Isiksuse ja lugemissoravuse vaheline seos

https://www.ester.ee/record=b5506851*es

Workshop to scope and preselect indicators for criterion D3C3 under MSFD decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE)

The workshop to scope and preselect indicators for Descriptor 3 criterion 3 under MSFD Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848 (WKD3C3SCOPE) provided a platform for experts from the EU member states and relevant regional bodies to meet and support development and progress the assessment methodology, based on a request by the EC (DGENV). WKD3C3SCOPE is the first of a series of three workshops (WKD3C3THRESHOLDS and WKSIMULD3) to provide guidance in relation to operational indicators for MSFD D3C3. The workshop was organized as a series of presentations with intermittent group discussions. On the first day of the workshop the participants discussed what defines a ‘healthy population structure’ for species with different life history traits (ToR a). During the following days, the group discussed and identified relevant D3C3 indicators (ToR b) and developed criteria to select among the identified D3C3 indicators to allow further testing and setting of thresholds at WKD3C3THRESHOLDS (ToR c). The participants found that overall, healthy fish stocks are characterized by high productivity, wide age and size structuring in the population, and the ability to quickly recover from disturbances. The groups noted that environmental factors, along with stock biomass and fishing pressure, influence the productivity and health of a stock, with environment playing a particularly large role in the recruitment of short-lived stocks. It was suggested that the age structure of a stock might be more relevant for evaluating the health of long-lived stocks. However, it was acknowledged that not all stocks have sufficient data to evaluate all proposed indicators, and a single indicator is unlikely to suffice for all stocks. Data availability, species- specific factors and regional or sub-regional variation are thus also important considerations. In relation to ToR b, the participants presented their work on potential indicators including: recruitment time-series, proportion of fish larger than the mean size of first sexual maturation, F rec/Fbar, length distribution L 90, relative proportion of old fish above A 90, indicators of spawner quality, and SSB/R. A discussion on pros/cons, benefits to the population of high or low indicator values, benefits supported by empirical evidence, applicability to data-poor stocks and benefits supported by simulation/theoretical considerations followed the presentations. Finally, in relation to ToR c, the difficulty emerged in ranking the indicators alone without considering the data used to estimate them and a new set of evaluation criteria for use in WKD3C3THRESHOLDS were defined. Based on the outputs of the meeting a list of indicators to be further evaluated has been drafted, which also emphasizes the stocks for which studies have empirically demonstrated effects on productivity. In addition to the listed indicators, indicators of genetic diversity and proportion of fish with parasite infestation were mentioned but to the knowledge of the participants, widespread data for these are currently not publicly available.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Hearing the Voice of the Resident in Long-Term Care Facilities—An Internationally Based Approach to Assessing Quality of Life

OBJECTIVES: interRAI launched this study to introduce a set of standardized self-report measures through which residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) could describe their quality of life and services. This article reports on the international development effort, describing measures relative to privacy, food, security, comfort, autonomy, respect, staff responsiveness, relationships with staff, friendships, and activities. First, we evaluated these items individually and then combined them in summary scales. Second, we examined how the summary scales related to whether the residents did or did not say that the LTCFs in which they lived felt like home. DESIGN: Cross-sectional self-report surveys by residents of LTCFs regarding their quality of life and services. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Resident self-report data came from 16,017 individuals who resided in 355 LTCFs. Of this total, 7113 were from the Flanders region of Belgium, 5143 residents were from Canada, and 3358 residents were from the eastern and mid-western United States. Smaller data sets were collected from facilities in Australia (20), the Czech Republic (72), Estonia (103), Poland (118), and South Africa (87). MEASUREMENTS: The interRAI Self-Report Quality of Life Survey for LTCFs was used to assess residents' quality of life and services. It includes 49 items. Each area of inquiry (eg, autonomy) is represented by multiple items; the item sets have been designed to elicit resident responses that could range from highly positive to highly negative. Each item has a 5-item response set that ranges from "never" to "always." RESULTS: Typically, we scored individual items scored based on the 2 most positive categories: "sometimes" and "always." When these 2 categories were aggregated, among the more positive items were: being alone when wished (83%); decide what clothes to wear (85%); get needed services (87%); and treated with dignity by staff (88%). Areas with a less positive response included: staff knows resident's life story (30%); resident has enjoyable things to do on weekends (32%); resident has people to do things with (33%); and resident has friendly conversation with staff (45%). We identified 5 reliable scales; these scales were positively associated with the resident statement that the LTCF felt like home. Finally, international score standards were established for the items and scales. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes a set of standardized, self-report items and scales with which to assess the quality of life and services for residents in LTCFs. The study also demonstrates that these scales are significantly related to resident perception of the home-like quality of the facilities.status: publishe

European postgraduate curriculum in geriatric medicine developed using an international modified Delphi technique

WOS: 000462615200022PubMed ID: 30423032the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS-GMS) recommendations for training in Geriatric Medicine were published in 1993. The practice of Geriatric Medicine has developed considerably since then and it has therefore become necessary to update these recommendations. under the auspices of the UEMS-GMS, the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EuGMS) and the European Academy of Medicine of Ageing (EAMA), a group of experts, representing all member states of the respective bodies developed a new framework for education and training of specialists in Geriatric Medicine using a modified Delphi technique. Thirty-two expert panel members from 30 different countries participated in the process comprising three Delphi rounds for consensus. The process was led by five facilitators. the final recommendations include four different domains: General Considerations on the structure and aim of the syllabus as well as quality indicators for training (6 sub-items), Knowledge in patient care (36 sub-items), Additional Skills and Attitude required for a Geriatrician (9 sub-items) and a domain on Assessment of postgraduate education: which items are important for the transnational comparison process (1 item). the current publication describes the development of the new recommendations endorsed by UEMS-GMS, EuGMS and EAMA as minimum training requirements to become a geriatrician at specialist level in EU member states.EUGMSThe project was supported by EUGMS by a restricted grant in 2017, which was used to support the administrative work during the Delphi procedure