The document summarizes a presentation given by Dr. Steven Pearson of the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) on developing a framework for assessing the value of medical treatments for US health insurers. ICER has created a framework that considers clinical effectiveness, additional benefits, affordability, and other factors to determine a treatment's "clinical care value" and "health system value." ICER engaged stakeholders including insurers, manufacturers, and patient groups to gather input on the framework. ICER aims for the framework to facilitate more transparent and consistent discussions between payers and manufacturers about a treatment's value.
This sample answer sheet corresponds with the ninth webinar in the Online Journal Club series, “What are public health interventions’ return on investment?"
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
This sample answer sheet corresponds with the seventh webinar in the Online Journal Club series, “What are effective interventions for Active School Transport?"
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
Meaningful and active collaboration with public and patient partners in planning, conducting and disseminating rapid reviews helps ensure that their perspectives are considered in research priorities and in shaping the evidence and care they receive.
Join us for an interactive session to learn about meaningfully engaging public partners in rapid reviews. We will present a spectrum of strategies to involve public partners and share lessons learned to optimize these opportunities. Public and patient partners will also present and share their perspectives and experiences.
The following document outlines the supporting tools that were discussed in the Spotlight on Methods and Tools: Rapid Review Guidebook: Synthesizing Evidence to Inform Public Health Practice webinar. These tools aid in the production of a rapid review and are specific to the first five stages of the Evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) process.
We will introduce the National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy’s online course in public health ethics, including its development and an overview of its content. We will then pass the microphone to a health professional who will discuss the ethical challenges she has faced in professional practice, as well as her experience in taking the course.
By the end of this webinar, participants will be able to:
• Understand how an ethical perspective can inform decision making
• Describe some of the main elements of the online course
• See how the knowledge and practical skills in applied ethics offered by the course may be put to use in professional practice.
Join Dr. Anthony Levinson and Kalpana Nair, PhD from McMaster University as they discuss the Early Years Check-In (EYCI) and its companion web-based resource, Play&Learn. Designed for parents of children 18 months to 6 years of age, the EYCI helps parents quickly identify any concerns they may have about their child’s development across four domains: social and emotional, language, movement, and thinking and learning. The EYCI can be used as a discussion aid to foster dialogue about early child development between parents and practitioners providing early years services, creating opportunities to build relationships as well as provide education and support to parents to foster their child’s development.
This sample answer sheet corresponds with the ninth webinar in the Online Journal Club series, “What are public health interventions’ return on investment?"
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
This sample answer sheet corresponds with the seventh webinar in the Online Journal Club series, “What are effective interventions for Active School Transport?"
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
Meaningful and active collaboration with public and patient partners in planning, conducting and disseminating rapid reviews helps ensure that their perspectives are considered in research priorities and in shaping the evidence and care they receive.
Join us for an interactive session to learn about meaningfully engaging public partners in rapid reviews. We will present a spectrum of strategies to involve public partners and share lessons learned to optimize these opportunities. Public and patient partners will also present and share their perspectives and experiences.
The following document outlines the supporting tools that were discussed in the Spotlight on Methods and Tools: Rapid Review Guidebook: Synthesizing Evidence to Inform Public Health Practice webinar. These tools aid in the production of a rapid review and are specific to the first five stages of the Evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) process.
We will introduce the National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy’s online course in public health ethics, including its development and an overview of its content. We will then pass the microphone to a health professional who will discuss the ethical challenges she has faced in professional practice, as well as her experience in taking the course.
By the end of this webinar, participants will be able to:
• Understand how an ethical perspective can inform decision making
• Describe some of the main elements of the online course
• See how the knowledge and practical skills in applied ethics offered by the course may be put to use in professional practice.
Join Dr. Anthony Levinson and Kalpana Nair, PhD from McMaster University as they discuss the Early Years Check-In (EYCI) and its companion web-based resource, Play&Learn. Designed for parents of children 18 months to 6 years of age, the EYCI helps parents quickly identify any concerns they may have about their child’s development across four domains: social and emotional, language, movement, and thinking and learning. The EYCI can be used as a discussion aid to foster dialogue about early child development between parents and practitioners providing early years services, creating opportunities to build relationships as well as provide education and support to parents to foster their child’s development.
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is excited to present a two-part webinar featuring the Policy Readiness Tool
Part 1: Overview of the Policy Readiness Tool
(ALSO ON YOUTUBE: https://youtu.be/FPzViyniKDQ)
Learn how the Policy Readiness Tool was developed and how to use the tool in your practice.
(Part 2 is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/NCCMT/nccmt-webinar-policy-readiness-tool-part-2)
A summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT is available here: http://www.nccmt.ca/registry/view/eng/144.html
Presented by the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) with guests:
Candace Nykiforuk, PhD, CE, Associate Professor, School of Public Health, University of Alberta; CIHR/PHAC/AIHS Applied Public Health Chair
and
Kayla Atkey, MSc, Policy Analyst, Alberta Policy Coalition for Chronic Disease Prevention (APCCP)
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The Tool for Assessing the Effects of Local Intersectoral Action (https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/library/assessing-effects-local-intersectoral-action-tool-cacis) is an interactive online tool that uses timeline mapping to support assessment of the impacts of local intersectoral action in living environments.
Join Angèle Bilodeau, from the School of Public Health at the University of Montreal, Marie-Pier St-Louis, from the Canada Research Chair in Community Approaches and Health Inequalities (CACIS), and their collaborator Gillian Kranias for an introduction to this tool, which was developed in collaboration with the Montreal Coalition of Neighborhood Round Tables, Communagir and the Tamarack Institute.
This webinar will be presented in partnership with the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT), the National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy (NCCHPP), and the National Collaborating Centre for Determinants of Health (NCCDH).
The Applicability and Transferability Tool helps you determine whether the evidence you find can be applied to your own local situation. Find the A&T tool on the NCCMT website: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/publications/9
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Join Dr. Sarah Neil-Sztramko, Knowledge Translation Advisor, and Dr. Maureen Dobbins, Scientific Director, to learn how the NCCMT quickly pivoted to meet decision makers’ needs for high-quality synthesized evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The presentation will include an overview of how rigorous review methods were adapted to the ever-changing COVID-19 evidence landscape and provide time for discussion and questions from webinar participants.
Reviews from the Rapid Evidence Service are available here: https://www.nccmt.ca/res, and a pre-print article describing methods is available here: https://www.researchsquare.com/articl....
Learning Objectives:
By the end of this webinar, you will:
1. Learn about the methods for conducting rigorous rapid reviews in the face of quickly evolving evidence.
2. Apply knowledge of the strengths and limitations of rapid reviews to decision making.
3. Gain tools and resources to apply to rapid reviews in your own work.
The Contextualizing Guidance Workbook can help you consider factors from the broader health system and political system so you make the most appropriate policy recommendations and decisions. Find out how this tool can help you apply recommendations from a guidance document to address the issue/problem in your local context:
View our summary of this resource here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/238
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Healthh in Canada More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Interested in sharing best practices within your organization?
Are you engaged in creating community health status reports? Are you interested in learning about how to improve health equity? The Equity-Integrated Population Health Status Reporting Action Framework can help health professionals at all levels identify and implement manageable steps for integrating equity into existing or new public health status reporting processes. The framework is suitable for use by health/public health staff, community organizations that provide local data, and academic researchers.
This framework was developed collaboratively by the six National Collaborating Centres for Public Health, building upon earlier work by the NCC for Determinants of Health.
