Knowledge in process? Exploring barriers between epidemiological research and local health policy development

The Redes de Trueque (RT) thrived during the economic crisis of 2001 – 2002 in Argentina and still stand out as one of the largest Complementary Currency System in the world. These local exchange networks reach a large scale during times of severe economic distress, but as large non-state initiatives, they pose a governance problem. Four types of governance systems were structured within the Argentine RT, of varying degrees of sustainability: a) loosely regulated market systems, b) hierarchies, c) associational regional networks, and d) local communities. Based on a four dimensional analytical framework, this paper discusses the rules of governance and sustainability of the governance systems in the RT. It found that some became more sustainable than others in terms of achieving combinations of scale and organisational modes

A Systematic Review Comparing the Acceptability, Validity and Concordance of Discrete Choice Experiments and Best–Worst Scaling for Eliciting Preferences in Healthcare

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the acceptability, validity and concordance of discrete choice experiment (DCE) and best–worst scaling (BWS) stated preference approaches in health. Methods: A systematic search of EMBASE, Medline, AMED, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and EconLit databases was undertaken in October to December 2016 without date restriction. Studies were included if they were published in English, presented empirical data related to the administration or findings of traditional format DCE and object-, profile- or multiprofile-case BWS, and were related to health. Study quality was assessed using the PREFS checklist. Results: Fourteen articles describing 12 studies were included, comparing DCE with profile-case BWS (9 studies), DCE and multiprofile-case BWS (1 study), and profile- and multiprofile-case BWS (2 studies). Although limited and inconsistent, the balance of evidence suggests that preferences derived from DCE and profile-case BWS may not be concordant, regardless of the decision context. Preferences estimated from DCE and multiprofile-case BWS may be concordant (single study). Profile- and multiprofile-case BWS appear more statistically efficient than DCE, but no evidence is available to suggest they have a greater response efficiency. Little evidence suggests superior validity for one format over another. Participant acceptability may favour DCE, which had a lower self-reported task difficulty and was preferred over profile-case BWS in a priority setting but not necessarily in other decision contexts. Conclusion: DCE and profile-case BWS may be of equal validity but give different preference estimates regardless of the health context; thus, they may be measuring different constructs. Therefore, choice between methods is likely to be based on normative considerations related to coherence with theoretical frameworks and on pragmatic considerations related to ease of data collection

Earth: Atmospheric Evolution of a Habitable Planet

Our present-day atmosphere is often used as an analog for potentially habitable exoplanets, but Earth's atmosphere has changed dramatically throughout its 4.5 billion year history. For example, molecular oxygen is abundant in the atmosphere today but was absent on the early Earth. Meanwhile, the physical and chemical evolution of Earth's atmosphere has also resulted in major swings in surface temperature, at times resulting in extreme glaciation or warm greenhouse climates. Despite this dynamic and occasionally dramatic history, the Earth has been persistently habitable--and, in fact, inhabited--for roughly 4 billion years. Understanding Earth's momentous changes and its enduring habitability is essential as a guide to the diversity of habitable planetary environments that may exist beyond our solar system and for ultimately recognizing spectroscopic fingerprints of life elsewhere in the Universe. Here, we review long-term trends in the composition of Earth's atmosphere as it relates to both planetary habitability and inhabitation. We focus on gases that may serve as habitability markers (CO2, N2) or biosignatures (CH4, O2), especially as related to the redox evolution of the atmosphere and the coupled evolution of Earth's climate system. We emphasize that in the search for Earth-like planets we must be mindful that the example provided by the modern atmosphere merely represents a single snapshot of Earth's long-term evolution. In exploring the many former states of our own planet, we emphasize Earth's atmospheric evolution during the Archean, Proterozoic, and Phanerozoic eons, but we conclude with a brief discussion of potential atmospheric trajectories into the distant future, many millions to billions of years from now. All of these 'Alternative Earth' scenarios provide insight to the potential diversity of Earth-like, habitable, and inhabited worlds.Comment: 34 pages, 4 figures, 4 tables. Review chapter to appear in Handbook of Exoplanet

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, as well as the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as health care, public health, education, social care, etc). This summary article presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist and recommendations for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer reviewed journals as well as the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. However, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, as there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: a report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces the previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, and the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as healthcare, public health, education, and social care). This Explanation and Elaboration Report presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist with recommendations and explanation and examples for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer-reviewed journals and the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. Nevertheless, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, given that there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 Explanation and Elaboration: a report of the ISPOR CHEERS II Good Practices Task Force

Health economic evaluations are comparative analyses of alternative courses of action in terms of their costs and consequences. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, published in 2013, was created to ensure health economic evaluations are identifiable, interpretable, and useful for decision making. It was intended as guidance to help authors report accurately which health interventions were being compared and in what context, how the evaluation was undertaken, what the findings were, and other details that may aid readers and reviewers in interpretation and use of the study. The new CHEERS 2022 statement replaces the previous CHEERS reporting guidance. It reflects the need for guidance that can be more easily applied to all types of health economic evaluation, new methods and developments in the field, and the increased role of stakeholder involvement including patients and the public. It is also broadly applicable to any form of intervention intended to improve the health of individuals or the population, whether simple or complex, and without regard to context (such as healthcare, public health, education, and social care). This Explanation and Elaboration Report presents the new CHEERS 2022 28-item checklist with recommendations and explanation and examples for each item. The CHEERS 2022 statement is primarily intended for researchers reporting economic evaluations for peer-reviewed journals and the peer reviewers and editors assessing them for publication. Nevertheless, we anticipate familiarity with reporting requirements will be useful for analysts when planning studies. It may also be useful for health technology assessment bodies seeking guidance on reporting, given that there is an increasing emphasis on transparency in decision making