Key performance indicators (KPIs) and priority setting in using the multi-attribute approach for assessing sustainable intelligent buildings

The main objectives of this paper are to: firstly, identify key issues related to sustainable intelligent buildings (environmental, social, economic and technological factors); develop a conceptual model for the selection of the appropriate KPIs; secondly, test critically stakeholder's perceptions and values of selected KPIs intelligent buildings; and thirdly develop a new model for measuring the level of sustainability for sustainable intelligent buildings. This paper uses a consensus-based model (Sustainable Built Environment Tool- SuBETool), which is analysed using the analytical hierarchical process (AHP) for multi-criteria decision-making. The use of the multi-attribute model for priority setting in the sustainability assessment of intelligent buildings is introduced. The paper commences by reviewing the literature on sustainable intelligent buildings research and presents a pilot-study investigating the problems of complexity and subjectivity. This study is based upon a survey perceptions held by selected stakeholders and the value they attribute to selected KPIs. It is argued that the benefit of the new proposed model (SuBETool) is a ‘tool’ for ‘comparative’ rather than an absolute measurement. It has the potential to provide useful lessons from current sustainability assessment methods for strategic future of sustainable intelligent buildings in order to improve a building's performance and to deliver objective outcomes. Findings of this survey enrich the field of intelligent buildings in two ways. Firstly, it gives a detailed insight into the selection of sustainable building indicators, as well as their degree of importance. Secondly, it tesst critically stakeholder's perceptions and values of selected KPIs intelligent buildings. It is concluded that the priority levels for selected criteria is largely dependent on the integrated design team, which includes the client, architects, engineers and facilities managers.

Priority setting in healthcare: from arbitrariness to societal values

This paper develops an account of the normative basis of priority setting in health care as combining the values which a given society holds for the common good of its members, with the universal provided by a principle of common humanity. We discuss national differences in health basket in Europe and argue that health care decision-making in complex social and moral frameworks is best thought of as anchored in such a principle by drawing on the philosophy of need. We show that health care needs are ethically ‘thick’ needs whose psychological and social construction can best be understood in terms of David Wiggins's notion of vital need: a person's need is vital when failure to meet it leads to their harm and suffering. The moral dimension of priority setting which operates across different societies’ health care systems is located in the demands both of and on any society to avoid harm to its members.

Application of the concepts of agro-tourism, agricultural diversification and food and nutrition for the development of Caribbean communities with reference to standards and priority setting

Introduction There is a renewed call for a new approach to development with emphasis on community empowerment or participation, with the belief that more sustainable activities will be undertaken in those communities. Much of that call, however, is coming not from within the communities, but primarily from advocates of change who may have little to do with those communities. What then will the new approach bring apart from a change in who are the decision-makers? And how do we ensure that the change that is called for will, in fact, bring added benefits to the communities themselves? To be sure, there are some successful stories of a community approach to problem solving. However, there are also many more stories of project failures. Serious analytical work, therefore, needs to be done to determine the factors that promote a successful community-based approach; when this approach should be used; and the methodology that should be employed. In an attempt to determine these factors, a brief analysis will be made of some of the governing structures in the subregion and their possible impact on the proposed new approach. Some of the earlier efforts at stakeholder and community approach to projects will also be examined as well as the new development strategy that is prompting the call for this new paradigm. The new paradigm focuses to a large extent on decision-making and community empowerment. With few exceptions, it is short on the promotion of tangible activities that are based on the resource inventory of the communities. This is not surprising, since, as noted before, the advocates of community empowerment may have very little connection with the communities and, in most cases, are unfamiliar with the resource base. Hence, a theoretical case is made, suggesting more style than substance. Another obvious shortcoming of this new paradigm is its continued over- dependence on assistance from the outside to build communities. Externally funded projects, seminars and meetings outside of the communities and foreign technical assistance continue to dominate these projects. While, of course, all communities have basic common needs such as water, health, education and electricity, there is sufficient diversity within communities to allow for tailoring of activities and programmes such that their differences become assets. It is in that context, that agro-tourism activities, standards, agricultural diversification, food and nutrition and priority setting have been chosen as aspects and activities for promoting community development, drawing on the various strengths of communities, rural or urban.