To see the summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/240
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
The Tool for Sharing Best Practices helps public health professionals by outlining five practical steps to share best practices throughout their organizations. Sharing best practices can help your organization learn from successes, replicate successful programs, and improve outcomes.
Find out more and how to use the tool: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/84
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The NCCMT looks forward to hosting its popular student-led webinar on evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in public health programs. During this webinar, students and recent graduates showcase how they are using EIDM tools and resources. EIDM skills are in demand in the workforce. Join this webinar to learn how the NCCMT’s accessible and informative resources can support your coursework, practicums and future public health careers.
The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is used to guide the adaptation and plan for the implementation of public health interventions. The tool is appropriate for individuals and groups involved in planning and implementing existing interventions. To see the summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/registry/view/eng/210.html
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) hosted our popular student-oriented webinar on evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in public health programs. The NCCMT supports students learning remotely by continuing to provide online resources for EIDM.
Learn how these resources can support your coursework, practicums and public health careers. Recent Master of Public Health (MPH) graduates from programs across the country provide fresh perspectives and share their experiences of using research evidence in their own work.
Listen to the winners of the 2020 Knowledge Translation Student Award, awarded by the National Collaborating Centres for Public Health (NCCPH), and get a first-hand look at their crucial work in bridging the gap between research and practice through facilitating knowledge translation efforts and developing knowledge translation tools. Learn more about knowledge translation initiatives, including supporting the work of Indigenous people and communicating research to policy-makers.
Join us in launching the NCCMT’s new tools for assessing the quality of community evidence. These tools can be applied to evidence for local health issues and context, such as surveillance data and community health status reports, as well as evidence for community and political preferences and actions, such as the expressed needs and interests of community members and support from public or government officials.
In partnership with the Community Health Nurses’ Initiatives Group (CHNIG), this webinar will provide an overview of Evidence-Informed Decision Making (EIDM) processes and apply those processes to the rapidly expanding COVID-19 literature. Learn how to think critically about headlines and find high-quality evidence you can trust.
What do the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) in the United States, and the Michael Garron Hospital in Toronto have in common? All three organizations have seen the benefits to patient safety when implementing the evidence-based teamwork and communication framework, TeamSTEPPS (Team Strategies and Tools for Effective Performance and Patient Safety).
Full details: https://goo.gl/8Y2PHc
This final webinar will emphasise the importance of understanding the problem before brainstorming solutions to better ensure a match between barriers and the solutions.
MORE INFO: http://bit.ly/2KctiLH
Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies: What's th...Health Evidence™
Health Evidence hosted a 60 minute webinar examining breastfeeding support interventions for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies. Click here for access to the audio recording for this webinar: https://youtu.be/fxDY-Q87xaY
Alison McFadden, Senior Research Fellow, Director, Mother and Infant Research Unit, School of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Dundee and Anna Gavine, Research Fellow School of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Dundee will be leading the session and presenting findings from their recent Cochrane review:
McFadden A, Gavine A, Renfrew M, Wade A, Buchanan P, Taylor J, et al. (2017). Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies . Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(2), CD001141.
Evidence suggests that not breastfeeding negatively impacts the health of both infants and mothers. Additionally, data demonstrates an inadequate uptake of the World Health Organization’s recommendations regarding type and duration of breastfeeding in many countries. This review examines the impact of breastfeeding support interventions on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies, compared to usual care. One-hundred trials with over 83,246 mother-infant pairs were included in this review. Seventy-three of the one-hundred trials were involved in the data analyses. Findings suggest that breastfeeding support interventions reduce cessation of ‘any breastfeeding’ before 4 to 6 weeks and 6 months, and cessation of ‘exclusive breastfeeding’ at 4 to 6 weeks and at 6 months. This webinar will provide an overview of the impact of support on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies.
Cette exemple de feuille de réponse correspond au huitième webinaire de la série club de lecture en ligne, « Comment les jeunes interprètent-ils les données probantes relatives au cannabis? »
Le Centre de collaboration nationale des méthodes et outils est financé par l’Agence de la santé publique du Canada et affilié à l’Université McMaster. Les vues exprimées ici ne reflètent pas nécessairement la position officielle de l’Agence de la santé publique du Canada.
Le CCNMO est l’un des six centres de collaboration nationale en santé publique au Canada. Les Centres encouragent et améliorent l’utilisation des connaissances provenant de la recherche scientifique et des autres savoirs afin de renforcer la pratique et les politiques de santé publique au Canada.
Motivational interviewing for the prevention of alcohol misuse in young adult...Health Evidence™
Health Evidence™ hosted a 60 minute webinar examining the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) for the prevention of alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults. Click here for access to the audio recording for this webinar: https://youtu.be/c9EHJ-Ks28c
Dr. David Foxcroft, President, European Society for Prevention Research (EUSPR), Professor of Community Psychology and Public Health, Department of Psychology, Social Work and Public Health, Oxford Brookes University led the session and presented findings from his recent Cochrane review:
Foxcroft D, Coombes L, Wood S, Allen D, Almeida Santimano N, & Moreira M. (2016). Motivational interviewing for the prevention of alcohol misuse in young adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2016(7), CD007025. https://www.healthevidence.org/view-article.aspx?a=motivational-interviewing-prevention-alcohol-misuse-young-adults-29645
According to the World Health Organization, alcohol is responsible for approximately 9% of deaths within the 15-29 year old age bracket. This review examines the effectiveness of MI interventions for preventing alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults. Eighty-four trials with 22,872 participants were included in this review. Findings suggest that MI interventions only slightly reduce quantity of alcohol consumed, frequency of alcohol consumption, and peak blood alcohol concentration, and only marginally reduce alcohol problems in young adults aged up to 25 years, compared to no intervention/placebo/treatment as usual. This webinar provided an overview of the effectiveness of MI interventions in preventing alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults.
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is excited to present a two-part webinar featuring the Policy Readiness Tool
Part 1: Overview of the Policy Readiness Tool
(ALSO ON YOUTUBE: https://youtu.be/FPzViyniKDQ)
Learn how the Policy Readiness Tool was developed and how to use the tool in your practice.
(Part 2 is available here: http://www.slideshare.net/NCCMT/nccmt-webinar-policy-readiness-tool-part-2)
A summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT is available here: http://www.nccmt.ca/registry/view/eng/144.html
Presented by the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) with guests:
Candace Nykiforuk, PhD, CE, Associate Professor, School of Public Health, University of Alberta; CIHR/PHAC/AIHS Applied Public Health Chair
and
Kayla Atkey, MSc, Policy Analyst, Alberta Policy Coalition for Chronic Disease Prevention (APCCP)
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The Tool for Assessing the Effects of Local Intersectoral Action (https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/library/assessing-effects-local-intersectoral-action-tool-cacis) is an interactive online tool that uses timeline mapping to support assessment of the impacts of local intersectoral action in living environments.
Join Angèle Bilodeau, from the School of Public Health at the University of Montreal, Marie-Pier St-Louis, from the Canada Research Chair in Community Approaches and Health Inequalities (CACIS), and their collaborator Gillian Kranias for an introduction to this tool, which was developed in collaboration with the Montreal Coalition of Neighborhood Round Tables, Communagir and the Tamarack Institute.
This webinar will be presented in partnership with the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT), the National Collaborating Centre for Healthy Public Policy (NCCHPP), and the National Collaborating Centre for Determinants of Health (NCCDH).
