativen Skala; SelbsteinschĂ€tzung auf der Links-Rechts-Skala und einer optionalen alternativen Skala; Demokratiezufriedenheit; NĂ€he zu einer politischen Partei; Parteiidentifikation; Partei, der sich der Befragte am nĂ€chsten fĂŒhlt; IntensitĂ€t der Parteiidentifikation. DATEN AUF BEZIRKSEBENE: Anzahl der im Wahlkreis/ bundesweiten Wahlkreis umkĂ€mpften Sitze; Anzahl der Kandidaten (Bezirk/ bundesweiter Wahlkreis); Anzahl der Parteienlisten (Bezirk/ bundesweiter Wahlkreis); Prozentsatz der Stimmen verschiedener Parteien (Wahlkreis/ bundesweiter Wahlkreis); offizielle Wahlbeteiligung im Wahlkreis/ bundesweiter Wahlkreis. DATEN AUF MAKROEBENE: WĂ€hleranteil oder Bevölkerung im Wahlkreis / bundesweiten Wahlkreis; Wahlergebnisse der Parteien bei der aktuellen Parlamentswahl (Unterhaus/Oberhaus); Prozentsatz der Sitze im Unterhaus bei den Parteien bei der aktuellen Unterhauswahl/Oberhauswahl; Prozentsatz der Sitze im Oberhaus bei den Parteien bei der aktuellen Unterhauswahl/Oberhauswahl; Prozentsatz der Stimmen bei den PrĂ€sidentschaftskandidaten der Parteien bei den laufenden Wahlen; Wahlbeteiligung (in Prozent der registrierten WĂ€hler/des Wahlalters der Bevölkerung); Wahlmanagement: Wahlverwaltungsmodell (unabhĂ€ngiges Organ, Regierung, gemischt); obligatorische WĂ€hlerregistrierung; Art der Stimmabgabe; Partei des PrĂ€sidenten und des Premierministers vor und nach der Wahl; Anzahl der von jeder Partei im Kabinett gehaltenen Portfolios, vor und nach der letzten Wahl; GröĂe des Kabinetts nach der letzten Wahl; ideologische Parteifamilien; von Experten zugewiesene Links-rechts-Position der Parteien und alternative Dimensionen; Populismus nach Parteien; Populismus-Skala der Parteien; die wichtigsten Faktoren bei der Wahl; Fairness der Wahl; formelle Beschwerden ĂŒber Ergebnisse auf nationaler Ebene; gemeldete WahlunregelmĂ€Ăigkeiten; geplantes und durchgefĂŒhrtes Wahldatum; UnregelmĂ€Ăigkeiten des Wahltermins; AusmaĂ der Gewalt bei der Wahl und nach den Wahlen; geografische Konzentration der Gewalt; Protest nach den Wahlen; wĂ€hrend des Wahlkampfes zulĂ€ssige WahlbĂŒndnisse; WahlbĂŒndnisse in der Praxis; Bildung von WahlbĂŒndnissen; Anforderungen an gemeinsame Parteienlisten; Möglichkeit der Anerkennung und Art der Anerkennungsvereinbarung; mehrheitliche BefĂŒrwortung der Abstimmung; abgegebene Stimmen; Abstimmungsverfahren; Abstimmungsrunden; Parteienlisten geschlossen, offen oder flexibel; ĂŒbertragbare Stimmen; kumulierte Stimmen, wenn mehr als eine Stimme abgegeben werden kann; Pflichtabstimmung; Parteienschwelle; Einheit fĂŒr die Schwelle; Freedom House Rating; Alter des derzeitigen Systems; Regime: Art der Exekutive; Anzahl der Monate seit der letzten Unterhauswahl und den letzten PrĂ€sidentschaftswahlen; Wahlformel fĂŒr PrĂ€sidentschaftswahlen; Wahlformel in allen Wahlstufen (mehrheitlich, proportional oder gemischt); fĂŒr Unter- und OberhĂ€user wurde kodiert: Anzahl der Wahlsegmente; vernetzte Wahlsegmente; abhĂ€ngige Formeln in gemischten Systemen; Subtypen der gemischten Wahlsysteme; BezirksgröĂe (Anzahl der aus jedem Bezirk gewĂ€hlten Mitglieder); Anzahl der sekundĂ€ren und tertiĂ€ren Wahlkreise; Anzahl der Sitze ĂŒber dem ersten Segment (Unterhaus); fusionierte Abstimmung; GröĂe des Unterhauses; verfassungsmĂ€Ăige föderale Struktur; Anzahl der Parlamentskammern; Anteil der Frauen im Parlament; Parteienfinanzierung: direkte oder indirekte öffentliche Finanzierung; Anzahl der an den Wahlen teilnehmenden Parteien; effektive Anzahl der Wahlparteien und Parlamentsfraktionen; direkte Demokratie (Referendum obligatorisch, optional, durch BĂŒrgerinitiative, Referendumsergebnis verbindlich oder konsultiv); Freiheitsgrad des Freedom House im Land zu drei Zeitpunkten (Wahljahr, ein Jahr vor der Wahl und zwei Jahre vor der Wahl); Bewertung der Demokratie-Autokratie-Politik IV; Gini-Koeffizient des verfĂŒgbaren Einkommens im Jahr der Wahl; BIP-Wachstum (in Prozent pro Jahr - Weltbank); BIP pro Kopf; Inflation, BIP-Deflator (in Prozent pro Jahr); Verschuldung der Zentralregierung, insgesamt (in Prozent BIP); Human development index; Gesamtbevölkerung; Arbeitslosenquote (in Prozent der gesamten Erwerbsbevölkerung); Arbeitslosenquote fĂŒr Personen im Alter von 15-24 Jahren (in Prozent der gesamten Erwerbsbevölkerung); Land unterliegt bei Wahlen der KonditionalitĂ€t des Internationalen WĂ€hrungsfonds; Transparency International Index fĂŒr die Wahrnehmung der Korruption; Index fĂŒr die Kontrolle der Korruption; Beurteilung des öffentlichen Sektors durch Experten: Unternehmen, die den Beamten die vorteilhaftesten Bestechungsgelder bieten; Angestellte des öffentlichen Dienstes und wie sie die Gesellschaft behandeln; HĂ€ufigkeit, mit der Angestellte des öffentlichen Dienstes FĂ€lle unparteiisch behandeln und nach Einhaltung der Regeln streben; Nettomigrationsrate (2000-2005, 2005-2010, 2010-2015, 2015-2020); Bevölkerung nach Staatsangehörigkeit: Prozentsatz der Bevölkerung, die BĂŒrger, AuslĂ€nder oder unbekannter Staatsangehörigkeitsstatus sind; sprachlicher Fraktionierungsindex; religiöser Fraktionierungsindex, ethnischer Fraktionierungsindex; Fragmentierungsindex des Gemeinwesens; Prozentsatz der Personen, die das Internet nutzen; Mobilfunkabonnements pro 100 Einwohner; feste Telefonleitungen pro 100 Einwohner; Parteiidentifikationscodes aus dem Manifesto Research on Political Representation Project (MARPOR/CMP); Parteiidentifikationscodes aus dem Parliament and Government Database (ParlGov) project
Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries
Background: Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods: This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was coprioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low-middle-income countries. Results: In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of 'single-use' consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low-middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion: This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high- and low-middle-income countries