International health policy survey in 11 countries: assessment of non-response bias in the Norwegian sample

BACKGROUND: International health policy surveys are used to compare and evaluate health system performance, but little is known about the effects of non-response. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of non-response in the Norwegian part of the Commonwealth Fund international health policy survey in 2009. METHODS: As part of an international health policy survey in 2009 a cross-sectional survey was conducted in Norway among a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners. 1,400 randomly selected GPs were sent a postal questionnaire including questions about the Norwegian health care system, the quality of the GPs' own practice and the cooperation with specialist health care. The survey included three postal reminders and a telephone follow-up of postal non-respondents. The main outcome measures were increase in response rate for each reminder, the effects of demographic and practice variables on response, the effects of non-response on survey estimates, and the cost-effectiveness of each reminder. RESULTS: After three postal reminders and one telephone follow-up, the response rate was 59.1%. Statistically significant differences between respondents and non-respondents were found for three variables; group vs. solo practice (p = 0.01), being a specialist or not (p < 0.001) and municipality centrality (least central vs. most central, p = 0.03). However, demographic and practice variables had little association with five outcome variables and the overall survey estimates changed little with additional reminders. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. CONCLUSIONS: The response rate in the Norwegian survey was satisfactory, and the effect of non-response was small indicating adequate representativeness. The cost-effectiveness of the final reminders was poor. The Norwegian findings strengthen the international project, but restrictions in generalizability warrant further study in other countries

Jury Systems Around the World

Lay citizens participate as decision makers in the legal systems of many countries. This review describes the different approaches that countries employ to integrate lay decision makers, contrasting in particular the use of juries composed of all citizens with mixed decision-making bodies of lay and law-trained judges. The review discusses research on the benefits and drawbacks of lay legal decision making as well as international support for the use of ordinary citizens as legal decision makers, with an eye to explaining a recent increase in new jury systems around the world. The review calls for more comparative work on diverse approaches to lay participation, examining how different methods of including lay participation promote or detract from fact finding, legal consciousness, civic engagement, and citizen power

Conceptualising spirituality for medical research and health service provision

The need to take account of spirituality in research and health services provision is assuming ever greater importance. However the field has long been hampered by a lack of conceptual clarity about the nature of spirituality itself. We do not agree with the sceptical claim that it is impossible to conceptualise spirituality within a scientific paradigm. Our aims are to 1) provide a brief over-view of critical thinking that might form the basis for a useful definition of spirituality for research and clinical work and 2) demystify the language of spirituality for clinical practice and research

Multi-level analysis of electronic health record adoption by health care professionals: A study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The electronic health record (EHR) is an important application of information and communication technologies to the healthcare sector. EHR implementation is expected to produce benefits for patients, professionals, organisations, and the population as a whole. These benefits cannot be achieved without the adoption of EHR by healthcare professionals. Nevertheless, the influence of individual and organisational factors in determining EHR adoption is still unclear. This study aims to assess the unique contribution of individual and organisational factors on EHR adoption in healthcare settings, as well as possible interrelations between these factors.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective study will be conducted. A stratified random sampling method will be used to select 50 healthcare organisations in the Quebec City Health Region (Canada). At the individual level, a sample of 15 to 30 health professionals will be chosen within each organisation depending on its size. A semi-structured questionnaire will be administered to two key informants in each organisation to collect organisational data. A composite adoption score of EHR adoption will be developed based on a Delphi process and will be used as the outcome variable. Twelve to eighteen months after the first contact, depending on the pace of EHR implementation, key informants and clinicians will be contacted once again to monitor the evolution of EHR adoption. A multilevel regression model will be applied to identify the organisational and individual determinants of EHR adoption in clinical settings. Alternative analytical models would be applied if necessary.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study will assess the contribution of organisational and individual factors, as well as their interactions, to the implementation of EHR in clinical settings.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results will be very relevant for decision makers and managers who are facing the challenge of implementing EHR in the healthcare system. In addition, this research constitutes a major contribution to the field of knowledge transfer and implementation science.</p

Punishing Terrorists: A Re-Examination of U.S. Federal Sentencing in the Postguidelines Era

The empirical literature on the theory and practice of sentencing politically motivated offenders such as terrorists in U.S. federal courts is limited. Thus, we know relatively little about the dealings between terrorist offenders and the criminal justice system or how these interactions may be influenced by changes in American legal or political context. This study summarizes previous findings relative to sentencing disparity among terrorists and nonterrorists in U.S. federal courts prior to the imposition of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. We then identify events occurring after the advent of the guidelines, including the early acts of terrorism on American soil. We evaluate the sentencing of terrorists versus nonterrorists following the confluence imposition of the guidelines and these events. We determine whether and how the sentencing disparity between terrorist and nonterrorist has changed since the implementation of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the terrorist events of the early 1990s. Based on our findings, we put forth suggestions as to the possible ways these conditions may have affected sentencing outcomes.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline