Suchergebnisse

"Many measurement systems to monitor the well-being of children and guide services are implemented across the community, state, and national levels in the United States. While great progress has been made in recent years in developing interventions that have been shown to improve the cognitive, affective, and behavioral health of children, many of these tested and effective interventions have yet to be widely implemented. One potential reason for this lag in implementation is a need to further develop and better utilize measures that gauge the success of evidence-based programs as part of a broad effort to prevent negative outcomes and foster children's health and well-being. To address this issue, the Institute of Medicine Forum on Promoting Children's Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health held a workshop in Washington, DC, on November 5-6, 2014. The workshop featured presentations on the use of data linkage and integration to inform research and practice related to children's cognitive, affective, and behavioral health; the use of quality measures to facilitate system change in health care, classroom, and juvenile justice settings; and tools developed to measure implementation of evidence-based prevention programs at scale to support sustainable program delivery, among other topics. Workshop presenters and participants discussed examples of innovative design and utilization of measurement systems, new approaches to build on existing data systems, and new data systems that could support the cognitive, affective, and behavioral health and well-being of children. This report summarizes the presentation and discussions of the event"--Publisher's description.

The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs provide federal research and development funding to small businesses. In 2008, the National Research Council completed a comprehensive assessment of the SBIR and STTR programs. The first-round study found that the programs were "sound in concept and effective in practice." Building on the outcomes from the Phase I study, this second phase examines both topics of general policy interest that emerged during the first phase and topics of specific interest to individual agencies, and provides a second snapshot to measure the program's progress against its legislative goals.

In April 2002, the U.S. National Academies hosted an interacademy workshop involving participants from the United States and Iran on the topic of Science and Ethics. The explicit purposes of the workshop were (a) to engage important members of the American and Iranian scientific communities in meaningful discussions of the topic of science and ethics and particularly differences in the approaches in the west and in Islamic countries in general and Iran in particular, (b) to encourage greater participation by Iranian scientists in international scientific discussions by exposing them to seasoned veterans in international meetings, and (c) to identify specific topics and approaches that could be carried out by the Academies in the two countries to contribute to international understanding of the importance of considering the ethical dimensions of scientific research and related activities. This report includes documents prepared by four breakout groups and a statement on priority areas for future interacademy cooperation developed at the final plenary session. Also included are background papers prepared by some participants prior to the workshop that were not previously published

"First edition, March, 1943." ; "Based on the three following studies: Fatigue of workers, its relation to industrial production, by the Committee on work in industry of the National research council. The dynamics of industrial democracy, by Clinton S. Golden and Harold J. Ruttenberg. and How collective bargaining works: a factual survey of labor-management relations in sixteen major industries in the United States, published by the Twentieth century fund."-p. 1. ; "For further reading": p. 32. ; Mode of access: Internet.

"Does the public trust science? Scientists? Scientific organizations? What roles do trust and the lack of trust play in public debates about how science can be used to address such societal concerns as childhood vaccination, cancer screening, and a warming planet? What could happen if social trust in science or scientists faded? These types of questions led the Roundtable on Public Interfaces of the Life Sciences of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to convene a 2-day workshop on May 5-6, 2015 on public trust in science. This report explores empirical evidence on public opinion and attitudes toward life sciences as they relate to societal issues, whether and how contentious debate about select life science topics mediates trust, and the roles that scientists, business, media, community groups, and other stakeholders play in creating and maintaining public confidence in life sciences. Does the Public Trust Science? Trust and Confidence at the Interfaces of the Life Sciences and Society highlights research on the elements of trust and how to build, mend, or maintain trust; and examine best practices in the context of scientist engagement with lay audiences around social issues"--Publisher's description

"In 2010, more than 105,000 people were injured or killed in the United States as the result of a firearm-related incident. Recent, highly publicized, tragic mass shootings in Newtown, CT; Aurora, CO; Oak Creek, WI; and Tucson, AZ, have sharpened the American public's interest in protecting our children and communities from the harmful effects of firearm violence. While many Americans legally use firearms for a variety of activities, fatal and nonfatal firearm violence poses a serious threat to public safety and welfare. In January 2013, President Barack Obama issued 23 executive orders directing federal agencies to improve knowledge of the causes of firearm violence, what might help prevent it, and how to minimize its burden on public health. One of these orders directed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to, along with other federal agencies, immediately begin identifying the most pressing problems in firearm violence research. The CDC and the CDC Foundation asked the IOM, in collaboration with the National Research Council, to convene a committee tasked with developing a potential research agenda that focuses on the causes of, possible interventions to, and strategies to minimize the burden of firearm-related violence. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence focuses on the characteristics of firearm violence, risk and protective factors, interventions and strategies, the impact of gun safety technology, and the influence of video games and other media"--Publisher's description

"This report summarizes a joint workshop convened by the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council with Fundacao Maria Cecilia Souto Vidigal in November 2014 in Sao Paulo, Brazil. The workshop presentations and discussions highlighted efforts made to scale program investments across health, education, nutrition, and social protection that aim to improve children's developmental potential. Speakers explored four topics around scaling up program investments: impact, scalability, sustainability, and governance. Participants shared their experiences scaling up programs and implementing early childhood services into a comprehensive national policy. Scaling Program Investments for Young Children Globally synthesizes up-to-date evidence on effective programs and interventions in Latin America and other regions, including an account of their strengths and challenges. This report highlights the presentations and discussions of the event."--Publisher's description

"Individuals with disabilities, chronic conditions, and functional impairments need a range of services and supports to keep living independently. However, there often is not a strong link between medical care provided in the home and the necessary social services and supports for independent living. Home health agencies and others are rising to the challenges of meeting the needs and demands of these populations to stay at home by exploring alternative models of care and payment approaches, the best use of their workforces, and technologies that can enhance independent living. All of these challenges and opportunities lead to the consideration of how home health care fits into the future health care system overall. On September 30 and October 1, 2014, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council convened a public workshop on the future of home health care. The workshop brought together a spectrum of public and private stakeholders and thought leaders to improve understanding of the current role of Medicare home health care in supporting aging in place and in helping high-risk, chronically ill, and disabled Americans receive health care in their communities. Through presentations and discussion, participants explored the evolving role of Medicare home health care in caring for Americans in the future, including how to integrate Medicare home health care into new models for the delivery of care and the future health care marketplace. The workshop also considered the key policy reforms and investments in workforces, technologies, and research needed to leverage the value of home health care to support older Americans, and research priorities that can help clarify the value of home health care. This summary captures important points raised by the individual speakers and workshop participants"--Publisher's description