107 resultados para happened-before


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVES Primary care physicians (PCPs) should prescribe faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) or colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening based on their patient's values and preferences. However, there are wide variations between PCPs in the screening method prescribed. The objective was to assess the impact of an educational intervention on PCPs' intent to offer FIT or colonoscopy on an equal basis. DESIGN Survey before and after training seminars, with a parallel comparison through a mailed survey to PCPs not attending the training seminars. SETTING All PCPs in the canton of Vaud, Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS Of 592 eligible PCPs, 133 (22%) attended a seminar and 106 (80%) filled both surveys. 109 (24%) PCPs who did not attend the seminars returned the mailed survey. INTERVENTION A 2 h-long interactive seminar targeting PCP knowledge, skills and attitudes regarding offering a choice of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening options. OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was PCP intention of having their patients screened with FIT and colonoscopy in equal proportions (between 40% and 60% each). Secondary outcomes were the perceived role of PCPs in screening decisions (from paternalistic to informed decision-making) and correct answer to a clinical vignette. RESULTS Before the seminars, 8% of PCPs reported that they had equal proportions of their patients screened for CRC by FIT and colonoscopy; after the seminar, 33% foresaw having their patients screened in equal proportions (p<0.001). Among those not attending, there was no change (13% vs 14%, p=0.8). Of those attending, there was no change in their perceived role in screening decisions, while the proportion responding correctly to a clinical vignette increased (88-99%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS An interactive training seminar increased the proportion of physicians with the intention to prescribe FIT and colonoscopy in equal proportions.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Energy shocks like the Fukushima accident can have important political consequences. This article examines their impact on collaboration patterns between collective actors in policy processes. It argues that external shocks create both behavioral uncertainty, meaning that actors do not know about other actors' preferences, and policy uncertainty on the choice and consequences of policy instruments. The context of uncertainty interacts with classical drivers of actor collaboration in policy processes. The analysis is based on a dataset comprising interview and survey data on political actors in two subsequent policy processes in Switzerland and Exponential Random Graph Models for network data. Results first show that under uncertainty, collaboration of actors in policy processes is less based on similar preferences than in stable contexts, but trust and knowledge of other actors are more important. Second, under uncertainty, scientific actors are not preferred collaboration partners.