The Applicability and Transferability Tool helps you determine whether the evidence you find can be applied to your own local situation. Find the A&T tool on the NCCMT website: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/publications/9
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Join Dr. Sarah Neil-Sztramko, Knowledge Translation Advisor, and Dr. Maureen Dobbins, Scientific Director, to learn how the NCCMT quickly pivoted to meet decision makers’ needs for high-quality synthesized evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The presentation will include an overview of how rigorous review methods were adapted to the ever-changing COVID-19 evidence landscape and provide time for discussion and questions from webinar participants.
Reviews from the Rapid Evidence Service are available here: https://www.nccmt.ca/res, and a pre-print article describing methods is available here: https://www.researchsquare.com/articl....
Learning Objectives:
By the end of this webinar, you will:
1. Learn about the methods for conducting rigorous rapid reviews in the face of quickly evolving evidence.
2. Apply knowledge of the strengths and limitations of rapid reviews to decision making.
3. Gain tools and resources to apply to rapid reviews in your own work.
The Contextualizing Guidance Workbook can help you consider factors from the broader health system and political system so you make the most appropriate policy recommendations and decisions. Find out how this tool can help you apply recommendations from a guidance document to address the issue/problem in your local context:
View our summary of this resource here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/238
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Healthh in Canada More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
Interested in sharing best practices within your organization?
Are you engaged in creating community health status reports? Are you interested in learning about how to improve health equity? The Equity-Integrated Population Health Status Reporting Action Framework can help health professionals at all levels identify and implement manageable steps for integrating equity into existing or new public health status reporting processes. The framework is suitable for use by health/public health staff, community organizations that provide local data, and academic researchers.
This framework was developed collaboratively by the six National Collaborating Centres for Public Health, building upon earlier work by the NCC for Determinants of Health.
To see the summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/240
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools is funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada and affiliated with McMaster University. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
NCCMT is one of six National Collaborating Centres (NCCs) for Public Health. The Centres promote and improve the use of scientific research and other knowledge to strengthen public health practices and policies in Canada.
The Tool for Sharing Best Practices helps public health professionals by outlining five practical steps to share best practices throughout their organizations. Sharing best practices can help your organization learn from successes, replicate successful programs, and improve outcomes.
Find out more and how to use the tool: http://www.nccmt.ca/resources/search/84
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The NCCMT looks forward to hosting its popular student-led webinar on evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in public health programs. During this webinar, students and recent graduates showcase how they are using EIDM tools and resources. EIDM skills are in demand in the workforce. Join this webinar to learn how the NCCMT’s accessible and informative resources can support your coursework, practicums and future public health careers.
The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is used to guide the adaptation and plan for the implementation of public health interventions. The tool is appropriate for individuals and groups involved in planning and implementing existing interventions. To see the summary statement of this tool developed by NCCMT, click here: http://www.nccmt.ca/registry/view/eng/210.html
NCCMT is one of six NCCs for Public Health in Canada. More on the NCCs at www.nccph.ca. Production of this webinar has been made possible through a financial contribution from the Public Health Agency of Canada. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Public Health Agency of Canada.
The National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) hosted our popular student-oriented webinar on evidence-informed decision making (EIDM) in public health programs. The NCCMT supports students learning remotely by continuing to provide online resources for EIDM.
Learn how these resources can support your coursework, practicums and public health careers. Recent Master of Public Health (MPH) graduates from programs across the country provide fresh perspectives and share their experiences of using research evidence in their own work.
Listen to the winners of the 2020 Knowledge Translation Student Award, awarded by the National Collaborating Centres for Public Health (NCCPH), and get a first-hand look at their crucial work in bridging the gap between research and practice through facilitating knowledge translation efforts and developing knowledge translation tools. Learn more about knowledge translation initiatives, including supporting the work of Indigenous people and communicating research to policy-makers.
Join us in launching the NCCMT’s new tools for assessing the quality of community evidence. These tools can be applied to evidence for local health issues and context, such as surveillance data and community health status reports, as well as evidence for community and political preferences and actions, such as the expressed needs and interests of community members and support from public or government officials.
In partnership with the Community Health Nurses’ Initiatives Group (CHNIG), this webinar will provide an overview of Evidence-Informed Decision Making (EIDM) processes and apply those processes to the rapidly expanding COVID-19 literature. Learn how to think critically about headlines and find high-quality evidence you can trust.
What do the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), the Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality (AHRQ) in the United States, and the Michael Garron Hospital in Toronto have in common? All three organizations have seen the benefits to patient safety when implementing the evidence-based teamwork and communication framework, TeamSTEPPS (Team Strategies and Tools for Effective Performance and Patient Safety).
Full details: https://goo.gl/8Y2PHc
This final webinar will emphasise the importance of understanding the problem before brainstorming solutions to better ensure a match between barriers and the solutions.
MORE INFO: http://bit.ly/2KctiLH
Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies: What's th...Health Evidence™
Health Evidence hosted a 60 minute webinar examining breastfeeding support interventions for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies. Click here for access to the audio recording for this webinar: https://youtu.be/fxDY-Q87xaY
Alison McFadden, Senior Research Fellow, Director, Mother and Infant Research Unit, School of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Dundee and Anna Gavine, Research Fellow School of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Dundee will be leading the session and presenting findings from their recent Cochrane review:
McFadden A, Gavine A, Renfrew M, Wade A, Buchanan P, Taylor J, et al. (2017). Support for healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies . Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(2), CD001141.
Evidence suggests that not breastfeeding negatively impacts the health of both infants and mothers. Additionally, data demonstrates an inadequate uptake of the World Health Organization’s recommendations regarding type and duration of breastfeeding in many countries. This review examines the impact of breastfeeding support interventions on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies, compared to usual care. One-hundred trials with over 83,246 mother-infant pairs were included in this review. Seventy-three of the one-hundred trials were involved in the data analyses. Findings suggest that breastfeeding support interventions reduce cessation of ‘any breastfeeding’ before 4 to 6 weeks and 6 months, and cessation of ‘exclusive breastfeeding’ at 4 to 6 weeks and at 6 months. This webinar will provide an overview of the impact of support on breastfeeding duration and exclusivity in healthy breastfeeding mothers with healthy term babies.
Cette exemple de feuille de réponse correspond au huitième webinaire de la série club de lecture en ligne, « Comment les jeunes interprètent-ils les données probantes relatives au cannabis? »
Le Centre de collaboration nationale des méthodes et outils est financé par l’Agence de la santé publique du Canada et affilié à l’Université McMaster. Les vues exprimées ici ne reflètent pas nécessairement la position officielle de l’Agence de la santé publique du Canada.
Le CCNMO est l’un des six centres de collaboration nationale en santé publique au Canada. Les Centres encouragent et améliorent l’utilisation des connaissances provenant de la recherche scientifique et des autres savoirs afin de renforcer la pratique et les politiques de santé publique au Canada.
Motivational interviewing for the prevention of alcohol misuse in young adult...Health Evidence™
Health Evidence™ hosted a 60 minute webinar examining the effectiveness of motivational interviewing (MI) for the prevention of alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults. Click here for access to the audio recording for this webinar: https://youtu.be/c9EHJ-Ks28c
Dr. David Foxcroft, President, European Society for Prevention Research (EUSPR), Professor of Community Psychology and Public Health, Department of Psychology, Social Work and Public Health, Oxford Brookes University led the session and presented findings from his recent Cochrane review:
Foxcroft D, Coombes L, Wood S, Allen D, Almeida Santimano N, & Moreira M. (2016). Motivational interviewing for the prevention of alcohol misuse in young adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2016(7), CD007025. https://www.healthevidence.org/view-article.aspx?a=motivational-interviewing-prevention-alcohol-misuse-young-adults-29645
According to the World Health Organization, alcohol is responsible for approximately 9% of deaths within the 15-29 year old age bracket. This review examines the effectiveness of MI interventions for preventing alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults. Eighty-four trials with 22,872 participants were included in this review. Findings suggest that MI interventions only slightly reduce quantity of alcohol consumed, frequency of alcohol consumption, and peak blood alcohol concentration, and only marginally reduce alcohol problems in young adults aged up to 25 years, compared to no intervention/placebo/treatment as usual. This webinar provided an overview of the effectiveness of MI interventions in preventing alcohol misuse and alcohol-related problems in young adults.
