Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury: Further Reflections

This Article, written by three contributors to the Reporters\u27 Study on Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury, offers further reflections about specific areas and proposals in the Study that have evoked important questions and comments. It addresses the concern that there are too many lawyers and lawsuits in the United States, and that it is this overpopulation of lawyers that is causing excessive tort litigation. It also addresses high damage awards and insurance premiums, it recommends refining products liability, and recommends organizational responsibility for medical malpractice. This Article is a supplement to the Study, and offers further examination of important issues raised in the Study

COVID-SCORE: A global survey to assess public perceptions of government responses to COVID-19 (COVID-SCORE-10)

BACKGROUND content: Understanding public perceptions of government responses to COVID-19 may foster improved public cooperation. Trust in government and population risk of exposure may influence public perception of the response. Other population-level characteristics, such as country socio-economic development, COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, and degree of democratic government, may influence perception. - Label: METHODS AND FINDINGS content: We developed a novel ten-item instrument that asks respondents to rate key aspects of their government's response to the pandemic (COVID-SCORE). We examined whether the results varied by gender, age group, education level, and monthly income. We also examined the internal and external validity of the index using appropriate predefined variables. To test for dimensionality of the results, we used a principal component analysis (PCA) for the ten survey items. We found that Cronbach's alpha was 0.92 and that the first component of the PCA explained 60% of variance with the remaining factors having eigenvalues below 1, strongly indicating that the tool is both reliable and unidimensional. Based on responses from 13,426 people randomly selected from the general population in 19 countries, the mean national scores ranged from 35.76 (Ecuador) to 80.48 (China) out of a maximum of 100 points. Heterogeneity in responses was observed across age, gender, education and income with the greatest amount of heterogeneity observed between countries. National scores correlated with respondents' reported levels of trust in government and with country-level COVID-19 mortality rates. - Label: CONCLUSIONS content: The COVID-SCORE survey instrument demonstrated satisfactory validity. It may help governments more effectively engage constituents in current and future efforts to control COVID-19. Additional country-specific assessment should be undertaken to measure trends over time and the public perceptions of key aspects of government responses in other countries

Does wage rank affect employees' well-being?

How do workers make wage comparisons? Both an experimental study and an analysis of 16,000 British employees are reported. Satisfaction and well-being levels are shown to depend on more than simple relative pay. They depend upon the ordinal rank of an individual's wage within a comparison group. “Rank” itself thus seems to matter to human beings. Moreover, consistent with psychological theory, quits in a workplace are correlated with pay distribution skewness

Vaccinate fast but leave no one behind: a call to action for COVID-19 vaccination in Spain

During the first five months of 2021, Spains COVID-19 vaccination campaign progressed slowly and failed to reach marginalised populations. Here, we discuss how, despite recent improvements, it remains important to further engage key stakeholders to ensure nobody is left behind

A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 48.1% reported that they would accept their employer's recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer's advice to do so

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat

Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.Peer reviewe