Monitoring and evaluation of human resources for health: an international perspective

BACKGROUND: Despite the undoubted importance of human resources to the functions of health systems, there is little consistency between countries in how human resource strategies are monitored and evaluated. This paper presents an integrated approach for developing an evidence base on human resources for health (HRH) to support decision-making, drawing on a framework for health systems performance assessment. METHODS: Conceptual and methodological issues for selecting indicators for HRH monitoring and evaluation are discussed, and a range of primary and secondary data sources that might be used to generate indicators are reviewed. Descriptive analyses are conducted drawing primarily on one type of source, namely routinely reported data on the numbers of health personnel and medical schools as covered by national reporting systems and compiled by the World Health Organization. Regression techniques are used to triangulate a given HRH indicator calculated from different data sources across multiple countries. RESULTS: Major variations in the supply of health personnel and training opportunities are found to occur by region. However, certain discrepancies are also observed in measuring the same indicator from different sources, possibly related to the occupational classification or to the sources' representation. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based information is needed to better understand trends in HRH. Although a range of sources exist that can potentially be used for HRH assessment, the information that can be derived from many of these individual sources precludes refined analysis. A variety of data sources and analytical approaches, each with its own strengths and limitations, is required to reflect the complexity of HRH issues. In order to enhance cross-national comparability, data collection efforts should be processed through the use of internationally standardized classifications (in particular, for occupation, industry and education) at the greatest level of detail possible

Orbit optimization for ASTROD-GW and its time delay interferometry with two arms using CGC ephemeris

ASTROD-GW (ASTROD [Astrodynamical Space Test of Relativity using Optical Devices] optimized for Gravitation Wave detection) is an optimization of ASTROD to focus on the goal of detection of gravitation waves. The detection sensitivity is shifted 52 times toward larger wavelength compared to that of LISA. The mission orbits of the 3 spacecraft forming a nearly equilateral triangular array are chosen to be near the Sun-Earth Lagrange points L3, L4 and L5. The 3 spacecraft range interferometrically with one another with arm length about 260 million kilometers. In order to attain the requisite sensitivity for ASTROD-GW, laser frequency noise must be suppressed below the secondary noises such as the optical path noise, acceleration noise etc. For suppressing laser frequency noise, we need to use time delay interferometry (TDI) to match the two different optical paths (times of travel). Since planets and other solar-system bodies perturb the orbits of ASTROD-GW spacecraft and affect the (TDI), we simulate the time delay numerically using CGC 2.7 ephemeris framework. To conform to the ASTROD-GW planning, we work out a set of 20-year optimized mission orbits of ASTROD-GW spacecraft starting at June 21, 2028, and calculate the residual optical path differences in the first and second generation TDI for one-detector case. In our optimized mission orbits for 20 years, changes of arm length are less than 0.0003 AU; the relative Doppler velocities are less than 3m/s. All the second generation TDI for one-detector case satisfies the ASTROD-GW requirement.Comment: 17 pages, 7 figures, 1 tabl

Dacron® vs. PTFE as bypass materials in peripheral vascular surgery – systematic review and meta-analysis

Roll S, Müller-Nordhorn J, Keil T, et al. Dacron® vs. PTFE as bypass materials in peripheral vascular surgery – systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surgery. 2008;8(1): 22.Background: In peripheral vascular bypass surgery different synthetic materials are available for bypass grafting. It is unclear which of the two commonly used materials, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or polyester (Dacron®) grafts, is to be preferred. Thus, the aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of these two prosthetic bypass materials (Dacron® and PTFE). Methods: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Cochrane-Library – CENTRAL, EMBASE and other databases for relevant publications in English and German published between 1999 and 2008. Only randomized controlled trials were considered for inclusion. We assessed the methodological quality by means of standardized checklists. Primary patency was used as the main endpoint. Random-effect meta-analysis as well as pooling data in life table format was performed to combine study results. Results: Nine randomized controlled trials (RCT) were included. Two trials showed statistically significant differences in primary patency, one favouring Dacron® and one favouring PTFE grafts, while 7 trials did not show statistically significant differences between the two materials. Meta-analysis on the comparison of PTFE vs. Dacron® grafts yielded no differences with regard to primary patency rates (hazard ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval [0.85;1.28]), no significant heterogeneity (p = 0.32, I2 = 14%)). Similarly, there were no significant differences with regard to secondary patency rates. Conclusion: Systematic evaluation and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing Dacron® and PTFE as bypass materials for peripheral vascular surgery showed no evidence of an advantage of one synthetic material over the other

"Physical education", "health and physical education", "physical literacy" and "health literacy": Global nomenclature confusion.

