130 resultados para Calculation methodology

em Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive


Relevância:

60.00% 60.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This paper critically evaluates the empirical evidence of 36 studies regarding the comparative cost-effectiveness of group and individual cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) as a whole, and also for specific mental disorders (e.g. depression, anxiety, substance abuse) or populations (e.g. children). Methods of calculating costs, as well as methods of comparing treatment outcomes were appraised and criticized. Overall, the evidence that group CBT is more cost-effective than individual CBT is mixed, with group CBT appearing to be more cost effective in treating depression and children, but less cost effective in treating drugs and alcohol dependence, anxiety and social phobias. In addition, methodological weaknesses in the studies assessed are noted. There is a need to improve cost calculation methodology, as well as more solid and a greater number of empirical cost-effectiveness studies before a firm conclusion can be reached that group CBT is more cost effective then individual CBT.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

There are increasing indications that the contribution of holding costs and its impact on housing affordability is very significant. Their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from considering the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them recently. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require further investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs and assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. They are not as visible as more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. This paper seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. It extends research in this area clarifying the extent to which holding costs impact housing affordability. Geographical diversity indicated by the considerable variation between various planning instruments and the length of regulatory assessment periods suggests further research should adopt a case study approach in order to test the relevance of theoretical modelling conducted.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. This is exemplified by widespread housing stock surpluses in many countries which threaten to destabilise numerous aspects related to individuals and community. However, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a distinct contrast whereby seemingly inexorable housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by high levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield property development. Preliminary analysis conducted by the author suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability – and notably, to a greater extent than commonly held. Even so, their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them over recent years. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs, thereby affecting the assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. Some forms of holding costs are not as visible as the more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment, based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. By extending research in the general area of housing affordability, this thesis seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. This will involve the development of soundly based economic and econometric models which seek to clarify the componentry impacts of holding costs. Ultimately, there are significant policy implications in relation to the framework used in Australian jurisdictions that promote, retain, or otherwise maximise, the opportunities for affordable housing.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Many of the costs associated with greenfield residential development are apparent and tangible. For example, regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others are all relatively easily identified since they represent actual costs incurred at a given point in time. However, identification of holding costs are not always immediately evident since by contrast they characteristically lack visibility. One reason for this is that, for the most part, they are typically assessed over time in an ever-changing environment. In addition, wide variations exist in development pipeline components: they are typically represented from anywhere between a two and over sixteen years time period - even if located within the same geographical region. Determination of the starting and end points, with regards holding cost computation, can also prove problematic. Furthermore, the choice between application of prevailing inflation, or interest rates, or a combination of both over time, adds further complexity. Although research is emerging in these areas, a review of the literature reveals attempts to identify holding cost components are limited. Their quantification (in terms of relative weight or proportionate cost to a development project) is even less apparent; in fact, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely and in some instances completely ignored. In addition, it may be demonstrated that ambiguities exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs and assessment of their relative contribution. Yet their impact on housing affordability is widely acknowledged to be profound, with their quantification potentially maximising the opportunities for delivering affordable housing. This paper seeks to build on earlier investigations into those elements related to holding costs, providing theoretical modelling of the size of their impact - specifically on the end user. At this point the research is reliant upon quantitative data sets, however additional qualitative analysis (not included here) will be relevant to account for certain variations between expectations and actual outcomes achieved by developers. Although this research stops short of cross-referencing with a regional or international comparison study, an improved understanding of the relationship between holding costs, regulatory charges, and housing affordability results.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This letter is in response to the recently published article “Evaluation of two self-referent foot health instruments” by Robert Trevethan (RT) and is in regard to the scale scores he derived when using the quality of life measure, the Foot Health Status Questionnaire [1]. Unfortunately, the journal reviewers and editor did not identify, or address, a fundamental flaw in the methodology of this paper. Subsequently, the inference drawn from this paper could, in all reasonableness, mislead the reader

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Power calculation and sample size determination are critical in designing environmental monitoring programs. The traditional approach based on comparing the mean values may become statistically inappropriate and even invalid when substantial proportions of the response values are below the detection limits or censored because strong distributional assumptions have to be made on the censored observations when implementing the traditional procedures. In this paper, we propose a quantile methodology that is robust to outliers and can also handle data with a substantial proportion of below-detection-limit observations without the need of imputing the censored values. As a demonstration, we applied the methods to a nutrient monitoring project, which is a part of the Perth Long-Term Ocean Outlet Monitoring Program. In this example, the sample size required by our quantile methodology is, in fact, smaller than that by the traditional t-test, illustrating the merit of our method.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

What role can climatically appropriate subdivision design play in decreasing the use of energy required to cool premises by maximising access to natural ventilation? How can this design be achieved? The subdivision design stage is critical to urban and suburban sustainability outcomes, as significant changes after development are constrained by the configuration of the subdivision, and then by the construction of the dwellings. Existing Australian lot rating methodologies for energy efficiency, such as that by the Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA), focus on reducing heating needs by increasing solar access, a key need in Australia’s temperate zone. A recent CRC CI project, Sustainable Subdivisions: Energy (Miller and Ambrose 2005) examined these guidelines to see if they could be adapted for use in subtropical South East Queensland (SEQ). Correlating the lot ratings with dwelling ratings, the project found that the SEDA guidelines would need to be modified for use to make allowance for natural ventilation. In SEQ, solar access for heating is less important than access to natural ventilation, and there is a need to reduce energy used to cool dwellings. In Queensland, the incidence of residential air-conditioning was predicted to reach 50 per cent by the end of 2005 (Mickel 2004). The CRC-CI, Sustainable Subdivisions: Ventilation Project (CRC-CI, in progress), aims to verify and quantify the role natural ventilation has in cooling residences in subtropical climates and develop a lot rating methodology for SEQ. This paper reviews results from an industry workshop that explored the current attitudes and methodologies used by a range of professionals involved in subdivision design and development in SEQ. Analysis of the workshop reveals that a key challenge for sustainability is that land development in subtropical SEQ is commonly a separate process from house design and siting. Finally, the paper highlights some of the issues that regulators and industry face in adopting a lot rating methodology for subdivisions offering improved ventilation access, including continuing disagreement between professionals over the desirability of rating tools.