Responsibilities, challenges, opportunities and governance - rethinking the university for the 21st century

Peer Reviewe

Institutional and political challenges of accreditation at the international level

This contribution is a strong plea for approaches in quality assessment and accreditation, which honour diversity and promote innovation and creativity in higher education. For many reasons, accreditation has become an important issue for higher education, which has occurred during a period in which there has been a major shift in values. Higher education, always considered primarily a public good, is increasingly being transformed into a predominantly private good; a commodity that could be subject to trade rules. Basic questions should be answered before any action is taken in this field. Accreditation for what purpose and for which qualities? Who will be the gatekeepers of the system and what will be their criteria? The implications of the concepts of quality and of accreditation, and the methods adopted in this field, will produce consequences not only at economic and financial levels but also in terms of the cultural, social and political life of institutions and nations. In 1998, during the World Conference on Higher Education (WCHE, UNESCO, Paris), a consensus was reached and the idea of evaluation was accepted, based on the general acceptance that quality in higher education is multidimensional. The WCHE favoured a system in which quality and relevance should go hand in hand. Since then, accreditation, a method already used for a long time in some countries, in particular the United States, was added more prominently to the international agenda. The concept of quality is crucial here. Aproposal of the WCHE, requesting institutions of higher education to define or redefine their missions together with society, could serve to help create the necessary conditions for appropriate evaluations, by comparing what the institutions actually achieve with what the society as a whole expects from them. Standards could be defined through this mechanism instead of using models that do not relate to the cultural environment of institutions or the specific needs of society. These standards should guarantee appropriate quality, while at the same time enhancing diversity, innovation and creativity.Peer Reviewe

Retos institucionales y políticos de la acreditación en el ámbito internacional

Durante los últimos años, la acreditación se ha convertido en una cuestión de suma importancia para la educación superior por motivos bien conocidos: el desarrollo de nuevas tecnologías, los avances en la educación a distancia y virtual, la multiplicación de nuevos proveedores, los intentos por generalizar la transformación de la educación en una mercancía, la internacionalización de la educación superior (1) y, de resultas de todos estos factores, la necesidad de unos sistemas fiables que garanticen la calidad y la pertinencia de los organismos y los programas. Estas medidas son presentadas en el ámbito nacional, regional o internacional como si tuvieran por objetivo garantizar la calidad y proteger a países y estudiantes de los «malos productos educativos» y de los proveedores de servicios educativos fraudulentos. Los sistemas de acreditación también son considerados un instrumento que permite a la educación superior hacer frente a las transformaciones que tienen lugar en la economía, la sociedad y la civilización, las cuales, en muchos aspectos, pueden ser consideradas más importantes que los cambios que ocurrieron en el mundo durante la Revolución Industrial. La piedra angular de esta evolución es el conocimiento. La creación de conocimiento y la forma en que se maneja, así como el control de la información, son herramientas fundamentales de que se valen los países desarrollados para lograr y afianzar su poder en un mundo globalizado. Sin embargo, la creación de conocimiento, así como su difusión y aplicación, también son esenciales para salvaguardar el futuro de los países en vías de desarrollo.Peer Reviewe

Age-related differences of oncological outcomes in primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma: a multistate model including 6260 patients

Abstract Purpose: No studies extensively compared the young adults (YA, 18e39 years), middle-aged (40e69 year

Institutional and political challenges of accreditation at the international level

This contribution is a strong plea for approaches in quality assessment and accreditation, which honour diversity and promote innovation and creativity in higher education. For many reasons, accreditation has become an important issue for higher education, which has occurred during a period in which there has been a major shift in values. Higher education, always considered primarily a public good, is increasingly being transformed into a predominantly private good; a commodity that could be subject to trade rules. Basic questions should be answered before any action is taken in this field. Accreditation for what purpose and for which qualities? Who will be the gatekeepers of the system and what will be their criteria? The implications of the concepts of quality and of accreditation, and the methods adopted in this field, will produce consequences not only at economic and financial levels but also in terms of the cultural, social and political life of institutions and nations. In 1998, during the World Conference on Higher Education (WCHE, UNESCO, Paris), a consensus was reached and the idea of evaluation was accepted, based on the general acceptance that quality in higher education is multidimensional. The WCHE favoured a system in which quality and relevance should go hand in hand. Since then, accreditation, a method already used for a long time in some countries, in particular the United States, was added more prominently to the international agenda. The concept of quality is crucial here. Aproposal of the WCHE, requesting institutions of higher education to define or redefine their missions together with society, could serve to help create the necessary conditions for appropriate evaluations, by comparing what the institutions actually achieve with what the society as a whole expects from them. Standards could be defined through this mechanism instead of using models that do not relate to the cultural environment of institutions or the specific needs of society. These standards should guarantee appropriate quality, while at the same time enhancing diversity, innovation and creativity.Peer Reviewe