Plan para la Gestión Sostenible de los Residuos Domiciliarios en Asturias (2010-2040), una alternativa a la incineración, promovido por Consorcio Cívico.
Emprender en la Actualidad - JECA 2015 Universidad Nacional del SurLisandro Sosa
Emprender en la Actualidad, Mi presentacion en las 1eras Jornadas de Estudiantes de Contador y Administracion en la Universidad Nacional del Sur - Bahia Blanca - Argentina
Chapter 12Cost, Access, and QualityLearning Ob.docxcravennichole326
Chapter 12
Cost, Access, and Quality
Learning Objectives
• Understand:
– Health care costs, their trends, and
underlying factors
– Why some regulatory cost-containment
approaches were unsuccessful
– Nature, scope, and dimensions of quality
– The difference between quality assurance
and assessment
Learning Objectives
• To become familiar with regulatory and
market-oriented ways to contain costs
• To appreciate the framework and dimensions
of access to care
• To learn about access indicators and
measurements
• To discuss the implications of the Affordable
Care Act on cost, access, and quality
Introduction
• Three cornerstones of health care delivery
– Cost
– Access
– Quality
• Uncontrolled expenditures mitigate a nation’s
ability to provide access to quality health care
Introduction
• High quality care
– The most cost-effective care
– Cost is important in evaluating quality
– Achieved when:
•Accessible services are efficient
•Cost-effective
•Provided in an acceptable manner
Cost of Health Care
• Three meanings
1. Price: physician’s bill, prescription bill,
premiums
2. National perspective: how much a nation
spends on health care (health care
expenditures)
3. Provider perspective: cost of production
(staff salaries, capital, supplies)
Trends in National Health Expenditures
• Evaluating national health care expenditures
1. Compared to Consumer Price Index (CPI)
•CPI measures general inflation in the
economy and calculates the annual
changes (see Figure 12−2)
2. Compared to Gross Domestic Product
(GDP)
•See Figure 12−3
Trends in National Health Expenditures
• United States uses a larger percentage of
economic resources on health care
– See Table 12−2
• 2009, 17.4% of GDP was spent on health care
– $7,960 per capita
• 2015, 20% of GDP projected to be spent on
health care
Do We Need to Contain Costs?
• Reasons to control costs
1. Health care consumes a greater percentage of the
total economic output
• Resources are limited
• Other economic uses are curtailed
2. Limited resources should be directed to their
highest value
3. Corporations bear the additional cost of doing
business
4. Public spending for health care will become
unsustainable
Reasons for Cost Escalation
• Medical cost inflation influenced by:
– Third-party payment
– Imperfect market
– Growth of technology
– Increase in elderly population
– Medical model of health care delivery
– Multipayer system, administrative costs
– Defensive medicine
– Waste and abuse
– Practice variations
Reasons for Cost Escalation
• Third-party payment
– Moral hazard
– Provider-induced demand
• Imperfect market
– Health care market in the United States is neither
free nor highly regulated, and prices far exceed
the cost of production
– E = Q × P
– In national health care, both Q and P are
controlled by a central agency
– Both remain unchecked in an imperfect market
Reasons for Cost Escalation
• Technology and specializ ...
This presentation by the Bureau of Health Information to the Royal Australasian College of Physicians looks at using clinical outcome data to improve patient care.
It examines:
Why measure and report on performance?
- Accountability and quality improvement
What is performance really?
- It is not a measure of what the system is, it is a measure of how well the system does
Whose performance is it anyway?
- Attributing results to providers, units or sectors requires a careful assessment
Learn about reference pricing as a purchaser in response to the high and rising pharmaceutical sales and innovative strategies for managing specialty drugs.
Moving to Value Based Care – Leveraging advanced analytics to measure physici...LexisNexis Risk Solutions
Payment reform and emphasis on value-based care is forcing payers, ACOs, and Integrated Delivery Networks to look for ways through which physician performance can be evaluated and measured over time with the goal of creating highly efficient and effective physician networks. With more pressure and risk moving to physicians – they will expect fair measurement of quality against their peers. Join this webinar to understand the implications of value-based care as it relates to physician performance analysis and why the ability to effectively monitor physicians with less than acceptable cost performance and those with high-quality performance will be non-negotiable.
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)Health Catalyst
In this webinar, we will look at pressures exerted in 2023 on the margin and explore how cost management and complete charge capture can protect and enhance the margin. We will provide details on patient activity costing versus the cost-to-charge ratio (CCR), looking at common themes for lost charges and providing an example of where patient activity cost management was able to provide insight into cost containment and practice patterns of a system provider.
Pharmacy's Emerging Role in Accountable Care Organizations (ACO)Parata Systems
Your pharmacy is an excellent partner for accountable care organizations. ACOs are formed by doctors, hospitals and other healthcare providers to improve health outcomes and lower overall medical expenses for a targeted patient population. Reimbursements are tied to patient outcomes.
ACOs’ highest-risk and highest-cost patients are those managing chronic illnesses and taking multiple medications a day. When your pharmacy can improve and track adherence – a key driver of readmission prevention and overall health – you are a valuable partner to help ACOs prevent unnecessary medical care.
Jamie Hale serves as the Chief Pharmacy Officer for Cornerstone Health Care where he is responsible for the development and integration of pharmaceutical care services in the Accountable Care Organization. He transitioned to Cornerstone in December 2012 after a 15 year career at Wake Forest Baptist Health, where he last served as Director of Pharmacy.
Download the full audio webinar at http://bit.ly/pharmacyACO.
The CMS Innovation Center hosted a special webinar featuring Dr. Patrick Conway, CMS Deputy Administrator for Innovation and Quality and CMS Chief Medical Officer, on Monday, November 10, 2014 from 10:30am – 11:30 am ET. Dr. Conway will provided an update about the work of the CMS Innovation Center and the models being tested to improve better care for patients, better health for our communities, and lower costs through improvement for our health care system. Opportunities for questions were provided.
- - -
CMS Innovation Center
http://innovation.cms.gov
We accept comments in the spirit of our comment policy:
http://newmedia.hhs.gov/standards/comment_policy.html
CMS Privacy Policy
http://cms.gov/About-CMS/Agency-Information/Aboutwebsite/Privacy-Policy.html
Similar to Evolving Approaches to Measuring the Value of New Health Technologies in the US (20)
On 31 October 2019, Adrian Towse and Chris Henshall from the Office of Health Economics (OHE) presented at the G20 meeting on antimicrobial drugs R&D in Paris organised by the Wellcome Trust. The topic of their presentation was HTA and payment mechanisms for new drugs to tackle antimicrobial resistance.
This presentation looks at ways in which governments can set prices, including “cost plus”, value, and the external referencing of prices elsewhere. It looks at the role that competition can play in keeping down prices. In that context it briefly discusses pricing proposals being considered in Malaysia. It makes the case for using HTA to inform pricing decisions.
