988 research outputs found

    PEDIATRÍA: Infusiones intramedulares en los niños

    Get PDF

    Characterizing Scalability Issues in Spreadsheet Software using Online Forums

    Full text link
    In traditional usability studies, researchers talk to users of tools to understand their needs and challenges. Insights gained via such interviews offer context, detail, and background. Due to costs in time and money, we are beginning to see a new form of tool interrogation that prioritizes scale, cost, and breadth by utilizing existing data from online forums. In this case study, we set out to apply this method of using online forum data to a specific issue---challenges that users face with Excel spreadsheets. Spreadsheets are a versatile and powerful processing tool if used properly. However, with versatility and power come errors, from both users and the software, which make using spreadsheets less effective. By scraping posts from the website Reddit, we collected a dataset of questions and complaints about Excel. Specifically, we explored and characterized the issues users were facing with spreadsheet software in general, and in particular, as resulting from a large amount of data in their spreadsheets. We discuss the implications of our findings on the design of next-generation spreadsheet software

    RĂ©flexions des directeurs de programme sur les rĂ©formes des politiques nationales en matiĂšre d’éducation mĂ©dicale : regards portĂ©s sur la prise de dĂ©cision, l’agrĂ©ment et le cadre CanMEDS

    Get PDF
    Background: Outcomes of national policy change impact all levels of the organizational hierarchy. The medical education literature is sparse on how reflections from program directors (PDs) on past large-scale policy changes can inform future policy initiatives. To fill this gap, we conducted a national survey on PDs’ perceptions of, and reflections on, decision-making in medical education, accreditation procedures, and the CanMEDS framework implementation. Methods: The survey was distributed to former Canadian specialty medicine PDs (N = 684). Descriptive analysis was performed on quantitative data, thematic analysis was performed on qualitative comments, and comparisons between the quantitative and qualitative findings were performed to identify areas of convergence and/or divergence. Results: A total of 265 (38.7%) former PDs participated. Quantitative analysis revealed that 52.8% of respondents did not feel involved in decision-making regarding policy changes, 45.1% of respondents did not feel prepared to assess the CanMEDS Roles, and PDs were divided on the reasonableness of accreditation documentation. Qualitative analysis produced four themes: communication, resources, expectations of outcomes, and buy-in. Nine sub-themes were also identified. A high level of convergence was identified across the content, with only four areas of divergence identified. Conclusions: Our findings have the potential to inform future policy and/or accreditation changes. Without the lens of those charged with overseeing the implementation, policy evaluation and quality improvement will remain uninformed. PDs, therefore, bring unique insights into our understanding of national policy changes, and without the voices of these frontline implementers, the true success of policy change implementation will be hindered.Contexte: Les effets des changements apportĂ©s aux politiques nationales se font sentir Ă  tous les niveaux de la hiĂ©rarchie organisationnelle. La littĂ©rature traite peu du fait que l’opinion des directeurs de programme (DP) concernant les rĂ©formes d’envergure intervenues dans les politiques sur l'Ă©ducation mĂ©dicale par le passĂ© peut servir Ă  Ă©clairer les rĂ©visions de politiques futures. Afin de combler cette lacune, nous avons menĂ© une enquĂȘte nationale pour sonder les DP sur leurs perceptions et rĂ©flexions quant Ă  la prise de dĂ©cision dans l'Ă©ducation mĂ©dicale, aux procĂ©dures d'agrĂ©ment et Ă  la mise en Ɠuvre du cadre CanMEDS. MĂ©thodes: Le sondage a Ă©tĂ© distribuĂ© aux anciens DP en mĂ©decine spĂ©cialisĂ©e du Canada (N = 684). Les donnĂ©es quantitatives ont fait l'objet d'une analyse descriptive, les commentaires qualitatifs d'une analyse thĂ©matique, et une comparaison entre les rĂ©sultats quantitatifs et qualitatifs a Ă©tĂ© effectuĂ©e pour repĂ©rer les domaines de convergence et de divergence. RĂ©sultats: Un total de 265 (38.7%) anciens DP ont participĂ© au sondage. L'analyse quantitative a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que 52.8% des rĂ©pondants ne se sentaient pas inclus dans la prise de dĂ©cision en matiĂšre de changements de politiques, que 45.1% des rĂ©pondants ne se sentaient pas en mesure d’évaluer les rĂŽles CanMEDS, et qu’ils Ă©taient partagĂ©s sur la question du caractĂšre raisonnable des documents d'agrĂ©ment. L'analyse qualitative a permis de dĂ©gager quatre thĂšmes: la communication, les ressources, les attentes en matiĂšre de rĂ©sultats et l'adhĂ©sion. Neuf sous-thĂšmes ont Ă©galement Ă©tĂ© dĂ©finis. Nous avons constatĂ© un niveau Ă©levĂ© de convergence sur l'ensemble du contenu, des divergences n'apparaissant que dans quatre domaines. Conclusions: Nos conclusions peuvent servir Ă  orienter les changements futurs en matiĂšre de politiques et d'agrĂ©ment. Sans le regard de ceux qui sont chargĂ©s de superviser leur mise en Ɠuvre, l'Ă©valuation des politiques et l'amĂ©lioration de la qualitĂ© demeureront mal fondĂ©es. La perspective unique des DP est essentielle Ă  notre comprĂ©hension des rĂ©visions des politiques, et sans la contribution de ces responsables de premiĂšre ligne de leur application, les rĂ©formes ne pourront ĂȘtre mises en Ɠuvre de façon optimale

    1968: Art and Politics in Chicago

    Get PDF
    https://via.library.depaul.edu/museum-publications/1006/thumbnail.jp

    A Mandated Minimum Competency Testing Program and Its Impact on Learning Disabled Students: Curricular Validity and Comparative Performances

    Get PDF
    This research was published by the KU Center for Research on Learning, formerly known as the University of Kansas Institute for Research in Learning Disabilities.In this study, LD specialists, regular class teachers, and parents of LD students judged that the objectives of the Kansas Minimum Competency Specifications prescribed for nonhandicapped students were applicable to LD students. In addition, the Kansas Minimal Competency Test was administered to LD students under standard and oral conditions. Results showed that they did not perform as well as their nonhandicapped peers at any of the five grade levels. The test was then administered under two modified conditions. Learning disabled students' performance on some objectives at every grade level was not improved by either administering items orally or administering the test one grade level above that designated for nonhandicapped students

    What is lacking in current decision aids on cancer screening?

    Full text link
    Recent guidelines on cancer screening have provided not only more screening options but also conflicting recommendations. Thus, patients, with their clinicians' support, must decide whether to get screened, which modality to use, and how often to undergo screening. Decision aids could potentially lead to better shared decision‐making regarding screening between the patient and the clinician. A total of 73 decision aids concerning screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostate cancers were reviewed. The goal of this review was to assess the effectiveness of such decision aids, examine areas in need of more research, and determine how the decision aids can be currently applied in the real‐world setting. Most studies used sound study designs. Significant variation existed in the setting, theoretical framework, and measured outcomes. Just over one‐third of the decision aids included an explicit values clarification. Other than knowledge, little consistency was noted with regard to which patient attributes were measured as outcomes. Few studies actually measured shared decision‐making. Little information was available regarding the feasibility and outcomes of integrating decision aids into practice. In this review, the implications for future research, as well as what clinicians can do now to incorporate decision aids into their practice, are discussed. CA Cancer J Clin 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98159/1/CAAC_21180_Supp_Appendix_Tables.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98159/2/21180_ftp.pd
    • 

    corecore