Retos institucionales y políticos de la acreditación en el ámbito internacional

Durante los últimos años, la acreditación se ha convertido en una cuestión de suma importancia para la educación superior por motivos bien conocidos: el desarrollo de nuevas tecnologías, los avances en la educación a distancia y virtual, la multiplicación de nuevos proveedores, los intentos por generalizar la transformación de la educación en una mercancía, la internacionalización de la educación superior (1) y, de resultas de todos estos factores, la necesidad de unos sistemas fiables que garanticen la calidad y la pertinencia de los organismos y los programas. Estas medidas son presentadas en el ámbito nacional, regional o internacional como si tuvieran por objetivo garantizar la calidad y proteger a países y estudiantes de los «malos productos educativos» y de los proveedores de servicios educativos fraudulentos. Los sistemas de acreditación también son considerados un instrumento que permite a la educación superior hacer frente a las transformaciones que tienen lugar en la economía, la sociedad y la civilización, las cuales, en muchos aspectos, pueden ser consideradas más importantes que los cambios que ocurrieron en el mundo durante la Revolución Industrial. La piedra angular de esta evolución es el conocimiento. La creación de conocimiento y la forma en que se maneja, así como el control de la información, son herramientas fundamentales de que se valen los países desarrollados para lograr y afianzar su poder en un mundo globalizado. Sin embargo, la creación de conocimiento, así como su difusión y aplicación, también son esenciales para salvaguardar el futuro de los países en vías de desarrollo.Peer Reviewe

A global inter-laboratory study to assess acquisition modes for multi-compound confirmatory analysis of veterinary drugs using liquid chromatography coupled to triple quadrupole, time of flight and orbitrap mass spectrometry

According to EU legislation a confirmatory method used for residue analysis should be able to confirm the identity of a compound beyond reasonable doubt. To provide an adequate instrumental set-up, Commission Decision 2002/657/EC introduced the concept of "identification points". A second aspect to assure unequivocal confirmation, is the establishment of ion ratio and retention time criteria. Currently, the gold standard for confirmatory analysis of most veterinary drug residues is liquid chromatography (LC) coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) in selected reaction monitoring (SRM) acquisition mode, isolating one precursor ion and monitoring two a priori selected product ions, yielding 4 identification points. We comprehensively evaluated the use of different low and high resolution LC-MS(/MS) techniques and acquisition modes with respect to the selectivity of 100 veterinary drugs in liver, muscle and urine extracts aiming to critically review the currently established identification points system. A comparison among MS/MS in SRM mode with high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) in full scan, all ion fragmentation and targeted MS/MS was made based on a unique inter-laboratory study, which comprises 21 laboratories from four different continents and equipment from all major vendors.In total 186 samples were analysed yielding results for 9282 analyte/matrix combinations. It was observed that the false positive rate approximately doubles if no ion ratio criterion is applied indicating that this criterion is important to prevent false positive results. Full scan HRMS analysis, only monitoring the molecular ion and allowing a ±5 ppm mass tolerance is, in general, less selective than low resolution MS/MS using SRM, and thus full scan alone is considered not sufficient for confirmatory analysis. Furthermore, even though the number of data on all ion fragmentation and targeted MS/MS at high resolution was limited, based on the data obtained, it was observed that the acquisition mode as well as the mass resolution needed, very much depend on the matrix and the compound itself. For complex matrix extracts and non-selective compounds (worst-case situation), only targeted MS/MS, monitoring the precursor ion and a single product ion in HR-MS using a maximum of ±5 ppm mass deviation, leads to comparable selectivity and false positive and negative rate as SRM monitoring two product ions in LR-MS. We conclude that the currently applied identification point system as established in commission decision 2002/657/EC should be revised with respect to the allocation of identification points