Adrian Towse
% GDP spending in UK, G5 countries and OECD upper middle income countries. W...Office of Health Economics
This presentation looks at rates of GDP spend on health care, distinguishing between categories of country (i.e. levels of GDP pre capita). It looks at the relationship between rates of spending and moves to universal health coverage, and explores alternative ways of increasing expenditure and making decisions about which services to provide with the money available.
The role of real world data and evidence in building a sustainable & efficien...Office of Health Economics
This presentation defines RWD and RWE in the context of digital health, and looks at potential uses for RWD and RWE. It briefly sets out the current landscape in Malaysia and looks at the challenges in using RWE. In particular, the issues of access, governance and ensuring good quality are considered.
The aim of this educational symposium was to discuss why we should seek value across the health care system and how we can apply existing research methods to measure the value of services. While considerable political attention in developed countries continues to be focused on drug spending, there is also growing awareness of the significant contribution of non-drug components of health care (e.g., hospital services and inefficient care delivery) to overall spending growth and patient affordability. At the same time, there is growing interest in making greater use of value assessment and value-based payment to control spending and better align it with care quality. In order to promote greater value, and to do so in ways that respond to the needs of payers and patients, it is essential to assess value across both drug- and non-drug interventions and health care services. This panel will offer expert viewpoints to identify and discuss gaps in value information, rationale and approaches to track and reduce system-wide low value care, and research methods for how to measure health care services.
Role Substitution, Skill Mix, and Provider Efficiency and Effectiveness : Les...Office of Health Economics
Graham participated in an organised session on Monday July 15th 2019. In the session he presented his paper with his co-author Ioannis Laliotis from the London School of Economics. The paper revisits the relationship between workforce and maternity outcomes in the English NHS in an attempt to contribute knowledge to an important policy question for which there has been a paucity of research.
This research explores the feasibility of introducing an Outcome-Based Payment approach for new cancer drugs in England. A literature review explored the current funding landscape in England, the available evidence on existing OBP schemes internationally, and
which outcomes cancer patients value most. Two focus groups and an online survey with patients and carers, as well as interviews with NHS and government stakeholders, healthcare
professionals, and pharmaceutical industry representatives, provided additional evidence on the feasibility and suitability of OBP schemes
Understanding what aspects of health and quality of life are important to peopleOffice of Health Economics
Poster presentation from the EuroQol Plenary Meeting 2019, Brussels, Belgium. By Koonal Shah, Brendan Mulhern, Patricia Cubi-Molla, Bas Janssen, and David Mott.
Koonal presented as part of an organised session on ‘moving beyond conventional economic approaches in palliative and end of life care’. He summarised the empirical evidence on the extent of pubic support for an end of life premium, before discussing some novel approaches that have been used in recent studies. His presentation was discussed by Helen Mason of Glasgow Caledonian University.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Koonal Shah, Office of Health Economics
Event: iHEA Congress
Date: 17/07/2019
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Assessing the Life-Cycle Value Added of Second Generation Antipsychotics in S...Office of Health Economics
This research presented in a poster at HTAi 2019, Cologne (Germany) by a team of OHE and IHE researchers, estimates the value added by second generation antipsychotics over their life-cycle in the UK and Sweden. It concludes that considering the entire life-cycle, the value added by SGAs to the system is higher than the expected value estimated at launch. P&R decisions should consider how to measure, capture and take into account the value added by medicines over the long-run.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Mikel Berdud (Office of Health Economics, London), Niklas Wallin-Bernhardsson (Institute for Health Economics, Stockholm), Bernarda Zamora (Office of Health Economics, London), Peter Lindgren (Institute for Health Economics, Stockholm), Adrian Towse (Office of Health Economics, London)
Event: HTAi 2019 Annual Meeting
Date: 18/06/2019
Location: Cologne, Germany
There is growing recognition that HTA and contracting systems for antimicrobials need to be adapted to help fight the threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), but there is little agreement on how. This poster reports findings from a literature review, expert interviews and face-to-face discussions at a Forum on the current HTA and payment systems for antibiotics across Europe and a number of recommendations for adapting these systems to respond to the challenges of AMR.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Margherita Neri (OHE) Grace Hampson (OHE) Christopher Henshall (OHE visiting fellow, independent consultant) Adrian Towse (OHE)
Event: HTAi annual conference 2019
Date: 18/06/2019
Location: Cologne, Germany
Assessing the Life-cycle Value Added of Second-Generation Antipsychotics in S...Office of Health Economics
This study aims to guide access decisions and drive the discussion on access and price, through recognition of the dynamic nature of value added by pharmaceutical innovation over the long-run. The analysis of the life-cycle value of risperidone estimates the value generated in the UK and Sweden. Results show that health systems were able to appropriate most of the life-cycle value generated, and this is larger than estimated at launch.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Mikel Berdud(1), Niklas Wallin-Bernhardsson(2), Bernarda Zamora(1), Peter Lindgren(2), and Adrian Towse(1) (1) Office of Health Economics (2) The Swedish Institute for. Health Economics
Event: XXXIX JORNADAS DE ECONOMÍA DE LA SALUD
Date: 12/06/2019
Location: Albacete, Spain
Prescribed Specialised Services (PSS) Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN) schemes were launched in 2013 in England with the aim of improving the quality of specialised care and achieving value for money. During this presentation, Marina Rodes Sanchez described the key features of the schemes and discussed its strengths and weaknesses based on international pay-for-performance literature.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Yan Feng, Queen Mary University of London; Søren Rud Kristensen, Imperial College London; Paula Lorgelly, King’s College London; Rachel Meacock, University of Manchester; Marina Rodes Sanchez, Office of Health Economics; Luigi Siciliani, University of York; Matt Sutton, University of Manchester
Event: XXXIX Spanish Health Economics Association Conference
Date: 12/06/2019
Location: Albacete, Spain
In this session, Meng Li sets out estimates of real option value for drugs arguing that option value matters and can be calculated. Adrian Towse sets out likely payer concerns about incorporating real option value into decision making. Meng Li responds to these concerns. Jens Grueger sets out how industry considers investment opportunities, arguing that if patients (and society) have preferences these need to be reflected in P&R decisions.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Meng Li, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Leonard D Schaeffer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Adrian Towse, Emeritus Director, Office of Health Economics, London, UK Jens Grueger, formerly Head of Global Access, Senior Vice President at F. Hoffmann-La Roche
Event: ISPOR 2019
Location: New Orleans, USA
Date: 21/05/2019
MCDA OR WEIGHTED CEA BASED ON THE QALY? WHICH IS THE FUTURE FOR HTA DECISION ...Office of Health Economics
In this ISPOR session Chuck Phelps and Adrian Towse debated the case for and against using MCDA to support HTA decision making, as compared to weighting or augmenting a QALY based ICER approach. Chuck Phelps argued for use of MCDA, Adrian Towse for weighting the QALY. Nancy Devlin set the scene and moderated.
Author(s) and affiliation(s): Nancy Devlin, Director, Centre for Health Policy, University of Melbourne, Australia Adrian Towse, Emeritus Director, Office of Health Economics, London, UK Chuck Phelps, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY USA
Event: ISPOR 2019
Location: New Orleans, USA
Date: 21/05/2019
micro teaching on communication m.sc nursing.pdfAnurag Sharma
Microteaching is a unique model of practice teaching. It is a viable instrument for the. desired change in the teaching behavior or the behavior potential which, in specified types of real. classroom situations, tends to facilitate the achievement of specified types of objectives.
