Search results

Collecting and reporting national data has become a routine practice for assisted reproductive technology (ART) governance. This article compares the building of national registries, the making of health statistics, and the utilization of these data in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. Instead of viewing data registries as tools for health surveillance or monitoring, we approach them in terms of their effectiveness in generating care. Conceptualizing ART data reporting as care infrastructure, built on Maria Puig de la Bellacasa's "matters of care," allows us to compare the extent to which data are collected for strengthening a community's ethical obligation, presented as indicators that could reflect quality of care and inform evidence-based policy making that promotes clinical practices for healthy outcomes. We find that sociotechnical imaginaries for ART were shaped by the fact that, in its early stages, in vitro fertilization was considered controversial in Japan, a source of nationalist glory in Taiwan, and a marginal procedure in South Korea. This in turn led to different trajectories of designing national registries in these countries, resulting in different care outcomes. We also point to the importance of mediators, including reflexive medical practitioners, care-centered state bureaucrats, and activists, in translating registry data into better ART health care.

Aims  The aims of the present study were to explore the perceptions of general practitioners (GPs) in the provision of health care services for people with intellectual disabilities and to analyse GPs' priorities in the delivery of health care services to this group of people in Taiwan.Methods  The study employed a cross‐sectional design and was conducted by a census method, the aim being to collect information from all GPs in Taiwan. A questionnaire was mailed out, between 10 April 2006 and 16 June 2006, and the responses provided by 331 GPs (response rate = 16) were included in the analysis.Results  The results showed that most of the respondents did not have sufficient experience to deal with patients with intellectual disabilities and lacked adequate knowledge about intellectual disabilities. Indeed, respondents expressed the need for on‐the‐job training in the field of intellectual disabilities and generally agreed that their role in providing health care services for people with intellectual disabilities was important. However, they were generally not satisfied with the achievements of their role on health care issues. The study highlighted that many issues need to be prioritized for people with intellectual disabilities in relation to policy planning at different health care stages (primary, secondary and tertiary health care). The results also revealed that those senior GPs with considerable experience in treating people with intellectual disabilities were more likely satisfied with their role in providing health care for this group of people.Conclusions  It is concluded that Taiwanese health and welfare authorities need to focus more carefully on issues concerning deficiencies in the training of GPs, and to employ appropriate strategies to address health care issues raised in the present study so as to improve the quality of care for people with intellectual disabilities.