Setting the agenda for dental education in Scotland: a priority setting exercise including multiple stakehiolders

Introduction The Scottish Oral Health Research Collaboration identified dental education research (DER) as a key strand of their strategy,(1) leading to the formation of the Dental Education Research Group. The starting point for this group was to understand various stakeholders’ perceptions of research priorities, yet no existing studies were found. The aim of the current study was to identify DER priorities for Scotland in the next 3-5 years. Methods The study utilised a similar methodology to that of Dennis et al,(2) in medical education. Data were collected sequentially using two online questionnaires with multiple dental stakeholders represented at undergraduate and postgraduate levels across urban and rural Scotland. 85 participants completed questionnaire 1 (qualitative) and 649 participants completed questionnaire 2 (quantitative). Qualitative and quantitative data analysis approaches were used. Results Of the 24 priorities identified, the top priorities were: role of assessments in identifying competence; undergraduate curriculum prepares for practice; and promoting teamwork within the dental team. Following factor analysis, the priorities loaded on four factors: teamwork and professionalism, measuring and enhancing performance, personal and professional development challenges, and curriculum integration and innovation. The top barriers were lack of time, funding, staff motivation, valuing of DER, and resources/ infrastructure. Discussion There were many similarities between the identified priorities for dental and medical education research2, but also some notable differences, which will be discussed. Overwhelmingly, the identified priorities in dentistry related to fitness for practice and robust assessment practices. Take home message Priority setting exercises with multiple stakeholders are an important first step in developing a national research strategy. References 1. Bagg J, Macpherson L, Mossey P, Rennie J, Saunders B, Taylor M (2010) Strategy for Oral Health Research in Scotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government. 2. Dennis A A, Cleland J A, Johnston P, Ker JS, Lough, M Rees CE (2014) Exploring stakeholders’ views of medical education research priorities: a national study. Medical Education, 48(11): 1078-1091.

Priorities for future intensive care research in the UK: results of a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

This James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership aimed to identify and prioritise unanswered questions about adult intensive care that are important to people who have been critically ill, their families, and the health professionals who care for them. Consensus techniques (modified Delphi and Nominal Group) were used to generate suggestions using online and postal surveys. Following verification and iterative editorial review, research topics were constructed from these suggestions. These topics were presented in a second online and postal survey for rating. A Nominal Group of 21 clinicians, patients and family representatives subsequently met to rank the most important research topics and produce a prioritised list. The project was coordinated by a representative Steering Group and independently overseen by the JLA. The initial survey and review of the literature generated over 1,300 suggestions. Preliminary editing and verification permitted us to encapsulate these suggestions within 151 research topics. Iterative review by members of the Steering Group produced 37 topic statements, subsequently rated by participants. Using the mode to determine importance, 19 topics were presented to the group from which a ‘top three’ intensive care research priorities were identified and a further nine topics were prioritised. By applying and adapting the JLA methodology to focus on an area of care rather than to a single disease, we have provided a means to ensure that patients, their families and professionals materially contribute to the prioritisation of intensive care research in the UK.

Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method

Objectives: The objectives of this study is to review the set of criteria of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for priority-setting in research with addition of new criteria if necessary, and to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the final priority score. Methods: Based on the evaluation of 199 research topics, forty-five experts identified additional criteria for priority-setting, rated their relevance, and ranked and weighted them in a three-round modified Delphi technique. A final priority score was developed and evaluated. Internal consistency, test–retest and inter-rater reliability were assessed. Correlation with experts’ overall qualitative topic ratings were assessed as an approximation to validity. Results: All seven original IOM criteria were considered relevant and two new criteria were added (“potential for translation into practice”, and “need for knowledge”). Final ranks and relative weights differed from those of the original IOM criteria: “research impact on health outcomes” was considered the most important criterion (4.23), as opposed to “burden of disease” (3.92). Cronbach’s alpha (0.75) and test–retest stability (interclass correlation coefficient = 0.66) for the final set of criteria were acceptable. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for overall assessment of priority was 0.66. Conclusions: A reliable instrument for prioritizing topics in clinical and health services research has been developed. Further evaluation of its validity and impact on selecting research topics is required

