Empirically Evaluating the Impact of Adjudicative Tribunals in the Health Sector: Context, Challenges and Opportunities

Adjudicative tribunals are an integral part of health system governance, yet their real-world impact remains largely unknown. Most assessments focus on internal accountability and use anecdotal methodologies; few, studies if any, empirically evaluate their external impact and use these data to test effectiveness, track performance, inform service improvements and ultimately strengthen health systems. Given that such assessments would yield important benefits and have been conducted successfully in similar settings (e.g. specialist courts), their absence is likely attributable to complexity in the health system, methodological difficulties and the legal environment within which tribunals operate. We suggest practical steps for potential evaluators to conduct empirical impact evaluations along with an evaluation matrix template featuring possible target outcomes and corresponding surrogate endpoints, performance indicators and empirical methodologies. Several system-level strategies for supporting such assessments have also been suggested for academics, health system institutions, health planners and research funders. Action is necessary to ensure that policymakers do not continue operating without evidence but can rather pursue data-driven strategies that are more likely to achieve their health system goals in a cost-effective way

Evaluating the Impact of Remedial Authority: Adjudicative Tribunals in the Health Sector

Adjudicative tribunals play an important role in the health sector yet their actual influence, as part of the health system, remains undetermined. Most of the studies that have evaluated their work have focused on measures of accountability and independence, rather than the indicators of societal impact. As efforts to reform health systems continue internationally, it is crucial that we understand the benefits and costs of adjudicative tribunals for providers and consumers of heath. In this regard, empirically evaluating the impact of adjudicative tribunals will help inform policymaking through the collection of objective data. A strong and accountable health care system depends on understanding the way these tribunals work and the effects of their decisions

The Elusive Search for Accountability: Evaluating Adjudicative Tribunals

Evaluating the success of adjudicative tribunals is an important but elusive undertaking. Adjudicative tribunals are created by governments and given statutory authority by legislatures for a host of reasons. These reasons may and often do include legal aspects, policy aspects and partisan aspects. While such tribunals are increasingly being asked by governments to be accountable, too often this devolves into publishing statistics on their caseload, dispositions, budgets and staffing. We are interested in a different and more basic question – are these tribunals successful? How do we know, for example, whether the remedies ordered by a tribunal actually do advance the purposes for which it was created? Can the success of an adjudicative tribunal be subject to meaningful empirical validation? While issues of evaluation and accountability cut across national and jurisdictional boundaries, the authors argue that this type of question can only be addressed empirically, by actually looking to the practice of a particular board or boards, in the context of a particular statute or statutes, and in particular jurisdictions at particular times. Such accounts can and should form the basis for comparative study. Only through comparative study can the value and limitations of particular methodologies become apparent. This study takes as its case study the role of adjudicative tribunals in the health system. The authors draw primarily from Canadian tribunal experience, though examples from other jurisdictions are used to demonstrate the potential of empirical evaluation. The authors discuss the relative dearth of empirical study in administrative law and argue that it ought to be the focus of the discussion on accountability in administrative justice

First record of Penthalodes ovalis (Dugès, 1834) in agricultural area with notes on its pest status (Acari: Penthalodidae)

The first record of species Penthalodes ovalis (Dugès, 1834) in agricultural habitat is presented in this paper. This is also the first record of the occurrence and damages on grown plants. The variability of the morphology and new data on the biology are given as well

Enhancing transparency of the research process to increase accuracy of findings: A guide for relationship researchers

The purpose of this paper is to extend to the field of relationship science, recent discussions and suggested changes in open research practises. We demonstrate different ways that greater transparency of the research process in our field will accelerate scientific progress by increasing accuracy of reported research findings. Importantly, we make concrete recommendations for how relationship researchers can transition to greater disclosure of research practices in a manner that is sensitive to the unique design features of methodologies employed by relationship scientists. We discuss how to implement these recommendations for four different research designs regularly used in relationship research and practical limitations regarding implementing our recommendations and provide potential solutions to these problems