The title “physical education” (PE) is the traditional taxonomy used to represent the education discipline. Health and physical education (HPE) is regarded to be an all-encompassing health-dimensional title that has been recently embraced by various education systems around the world. Hence, it can be argued that PE and HPE are often used interchangeably by educationalists, portraying a similar meaning and understanding. This can be regarded as internationally confusing, as historically PE and HPE have represented different and at times paradoxical discourses and ideologies. Amongst the ambiguity of which title to use, PE or HPE, new terms of branding such as “physical literacy” and “health literacy” have re/emerged. The purpose of this interpretivist study is to identify if associated terms used for the original PE label are a help or hindrance to practitioners? Participants were asked an open-ended question relating to PE nomenclatures. The data gathered were analysed and findings confirmed that practitioner confusion does exist. It is suggested that children are first and foremost “physically educated”; therefore a strong, clear and comprehensive grounding in quality PE is essential for teachers and students

A review of the polygraph: history, methodology and current status

The history of research into psychophysiological measurements as an aid to detecting lying, widely known as the ‘lie detector’ or polygraph is the focus of this review. The physiological measurements used are detailed and the debates that exist in regards to its role in the investigative process are introduced. Attention is given to the main polygraph testing methods, namely the Comparative Question Test and the Concealed Information Test. Discussion of these two central methods, their uses and problems forms the basis of the review. Recommendations for future research are made specifically in regards to improving current polygraph technology and exploring the role of the polygraph in combination with other deception detection techniques

Omega-3 fatty acids for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Background: Researchers have suggested that omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids from oily fish (long-chain omega-3 (LCn3), including eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)), as well as from plants (alpha-linolenic acid (ALA)) benefit cardiovascular health. Guidelines recommend increasing omega-3-rich foods, and sometimes supplementation, but recent trials have not confirmed this. Objectives: To assess effects of increased intake of fish- and plant-based omega-3 for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CVD) events, adiposity and lipids. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase to April 2017, plus ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry to September 2016, with no language restrictions. We handsearched systematic review references and bibliographies and contacted authors. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that lasted at least 12 months and compared supplementation and/or advice to increase LCn3 or ALA intake versus usual or lower intake. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed validity. We performed separate random-effects meta-analysis for ALA and LCn3 interventions, and assessed dose-response relationships through meta-regression. Main results: We included 79 RCTs (112,059 participants) in this review update and found that 25 were at low summary risk of bias. Trials were of 12 to 72 months' duration and included adults at varying cardiovascular risk, mainly in high-income countries. Most studies assessed LCn3 supplementation with capsules, but some used LCn3- or ALA-rich or enriched foods or dietary advice compared to placebo or usual diet. Meta-analysis and sensitivity analyses suggested little or no effect of increasing LCn3 on all-cause mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.03, 92,653 participants; 8189 deaths in 39 trials, high-quality evidence), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03, 67,772 participants; 4544 CVD deaths in 25 RCTs), cardiovascular events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04, 90,378 participants; 14,737 people experienced events in 38 trials, high-quality evidence), coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.09, 73,491 participants; 1596 CHD deaths in 21 RCTs), stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, 89,358 participants; 1822 strokes in 28 trials) or arrhythmia (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05, 53,796 participants; 3788 people experienced arrhythmia in 28 RCTs). There was a suggestion that LCn3 reduced CHD events (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.97, 84,301 participants; 5469 people experienced CHD events in 28 RCTs); however, this was not maintained in sensitivity analyses - LCn3 probably makes little or no difference to CHD event risk. All evidence was of moderate GRADE quality, except as noted. Increasing ALA intake probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20, 19,327 participants; 459 deaths, 5 RCTs),cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.25, 18,619 participants; 219 cardiovascular deaths, 4 RCTs), and it may make little or no difference to CHD events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, 19,061 participants, 397 CHD events, 4 RCTs, low-quality evidence). However, increased ALA may slightly reduce risk of cardiovascular events (from 4.8% to 4.7%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.07, 19,327 participants; 884 CVD events, 5 RCTs, low-quality evidence), and probably reduces risk of CHD mortality (1.1% to 1.0%, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26, 18,353 participants; 193 CHD deaths, 3 RCTs), and arrhythmia (3.3% to 2.6%, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10, 4,837 participants; 141 events, 1 RCT). Effects on stroke are unclear. Sensitivity analysis retaining only trials at low summary risk of bias moved effect sizes towards the null (RR 1.0) for all LCn3 primary outcomes except arrhythmias, but for most ALA outcomes, effect sizes moved to suggest protection. LCn3 funnel plots suggested that adding in missing studies/results would move effect sizes towards null for most primary outcomes. There were no dose or duration effects in subgrouping or meta-regression. There was no evidence that increasing LCn3 or ALA altered serious adverse events, adiposity or lipids, although LCn3 slightly reduced triglycerides and increased HDL. ALA probably reduces HDL (high- or moderate-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions: This is the most extensive systematic assessment of effects of omega-3 fats on cardiovascular health to date. Moderate- and high-quality evidence suggests that increasing EPA and DHA has little or no effect on mortality or cardiovascular health (evidence mainly from supplement trials). Previous suggestions of benefits from EPA and DHA supplements appear to spring from trials with higher risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggests ALA may slightly reduce CVD event risk, CHD mortality and arrhythmia