1,532 research outputs found
User-Centered Evaluation of Adaptive and Adaptable Systems
Adaptive and adaptable systems provide tailored output to various users in various contexts. While adaptive systems base their output on implicit inferences, adaptable systems use explicitly provided information. Since the presentation or output of these systems is adapted, standard user-centered evaluation methods do not produce results that can be easily generalized. This calls for a reflection on the appropriateness of standard evaluation methods for user-centered evaluations of these systems. We have conducted a literature review to create an overview of the methods that have been used. When reviewing the empirical evaluation studies we have, among other things, focused on the variables measured and the implementation of results in the (re)design process. The goal of our review has been to compose a framework for user-centered evaluation. In the next phase of the project, we intend to test some of the most valid and feasible methods with an adaptive or adaptable system
Ecological observations on flatfish on the reefs and in the inner bays around Curaçao, Netherlands Antilles
Kwaliteitsinformatie en de marktaandelen van IVF-centra
Sinds 1997 zijn de prestaties van IVF-centra op internet onderling vergelijkbaar. Zorggebruikers lijken de beschikbare kwaliteitsinformatie te gebruiken. IVF-centra in de Randstad
met een hoger percentage doorgaande zwangerschappen hebben een groter marktaandeel
Price competition among Dutch sickness funds
In general, competition enhances efficiency. On the market for health insurance free market competition, however, has unwanted side-effects. The existence of asymmetrical information can lead to adverse selection and cream skimming. Adequate risk-adjustment removes the incentives for cream skimming and balances the negative consequences of adverse selection. In an attempt to enhance efficiency, the Dutch government in 1992 introduced price competition between social health insurers in combination with risk-adjusted capitation payments. Our estimation results indicate that this has not resulted in altering market shares. Relatively cheap insurers did not enlarge their market share at the expense of their relatively expensive competitors.
The introduction of competition among social health insurers has not been the success the Dutch government hoped for. Experiences in Belgium and Germany show that the Dutch difficulties are not exceptional. When equity considerations are high valued features of a health insurance system, it is difficult to introduce competition. To enhance efficiency, we recommend that the current capitation formula should be refined and that the insurers should be given more room for selective contracting of health care providers
Using the deductible for patient channeling: did preferred providers gain patient volume?
In market-based health care systems, channeling patients to designated preferred providers can increase payer’s bargaining clout, other things being equal. In the unique setting of the new Dutch health care system with regulated competition, this paper evaluates the impact of a 1-year natural experiment with patient channeling on providers’ market shares. In 2009 a large regional Dutch health insurer designated preferred providers for two different procedures (cataract surgery and varicose veins treatment) and gave its enrollees a positive financial incentive for choosing them. That is, patients were exempted from paying their deductible when they went to a preferred provider. Using claims data over the period 2007–2009, we apply a difference-in-difference approach to study the impact of this channeling strategy on the allocation of patients across individual providers. Our estimation results show that, in the year of the experiment, preferred providers of varicose veins treatment on average experienced a significant increase in patient volume relative to non-preferred providers. However, for cataract surgery no significant effect is found. Possible explanations for the observed difference between both procedures may be the insurer’s selection of preferred providers and the design of the channeling incentive resulting in different expected financial benefits for both patient groups
Response to: ''Halo Score': missing large vessel giant cell arteritis- do we need a modified 'Halo Score?'' by Chattopadhyay and Ghosh
- …