Factory Supply Best Quality Pmk Oil CAS 28578–16–7 PMK Powder in Stockrebeccabio
Factory Supply Best Quality Pmk Oil CAS 28578–16–7 PMK Powder in Stock
Telegram: bmksupplier
signal: +85264872720
threema: TUD4A6YC
You can contact me on Telegram or Threema
Communicate promptly and reply
Free of customs clearance, Double Clearance 100% pass delivery to USA, Canada, Spain, Germany, Netherland, Poland, Italy, Sweden, UK, Czech Republic, Australia, Mexico, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan.Door to door service
Hot Selling Organic intermediates
Couples presenting to the infertility clinic- Do they really have infertility...Sujoy Dasgupta
Dr Sujoy Dasgupta presented the study on "Couples presenting to the infertility clinic- Do they really have infertility? – The unexplored stories of non-consummation" in the 13th Congress of the Asia Pacific Initiative on Reproduction (ASPIRE 2024) at Manila on 24 May, 2024.
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Ve...kevinkariuki227
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Verified Chapters 1 - 19, Complete Newest Version.pdf
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Verified Chapters 1 - 19, Complete Newest Version.pdf
Flu Vaccine Alert in Bangalore Karnatakaaddon Scans
As flu season approaches, health officials in Bangalore, Karnataka, are urging residents to get their flu vaccinations. The seasonal flu, while common, can lead to severe health complications, particularly for vulnerable populations such as young children, the elderly, and those with underlying health conditions.
Dr. Vidisha Kumari, a leading epidemiologist in Bangalore, emphasizes the importance of getting vaccinated. "The flu vaccine is our best defense against the influenza virus. It not only protects individuals but also helps prevent the spread of the virus in our communities," he says.
This year, the flu season is expected to coincide with a potential increase in other respiratory illnesses. The Karnataka Health Department has launched an awareness campaign highlighting the significance of flu vaccinations. They have set up multiple vaccination centers across Bangalore, making it convenient for residents to receive their shots.
To encourage widespread vaccination, the government is also collaborating with local schools, workplaces, and community centers to facilitate vaccination drives. Special attention is being given to ensuring that the vaccine is accessible to all, including marginalized communities who may have limited access to healthcare.
Residents are reminded that the flu vaccine is safe and effective. Common side effects are mild and may include soreness at the injection site, mild fever, or muscle aches. These side effects are generally short-lived and far less severe than the flu itself.
Healthcare providers are also stressing the importance of continuing COVID-19 precautions. Wearing masks, practicing good hand hygiene, and maintaining social distancing are still crucial, especially in crowded places.
Protect yourself and your loved ones by getting vaccinated. Together, we can help keep Bangalore healthy and safe this flu season. For more information on vaccination centers and schedules, residents can visit the Karnataka Health Department’s official website or follow their social media pages.
Stay informed, stay safe, and get your flu shot today!
New Directions in Targeted Therapeutic Approaches for Older Adults With Mantl...i3 Health
i3 Health is pleased to make the speaker slides from this activity available for use as a non-accredited self-study or teaching resource.
This slide deck presented by Dr. Kami Maddocks, Professor-Clinical in the Division of Hematology and
Associate Division Director for Ambulatory Operations
The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, will provide insight into new directions in targeted therapeutic approaches for older adults with mantle cell lymphoma.
STATEMENT OF NEED
Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) accounting for 5% to 7% of all lymphomas. Its prognosis ranges from indolent disease that does not require treatment for years to very aggressive disease, which is associated with poor survival (Silkenstedt et al, 2021). Typically, MCL is diagnosed at advanced stage and in older patients who cannot tolerate intensive therapy (NCCN, 2022). Although recent advances have slightly increased remission rates, recurrence and relapse remain very common, leading to a median overall survival between 3 and 6 years (LLS, 2021). Though there are several effective options, progress is still needed towards establishing an accepted frontline approach for MCL (Castellino et al, 2022). Treatment selection and management of MCL are complicated by the heterogeneity of prognosis, advanced age and comorbidities of patients, and lack of an established standard approach for treatment, making it vital that clinicians be familiar with the latest research and advances in this area. In this activity chaired by Michael Wang, MD, Professor in the Department of Lymphoma & Myeloma at MD Anderson Cancer Center, expert faculty will discuss prognostic factors informing treatment, the promising results of recent trials in new therapeutic approaches, and the implications of treatment resistance in therapeutic selection for MCL.
Target Audience
Hematology/oncology fellows, attending faculty, and other health care professionals involved in the treatment of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).
Learning Objectives
1.) Identify clinical and biological prognostic factors that can guide treatment decision making for older adults with MCL
2.) Evaluate emerging data on targeted therapeutic approaches for treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory MCL and their applicability to older adults
3.) Assess mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies for MCL and their implications for treatment selection
MANAGEMENT OF ATRIOVENTRICULAR CONDUCTION BLOCK.pdfJim Jacob Roy
Cardiac conduction defects can occur due to various causes.
Atrioventricular conduction blocks ( AV blocks ) are classified into 3 types.
This document describes the acute management of AV block.
Title: Sense of Taste
Presenter: Dr. Faiza, Assistant Professor of Physiology
Qualifications:
MBBS (Best Graduate, AIMC Lahore)
FCPS Physiology
ICMT, CHPE, DHPE (STMU)
MPH (GC University, Faisalabad)
MBA (Virtual University of Pakistan)
Learning Objectives:
Describe the structure and function of taste buds.
Describe the relationship between the taste threshold and taste index of common substances.
Explain the chemical basis and signal transduction of taste perception for each type of primary taste sensation.
Recognize different abnormalities of taste perception and their causes.
Key Topics:
Significance of Taste Sensation:
Differentiation between pleasant and harmful food
Influence on behavior
Selection of food based on metabolic needs
Receptors of Taste:
Taste buds on the tongue
Influence of sense of smell, texture of food, and pain stimulation (e.g., by pepper)
Primary and Secondary Taste Sensations:
Primary taste sensations: Sweet, Sour, Salty, Bitter, Umami
Chemical basis and signal transduction mechanisms for each taste
Taste Threshold and Index:
Taste threshold values for Sweet (sucrose), Salty (NaCl), Sour (HCl), and Bitter (Quinine)
Taste index relationship: Inversely proportional to taste threshold
Taste Blindness:
Inability to taste certain substances, particularly thiourea compounds
Example: Phenylthiocarbamide
Structure and Function of Taste Buds:
Composition: Epithelial cells, Sustentacular/Supporting cells, Taste cells, Basal cells
Features: Taste pores, Taste hairs/microvilli, and Taste nerve fibers
Location of Taste Buds:
Found in papillae of the tongue (Fungiform, Circumvallate, Foliate)
Also present on the palate, tonsillar pillars, epiglottis, and proximal esophagus
Mechanism of Taste Stimulation:
Interaction of taste substances with receptors on microvilli
Signal transduction pathways for Umami, Sweet, Bitter, Sour, and Salty tastes
Taste Sensitivity and Adaptation:
Decrease in sensitivity with age
Rapid adaptation of taste sensation
Role of Saliva in Taste:
Dissolution of tastants to reach receptors
Washing away the stimulus
Taste Preferences and Aversions:
Mechanisms behind taste preference and aversion
Influence of receptors and neural pathways
Impact of Sensory Nerve Damage:
Degeneration of taste buds if the sensory nerve fiber is cut
Abnormalities of Taste Detection:
Conditions: Ageusia, Hypogeusia, Dysgeusia (parageusia)
Causes: Nerve damage, neurological disorders, infections, poor oral hygiene, adverse drug effects, deficiencies, aging, tobacco use, altered neurotransmitter levels
Neurotransmitters and Taste Threshold:
Effects of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) on taste sensitivity
Supertasters:
25% of the population with heightened sensitivity to taste, especially bitterness
Increased number of fungiform papillae
The prostate is an exocrine gland of the male mammalian reproductive system
It is a walnut-sized gland that forms part of the male reproductive system and is located in front of the rectum and just below the urinary bladder
Function is to store and secrete a clear, slightly alkaline fluid that constitutes 10-30% of the volume of the seminal fluid that along with the spermatozoa, constitutes semen
A healthy human prostate measures (4cm-vertical, by 3cm-horizontal, 2cm ant-post ).