Cost-effectiveness analysis of humanitarian relief interventions: visceral leishmaniasis treatment in the Sudan

Spending by aid agencies on emergencies has quadrupled over the last decade, to over US$ 6 billion. To date, cost-effectiveness has seldom been considered in the prioritization and evaluation of emergency interventions. The sheer volume of resources spent on humanitarian aid and the chronicity of many humanitarian interventions call for more attention to be paid to the issue of 'value for money'. In this paper we present data from a major humanitarian crisis, an epidemic of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in war-torn Sudan. The special circumstances provided us, in retrospect, with unusually accurate data on excess mortality, costs of the intervention and its effects, thus allowing us to express cost-effectiveness as the cost per Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted. The cost-effectiveness ratio, of US$ 18.40 per DALY (uncertainty range between US$ 13.53 and US$ 27.63), places the treatment of VL in Sudan among health interventions considered 'very flood value for money' (interventions of less than US$ 25 per DALY). We discuss the usefulness of this analysis to the internal management of the VL programme, the procurement of funds for the programme, and more generally, to priority setting in humanitarian relief interventions. We feel that in evaluations of emergency interventions attempts could be made more often to perform cost-effectiveness analyses, including the use of DALYs, provided that the outcomes of these analyses are seen in the broad context of the emergency situation and its consequences on the affected population. This paper provides a first contribution to what is hoped to become an international database of cost-effectiveness studies of health outcome such as the DALY.

Metodologia da determinação de prioridades no planeamento regional de saúde : uma proposta

RESUMO - O estabelecimento de prioridades determina a sustentabilidade de qualquer sistema de saúde, pelo que urge identificar os procedimentos, metodologias e critérios de priorização. Não existem critérios nem métodos universais de os combinar, sendo que a sua seleção depende do contexto de aplicação. O presente projeto de estudo exploratório-descritivo tem por finalidade a criação de uma proposta de metodologia a adotar na determinação de prioridades do Plano Regional de Saúde de Lisboa e Vale do Tejo 2011-2016, contextualizada à região, tempo e circunstâncias. O estudo está organizado em duas etapas metodológicas: uma revisão bibliográfica, dirigida à identificação do método e dos critérios de determinação de prioridades, e a realização de um painel de Delphi, para validação do método de determinação de prioridades proposto, definição dos critérios e suas ponderações. Tendo sido encontrada evidência na literatura sobre as vantagens da utilização da Análise Multicritério da Tomada de Decisão, através da utilização do Método Aditivo Linear, na determinação de prioridades em saúde, foi selecionada esta metodologia, que obteve a concordância de 85% dos participantes para a sua utilização no contexto em estudo, na primeira ronda do painel de Delphi. Os resultados preliminares do estudo, obtidos na primeira ronda, mostram que um dos onze critérios propostos foi excluído, tendo sido sugeridos sete novos critérios pelos participantes, que serão sujeitos a análise nas rondas subsequentes. Os resultados obtidos poderão servir de base a estudos mais aprofundados nesta área e contribuir para o debate sobre os critérios subjacentes ao processo de determinação de prioridades em saúde.

Environmental sanitation conditions and health impact: a case-control study

This epidemiological investigation examines the impact of several environmental sanitation conditions and hygiene practices on diarrhea occurrence among children under five years of age living in an urban area. The case-control design was employed; 997 cases and 999 controls were included in the investigation. Cases were defined as children with diarrhea and controls were randomly selected among children under five years of age. After logistic regression adjustment, the following variables were found to be significantly associated with diarrhea: washing and purifying fruit and vegetables; presence of wastewater in the street; refuse storage, collection and disposal; domestic water reservoir conditions; feces disposal from swaddles; presence of vectors in the house and flooding in the lot. The estimates of the relative risks reached values up to 2.87. The present study revealed the feasibility of developing and implementing an adequate model to establish intervention priorities in the field of environmental sanitation.

Future hotspots of terrestrial mammal loss.

