Design and implementation of a multicriteria medical decision support system for diagnosis and treatment

Health care providers face the problem of trying to make decisions with inadequate information and also with an overload of (often contradictory) information. Physicians often choose treatment long before they know which disease is present. Indeed, uncertainty is intrinsic to the practice of medicine. Decision analysis can help physicians structure and work through a medical decision problem, and can provide reassurance that decisions are rational and consistent with the beliefs and preferences of other physicians and patients. ^ The primary purpose of this research project is to develop the theory, methods, techniques and tools necessary for designing and implementing a system to support solving medical decision problems. A case study involving “abdominal pain” serves as a prototype for implementing the system. The research, however, focuses on a generic class of problems and aims at covering theoretical as well as practical aspects of the system developed. ^ The main contributions of this research are: (1) bridging the gap between the statistical approach and the knowledge-based (expert) approach to medical decision making; (2) linking a collection of methods, techniques and tools together to allow for the design of a medical decision support system, based on a framework that involves the Analytic Network Process (ANP), the generalization of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to dependence and feedback, for problems involving diagnosis and treatment; (3) enhancing the representation and manipulation of uncertainty in the ANP framework by incorporating group consensus weights; and (4) developing a computer program to assist in the implementation of the system. ^

Establishing occupational and environmental health design requirements for Lunar and Mars settlements

In a study of Lunar and Mars settlement concepts, an analysis was made of fundamental design assumptions in five technical areas against a model list of occupational and environmental health concerns. The technical areas included the proposed science projects to be supported, habitat and construction issues, closed ecosystem issues, the "MMM" issues--mining, material-processing, and manufacturing, and the human elements of physiology, behavior and mission approach. Four major lessons were learned. First it is possible to relate public health concerns to complex technological development in a proactive design mode, which has the potential for long-term cost savings. Second, it became very apparent that prior to committing any nation or international group to spending the billions to start and complete a lunar settlement, over the next century, that a significantly different approach must be taken from those previously proposed, to solve the closed ecosystem and "MMM" problems. Third, it also appears that the health concerns and technology issues to be addressed for human exploration into space are fundamentally those to be solved for human habitation of the earth (as a closed ecosystem) in the 21st century. Finally, it is proposed that ecosystem design modeling must develop new tools, based on probabilistic models as a step up from closed circuit models. ^

A survey of the implementation status of environmental management systems in U.S. colleges and universities, and, An environmental management system implementation model for U.S. colleges and universities

A census of 925 U.S. colleges and universities offering masters and doctorate degrees was conducted in order to study the number of elements of an environmental management system as defined by ISO 14001 possessed by small, medium and large institutions. A 30% response rate was received with 273 responses included in the final data analysis. Overall, the number of ISO 14001 elements implemented among the 273 institutions ranged from 0 to 16, with a median of 12. There was no significant association between the number of elements implemented among institutions and the size of the institution (p = 0.18; Kruskal-Wallis test) or among USEPA regions (p = 0.12; Kruskal-Wallis test). The proportion of U.S. colleges and universities that reported having implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, defined by answering yes to all 16 elements, was 10% (95% C.I. 6.6%–14.1%); however 38% (95% C.I. 32.0%–43.8%) reported that they had implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, while 30.0% (95% C.I. 24.7%–35.9%) are planning to implement a comprehensive environmental management system within the next five years. Stratified analyses were performed by institution size, Carnegie Classification and job title. ^ The Osnabruck model, and another under development by the South Carolina Sustainable Universities Initiative, are the only two environmental management system models that have been proposed specifically for colleges and universities, although several guides are now available. The Environmental Management System Implementation Model for U.S. Colleges and Universities developed is an adaptation of the ISO 14001 standard and USEPA recommendations and has been tailored to U.S. colleges and universities for use in streamlining the implementation process. In using this implementation model created for the U.S. research and academic setting, it is hoped that these highly specialized institutions will be provided with a clearer and more cost-effective path towards the implementation of an EMS and greater compliance with local, state and federal environmental legislation. ^

Environmental sustainability and the human element: Decision making in National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers and Practice Greenhealth subscribing institutions

Background. Various aspects of sustainability have taken root in the hospital environment; however, decisions to pursue sustainable practices within the framework of a master plan are not fully developed in National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer centers and subscribing institutions to the Practice Greenhealth (PGH) listserv.^ Methods. This cross sectional study was designed to identify the organizational characteristics each study group pursed to implement sustainability practices, describe the barriers they encountered and reasons behind their choices for undertaking certain sustainability practices. A web-based questionnaire was pilot tested, and then sent out to 64 NCI-designated cancer centers and 1638 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv.^ Results. Complete responses were received from 39 NCI-designated cancer centers and 58 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv. NCI-designated cancer centers reported greater progress in integrating sustainability criteria into design and construction projects than hospitals of institutions subscribing to the PHG listserv (p-value = <0.05). Statistically significant differences were also identified between these two study groups in undertaking work life options, conducting energy usage assessments, developing energy conservation and optimization plans, implementing solid waste and hazardous waste minimization programs, using energy efficient vehicles and reporting sustainability progress to external stakeholders. NCI-designated cancer centers were further along in implementing these programs (p-value = <0.05). In comparing the self-identified NCI-designated cancer centers to centers that indicated they were both and NCI and PGH, the later had made greater progress in using their collective buying power to pursue sustainable purchasing practices within the medical community (p-value = <0.05). In both study groups, recycling programs were well developed.^ Conclusions. Employee involvement was viewed as the most important reason for both study groups to pursue recycling initiatives and incorporated environmental criteria into purchasing decisions. A written sustainability commitment did not readily translate into a high percentage that had developed a sustainability master plan. Coordination of sustainability programs through a designated sustainability professional was not being undertaken by a large number of institutions within each study group. This may be due to the current economic downturn or management's attention to the emerging health care legislation being debated in congress. ^ Lifecycle assessments, an element of a carbon footprint, are seen as emerging areas of opportunity for health care institutions that can be used to evaluate the total lifecycle costs of products and services.^