It surrounds the urethra just below the urinary bladder. It has anterior, median, posterior and two lateral lobes
It’s work is regulated by androgens which are responsible for male sex characteristics
Generalised disease of the prostate due to hormonal derangement which leads to non malignant enlargement of the gland (increase in the number of epithelial cells and stromal tissue)to cause compression of the urethra leading to symptoms (LUTS
Report Back from SGO 2024: What’s the Latest in Cervical Cancer?bkling
Are you curious about what’s new in cervical cancer research or unsure what the findings mean? Join Dr. Emily Ko, a gynecologic oncologist at Penn Medicine, to learn about the latest updates from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) 2024 Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer. Dr. Ko will discuss what the research presented at the conference means for you and answer your questions about the new developments.
Lung Cancer: Artificial Intelligence, Synergetics, Complex System Analysis, S...Oleg Kshivets
RESULTS: Overall life span (LS) was 2252.1±1742.5 days and cumulative 5-year survival (5YS) reached 73.2%, 10 years – 64.8%, 20 years – 42.5%. 513 LCP lived more than 5 years (LS=3124.6±1525.6 days), 148 LCP – more than 10 years (LS=5054.4±1504.1 days).199 LCP died because of LC (LS=562.7±374.5 days). 5YS of LCP after bi/lobectomies was significantly superior in comparison with LCP after pneumonectomies (78.1% vs.63.7%, P=0.00001 by log-rank test). AT significantly improved 5YS (66.3% vs. 34.8%) (P=0.00000 by log-rank test) only for LCP with N1-2. Cox modeling displayed that 5YS of LCP significantly depended on: phase transition (PT) early-invasive LC in terms of synergetics, PT N0—N12, cell ratio factors (ratio between cancer cells- CC and blood cells subpopulations), G1-3, histology, glucose, AT, blood cell circuit, prothrombin index, heparin tolerance, recalcification time (P=0.000-0.038). Neural networks, genetic algorithm selection and bootstrap simulation revealed relationships between 5YS and PT early-invasive LC (rank=1), PT N0—N12 (rank=2), thrombocytes/CC (3), erythrocytes/CC (4), eosinophils/CC (5), healthy cells/CC (6), lymphocytes/CC (7), segmented neutrophils/CC (8), stick neutrophils/CC (9), monocytes/CC (10); leucocytes/CC (11). Correct prediction of 5YS was 100% by neural networks computing (area under ROC curve=1.0; error=0.0).
CONCLUSIONS: 5YS of LCP after radical procedures significantly depended on: 1) PT early-invasive cancer; 2) PT N0--N12; 3) cell ratio factors; 4) blood cell circuit; 5) biochemical factors; 6) hemostasis system; 7) AT; 8) LC characteristics; 9) LC cell dynamics; 10) surgery type: lobectomy/pneumonectomy; 11) anthropometric data. Optimal diagnosis and treatment strategies for LC are: 1) screening and early detection of LC; 2) availability of experienced thoracic surgeons because of complexity of radical procedures; 3) aggressive en block surgery and adequate lymph node dissection for completeness; 4) precise prediction; 5) adjuvant chemoimmunoradiotherapy for LCP with unfavorable prognosis.
Lung Cancer: Artificial Intelligence, Synergetics, Complex System Analysis, S...
Evolving Approaches to Measuring the Value of New Health Technologies in the US
1. Measuring Attributes of Value: A Framework for Payer Assessments of Treatments in the US
DrSteven D Pearson
Institute for Clinical and Economic Review
Lunchtime Seminar
23 September 2014 • London, Office of HealthEconomics
2. Measuring Attributes of Value
A Framework for Payer Assessments of Treatments in the United States…
“Nonsense on Stilts” or “Fit for Purpose” for the UK?
Copyright ICER 2014
3. How the US does it today
•
Current practice in the US
–
Nearly all drugs are funded for all FDA indications
–
Prices are set at discretion of manufacturers with standard % discounts for some public insurers
–
Clinicians have little accountability for quality and even less for the financial impact of treatment decisions
–
Insurers manage use through
•
Patient cost-sharing using tiered formularies in which tier placement is determined by price, not “value”
•
Delegation of negotiating and drug delivery to pharmacy benefit management companies
•
Prior authorization to restrict use beyond FDA indications
•
Step therapy (“fail first”) policies
Copyright ICER 2014
6. Per Capita Annual Growth in Rx and Total Health Spending, 1992–2012
three-year weighted average
Source: National Health Expenditure Accounts and U.S. Census Bureau
What Crisis?
9. Costly, High-Use Drugs on the Horizon
PREVALENCE
5.4 million
26 million
71 million
2.7 million
ANNUAL COST
$35,000
$7,000
$10,000
~$100,000
Diabetes
High Cholesterol
Hepatitis C
Alzheimer’s
10. What’s the problem in the US?
•
Payers (insurers) in the US becoming less able to pass on cost increases –from any source --to patients or purchasers
•
The most important payer, Medicare*, is prohibited from considering costs and no dominant approach to judging value exists across private payers or state Medicaid programs
•
Ongoing disconnect between the view of value between payers and manufacturers
•
The current scientific and business model for manufacturers is trending toward more high-cost drugs
–
Payers often do not believe these drugs offer good value to the health care system
–
Manufacturers worry that payers will tighten their unclear evidence standards ever further and use existing policy tools to restrict access
*Editor’s note: Medicare is a taxpayer-funded federal program that covers those 65 and older (and a
few others). Medicaid, funded jointly by the state and federal governments, covers the indigent,
including some of those 65 and older.
Copyright ICER 2014
11. Is there a solution out there?
•
Comparative effectiveness research hobbled by exclusion of consideration of costs
•
Early efforts of physician specialty societies meeting resistance
–
American College of Cardiology (cost/QALYs)
–
American Society of Clinical Oncology (unclear)
•
Attempt at public shaming over cost of sofosbuvir
•
More intensive application of existing policy tools
–
Narrow coverage policies, step therapy, etc.