A global inter-laboratory study to assess acquisition modes for multi-compound confirmatory analysis of veterinary drugs using liquid chromatography coupled to triple quadrupole, time of flight and orbitrap mass spectrometry

According to EU legislation a confirmatory method used for residue analysis should be able to confirm the identity of a compound beyond reasonable doubt. To provide an adequate instrumental set-up, Commission Decision 2002/657/EC introduced the concept of "identification points". A second aspect to assure unequivocal confirmation, is the establishment of ion ratio and retention time criteria. Currently, the gold standard for confirmatory analysis of most veterinary drug residues is liquid chromatography (LC) coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) in selected reaction monitoring (SRM) acquisition mode, isolating one precursor ion and monitoring two a priori selected product ions, yielding 4 identification points. We comprehensively evaluated the use of different low and high resolution LC-MS(/MS) techniques and acquisition modes with respect to the selectivity of 100 veterinary drugs in liver, muscle and urine extracts aiming to critically review the currently established identification points system. A comparison among MS/MS in SRM mode with high resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) in full scan, all ion fragmentation and targeted MS/MS was made based on a unique inter-laboratory study, which comprises 21 laboratories from four different continents and equipment from all major vendors.In total 186 samples were analysed yielding results for 9282 analyte/matrix combinations. It was observed that the false positive rate approximately doubles if no ion ratio criterion is applied indicating that this criterion is important to prevent false positive results. Full scan HRMS analysis, only monitoring the molecular ion and allowing a ±5 ppm mass tolerance is, in general, less selective than low resolution MS/MS using SRM, and thus full scan alone is considered not sufficient for confirmatory analysis. Furthermore, even though the number of data on all ion fragmentation and targeted MS/MS at high resolution was limited, based on the data obtained, it was observed that the acquisition mode as well as the mass resolution needed, very much depend on the matrix and the compound itself. For complex matrix extracts and non-selective compounds (worst-case situation), only targeted MS/MS, monitoring the precursor ion and a single product ion in HR-MS using a maximum of ±5 ppm mass deviation, leads to comparable selectivity and false positive and negative rate as SRM monitoring two product ions in LR-MS. We conclude that the currently applied identification point system as established in commission decision 2002/657/EC should be revised with respect to the allocation of identification points.</p

A critical assessment of the performance criteria in confirmatory analysis for veterinary drug residue analysis using mass spectrometric detection in selected reaction monitoring mode

Besides the identification point system to assure adequate set-up of instrumentation, European Commission Decision 2002/657/EC includes performance criteria regarding relative ion abundances in mass spectrometry and chromatographic retention time. In confirmatory analysis, the relative abundance of two product ions, acquired in selected reaction monitoring mode, the ion ratio should be within certain ranges for confirmation of the identity of a substance. The acceptable tolerance of the ion ratio varies with the relative abundance of the two product ions and for retention time, CD 2002/657/EC allows a tolerance of 5%. Because of rapid technical advances in analytical instruments and new approaches applied in the field of contaminant testing in food products (multi-compound and multi-class methods) a critical assessment of these criteria is justified. In this study a large number of representative, though challenging sample extracts were prepared, including muscle, urine, milk and liver, spiked with 100 registered and banned veterinary drugs at levels ranging from 0.5 to 100 µg/kg. These extracts were analysed using SRM mode using different chromatographic conditions and mass spectrometers from different vendors. In the initial study, robust data was collected using four different instrumental set-ups. Based on a unique and highly relevant data set, consisting of over 39 000 data points, the ion ratio and retention time criteria for applicability in confirmatory analysis were assessed. The outcomes were verified based on a collaborative trial including laboratories from all over the world. It was concluded that the ion ratio deviation is not related to the value of the ion ratio, but rather to the intensity of the lowest product ion. Therefore a fixed ion ratio deviation tolerance of 50% (relative) is proposed, which also is applicable for compounds present at sub-ppb levels or having poor ionisation efficiency. Furthermore, it was observed that retention time shifts, when using gradient elution, as is common practice nowadays, are mainly observed for early eluting compounds. Therefore a maximum retention time deviation of 0.2 min (absolute) is proposed. These findings should serve as input for discussions on the revision of currently applied criteria and the establishment of a new, globally accepted, criterion document for confirmatory analysis.</p