Current levels of endangerment and historical trends of species and habitats are the main criteria used to direct conservation efforts globally. Estimates of future declines, which might indicate different priorities than past declines, have been limited by the lack of appropriate data and models. Given that much of conservation is about anticipating and responding to future threats, our inability to look forward at a global scale has been a major constraint on effective action. Here, we assess the geography and extent of projected future changes in suitable habitat for terrestrial mammals within their present ranges. We used a global earth-system model, IMAGE, coupled with fine-scale habitat suitability models and parametrized according to four global scenarios of human development. We identified the most affected countries by 2050 for each scenario, assuming that no additional conservation actions other than those described in the scenarios take place. We found that, with some exceptions, most of the countries with the largest predicted losses of suitable habitat for mammals are in Africa and the Americas. African and North American countries were also predicted to host the most species with large proportional global declines. Most of the countries we identified as future hotspots of terrestrial mammal loss have little or no overlap with the present global conservation priorities, thus confirming the need for forward-looking analyses in conservation priority setting. The expected growth in human populations and consumption in hotspots of future mammal loss mean that local conservation actions such as protected areas might not be sufficient to mitigate losses. Other policies, directed towards the root causes of biodiversity loss, are required, both in Africa and other parts of the world.

Health Inequalities Intervention Toolkit

This Health Inequalities Intervention Toolkit, developed jointly by the Association of Public Health Observatories and the Department of Health, focuses on improving life expectancy and infant mortality rates, especially in disadvantaged areas. Based on local authority boundaries, it is designed to assist evidence-based local service planning and commissioning, including Joint Strategic Needs Assessments. The Toolkit does this by providing information on the diseases, which are causing low life expectancy in individual areas, enabling good local priority setting. The Toolkit was originally designed to support achievement of the national Public Service Agreement target to: "Reduce health inequalities by 10% by 2010 as measured by infant mortality and life expectancy at birth." Although the PSA target has now ended, the Toolkit should still be useful to the NHS and local government, supporting planning to narrow inequalities in life expectancy and infant mortality

Consultation on Personal and Public Involvement strategy

Personal and Public Involvement (PPI) is an integral element of effective commissioning and is underpinned by a core set of values and principles - involving and listening to people in order to help us make services better.It brings about a number of recognised benefits if fully embraced into our culture and practice, these include:Use of service user knowledge and expertise;Better priority setting and decision making;More responsive, appropriate, efficient and tailored services;Transformation and reduction of complaints;Increased levels of service satisfaction;Increased dignity and self worth.The Public Health Agency (PHA) and Health and Social Care Board (HSCB) have now developed a joint Personal and Public Involvement (PPI) Strategy after extensive engagement and discussion. The Strategy has been approved by both organisations and is now being formally consulted on during the period 23rd June 2011 to 15th September 2011.The Strategy is now available for your consideration. We have developed the following documents (please see attachments below):Valuing People, Valuing Their Participation. Involving You and Listening to You Consultation Document.Valuing People, Valuing Their Participation, Involving You and Listening to You. [An Easy Read version of the Personal and Public Involvement Strategy].Valuing People, Valuing Their Participation. [An Equality and Human Rights Screening of the Strategy].Key Questions to guide consideration of the Personal and Public Involvement Strategy.People are encouraged to read the Strategy and to let us have your views.� There is a set of Key Questions, but any comments, ideas and or suggestions that you may have, that could support us in our efforts to embed Personal and Public Involvement into our culture and practice, would be most welcome.Responses should be returned by 4.00pm on Thursday 15th September 2011 to:By post:Martin QuinnRegional PPI LeadPublic Health AgencyGransha Park House15 Gransha ParkLondonderryBT47 6FNBy email: siobhan.carlin@hscni.net By telephone: (028) 7186 0086A more detailed version of the consultation document is avalable by clicking here or contacting Siobhan Carlin, email: siobhan.carlin@hscni.net, Tel: (028) 7186 0086.If you require any of these documents in an alternative format such as Braille, larger print or in another language if you are not fluent in English, please do not hesitate to contact us.A report of feedback received as part of this consultation can be made available upon request.Please be aware that the PHA and HSCB are also currently consulting on the Community Development Strategy.You are invited to consider responding to this consultation as well if appropriate.