–
Increasing cost-sharing for patients
–
Raising health insurance premiums
•
Political and policy gridlock Copyright ICER 2014
12. The ICER value framework project
•
The framework includes
–
Content
•
A list of elementsto consider
–
Measurement options
•
Methods to measure or judge each element
–
Assessment process
•
Process by which to integrate measurements and other information in an assessment of overall value
•
Long range goals
–
Improve the reliability and consistency of value determinations by payers
–
Provide the basis for more transparent dialogue between manufacturers, payers, and other stakeholders over considerations of value
Copyright ICER 2014
13. ICER policy development group
•
Insurers and Pharmacy Benefit Management Companies
–
OmedaRx
–
Kaiser Permanente
–
Aetna
–
WellPoint
–
Premera
–
America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP)
•
Patient Organizations
–
FamiliesUSA
•
Purchasers
–
Marriott
–
Maine Health Management Coalition
•
Manufacturers
–
National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC)
–
Covidien
–
Lilly
–
GSK
–
Philips
–
Amgen
–
Biotechnology Industry Organization
–
Merck
Copyright ICER 2014
14. A value framework for the US payer
•
Working backwards from the foreseeable actionable use of value in the US system
–
Used in tiered formularies, VBID
–
Consistent with clinician and public vernacular
–
“High” and “Low” value ratings are actionable
Copyright ICER 2014
15. Elements in a payer assessment of value: Clinical Care Value
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
Additional Benefits
Contextual Considerations
Incremental cost per outcomes achieved
Clinical Care Value Copyright ICER 2014
16. Elements in a payer assessment of value: Clinical Care Value and Health System Value
Managing Affordability
Health System Value
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
17. Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
•
Magnitude of the comparativenet health benefit
–
How important and patient centered are the outcomes measured?
•
Level of certainty in the evidence on net health benefit
•
Measurement options
–
Disaggregated
•
Specific clinical outcomes, e.g. disease-specific mortality
–
Aggregated
•
QALYs
•
Need for a categorical summary
•
ICER Matrix, HAS or IQWiGdegrees of “added clinical benefit”
•
Incorporation of level of certainty remains a challenge
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
Additional Benefits
Contextual Considerations
Incremental cost per outcomes achieved
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
18.
19. Additional Benefits
•
Are there benefits of treatment that extend beyond patient-specific healthimprovement?
–
Reduction in care needed from friends and family, earlier ability to return towork
•
Will the treatment expand the population that will benefit from treatment?
–
Allows sicker patients or those with comorbidities to be treated
•
Does the treatment offer a new or different mechanism of action when significantvariation of treatment effect suggests that many patients who do not achieveadequate outcomes on other treatments may benefit?
•
Are there other practical advantages related to preparation, storage, or deliveryof the treatment?
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
Additional Benefits
Contextual Considerations
Incremental cost per outcomes achieved
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
20. Contextual Considerations
•
No other acceptable treatments exist
•
High severity and/or priority condition
•
Vulnerable population (e.g. children)
•
Consensus among professional statementson appropriate use
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
Additional Benefits
Contextual Considerations
Incremental cost per outcomes achieved
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
21. Incremental cost per outcomes
•
Relative measure
–
Cost per a single desired clinical outcome
•
e.g. additional stroke prevented or long-term cancer remission achieved
–
Cost per aggregated health measure
•
QALY
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
Additional Benefits
Contextual Considerations
Incremental cost per outcomes achieved
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
22. Clinical Care Value and Health System Value
•
Affordability = implied risk of clinical opportunity costs andimpact on sustainable access to health insurance
–
Budget impact on the organization
–
Impact on overall health care costs measured by potentialimpact on insurance premiums
•
Managing affordability for interventions of high clinical carevalue is an action step
–
Changing the payment mechanism (longer terms) and/or price (lower)
–
Prioritizing Rx populations to reduce immediate cost impact
–
Finding savings in other areas
–
Sharing the costs with government or other funders
Managing Affordability
Health System Value
Clinical Care Value
Copyright ICER 2014
23. Determining Value
•
Define the elements of value
•
Measure/judge the elements of value
•
Integrate the elements of value in a value assessment
Copyright ICER 2014
24. A “value flowchart” for payers
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
AdditionalBenefits
ContextualConsiderations regarding the illness and therapy
Incrementalcost per outcomes achieved
First value rating: “Clinical Care Value”
Affordability
Second value rating: “HealthSystem Value”
Copyright ICER 2014
25. High Clinical Care Value andHigh Health System Value:
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
AdditionalBenefits
Contextual Considerations regarding the illness and therapy
Incremental cost per outcomesachieved
First value rating: “Clinical Care Value”
Affordability
Second value rating: “Health System Value”
Superior
Less important
Less important
Below comparator or threshold($100K/QALY)
High
Can be broughtbelow threshold(0.5-1% PMPM)
High
Incremental
Important
Important
Belowcomparator or threshold($100K/QALY)
High
Can be brought belowthreshold
(0.5-1% PMPM)
High
Comparable
More important
Important
Below comparator
High
Can be brought belowcomparator
(0.5-1% PMPM)
High
Copyright ICER 2014
26. A test case: Sovaldivs. previous triple Rx
Sovaldivs.previoustriple therapy
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
AdditionalBenefits
Contextual Considerations regarding the illness and therapy
Incremental cost per outcomesachieved
First value rating: “Clinical Care Value”
Affordability
Second value rating: “Health System Value”
SVR 90% vs. 70%
Shorterduration
1.Vulnerable populations
2.Professional guidelines encourage use
Costper SVR = $100K
Cost per QALY < $50,000
Rx for allknown diagnosed would increasedrug budgets by >10%
PMPM by over 15% in first year
Superior
Less important
Less important
Below comparator or threshold?
High
Can be broughtbelow threshold?
Low if unable to modulate budget impact
High if can reduceshort- term budget impact
Copyright ICER 2014
27. Low ClinicalCare Value
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness
AdditionalBenefits
Contextual Considerations regarding the illness and therapy
Incremental cost per outcomesachieved
First value rating: “Clinical Care Value”
Superior
More important
More relevant
Incremental cost/key outcome “far higher” than comparator; or
Cost/QALY > threshold($150K)
Low
Incremental
More important
Morerelevant
Cost/key outcome > comparator; or
Cost/QALY > threshold ($100-150K)
Low
Comparable
More important
More relevant
Cost/key outcome > comparator;
Cost/QALY not relevant ifclinically comparable
Low
Promising but Inconclusive
More important
More relevant
Cost/key outcome > comparator; or
Cost/QALY > lower threshold ($50K)
Low
Copyright ICER 2014
28. ICER framework vs. NICE
•
A categorical, part quantitative, part qualitative multi-criteria decision analytic approach
•
A continuous relative index with potential for internal quantitative weighting and/or some discretion for consideration of social values at the margins
•
These two approaches are not mutually exclusive
Copyright ICER 2014
29. ICER framework vs. NICE
Attribute
ICER value framework
NICE
Comprehensive in addressing multiple elements of value
Consistent across payers
Consistent across conditions
Transparent
Addresses affordability
“Cookbook” or “one size fits all”
Copyright ICER 2014
30. Concluding Thoughts for the US
•
The conceptual view of value by payersin the US today is dominated by comparative clinical effectiveness and budget impact.
•
The conceptual view of value by manufacturersin the US is dominated by comparative clinical effectiveness and additional benefits, with a vague nod to cost-effectiveness and disavowal of responsibility for affordability.
•
If the ICER value framework can convince US payers to integrate cost-effectiveness into their assessments of value, while encouraging manufacturers to think of affordability as a joint challenge, (some) progress will have been achieved.
Copyright ICER 2014
31. This seminar is one in a series of Lunchtime Seminars that OHE sponsors each year.
The Office of Health Economics is a research and consulting organisation that has been providing specialised research, analysis and expertise on a range of health care and life sciences issues and topics for more than 50 years.
To keep up with the latest news and research, subscribe to our blog, OHE News.
Follow us on Twitter @OHENews, LinkedInand SlideShare.
OHE’s publications may be downloaded free of charge for registered users of its website.
Office of Health EconomicsSouthside, 7th Floor105 Victoria StreetLondon SW1E 6QT United Kingdom
+44 20 7747 8850 www.ohe.org
About this seminar