Suchergebnisse
Filter
72 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
A Multivariate Logit Analysis of the Outcomes of Arbitration Decisions in British Columbia
In: Evaluation review: a journal of applied social research, Band 14, Heft 3, S. 247-263
ISSN: 1552-3926
A major conclusion drawn from this study is that bivariate estimates of the probability of management or union wins in grievance arbitration cases can be seriously in error as a result of the failure of these estimates to adjust for the effects of variables not included in the bivariate comparison. In this analysis of 1,815 arbitration cases occurring in British Columbia in the 1982 to 1985 period, bias is identified in the bivariate estimates of the probability of management wins by industry and issue. In addition, from application of a multivariate logit model, the study estimates the effect on arbitration outcome of industry, union size, union arbitration proneness, issue, arbitration experience, union occupation, and year. Similarities to and differences from the findings of previous studies are identified.
A Multivariate Logit Analysis of the Outcomes of Arbitration Decisions in British Columbia
In: Evaluation review: a journal of applied social research, Band 14, Heft 3, S. 247-263
ISSN: 0193-841X, 0164-0259
The Little Field-Marshal
In: Military Affairs, Band 46, Heft 4, S. 213
Managing resources in NHS dentistry: using health economics to inform commissioning decisions
Background: The aim of this study is to develop, apply and evaluate an economics-based framework to assist commissioners in their management of finite resources for local dental services. In April 2006, Primary Care Trusts in England were charged with managing finite dental budgets for the first time, yet several independent reports have since criticised the variability in commissioning skills within these organisations. The study will explore the views of stakeholders (dentists, patients and commissioners) regarding priority setting and the criteria used for decision-making and resource allocation. Two inter-related case studies will explore the dental commissioning and resource allocation processes through the application of a pragmatic economics-based framework known as Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis. Methods/Design: The study will adopt an action research approach. Qualitative methods including semi-structured interviews, focus groups, field notes and document analysis will record the views of participants and their involvement in the research process. The first case study will be based within a Primary Care Trust where mixed methods will record the views of dentists, patients and dental commissioners on issues, priorities and processes associated with managing local dental services. A Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis framework will be applied to determine the potential value of economic principles to the decision-making process. A further case study will be conducted in a secondary care dental teaching hospital using the same approach. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis and managed using a framework approach. Discussion: The recent announcement by government regarding the proposed abolition of Primary Care Trusts may pose challenges for the research team regarding their engagement with the research study. However, whichever commissioning organisations are responsible for resource allocation for dental services in the future; resource scarcity is highly likely to remain an issue. Wider understanding of the complexities of priority setting and resource allocation at local levels are important considerations in the development of dental commissioning processes, national oral health policy and the future new dental contract which is expected to be implemented in April 2014.
BASE
Reviews - PLUS Book reviews
In: The RUSI journal: independent thinking on defence and security, Band 151, Heft 2, S. 84
ISSN: 0307-1847
Reviews - PLUS Book reviews
In: The RUSI journal: independent thinking on defence and security, Band 150, Heft 1, S. 77
ISSN: 0307-1847
Book Reviews
In: The RUSI journal: independent thinking on defence and security, Band 148, Heft 5, S. 98
ISSN: 0307-1847
Book reviews
In: Small wars & insurgencies, Band 7, Heft 2, S. 254-260
ISSN: 1743-9558
Correspondence
In: Journal of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies, Band 127, Heft 2, S. 79-80
ISSN: 1744-0378
How does priority setting for resource allocation happen in commissioning dental services in a nationally led, regionally delivered system: a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with NHS England dental commissioners
Objectives: To understand approaches to priority setting for healthcare service resource allocation at an operational level in a nationally commissioned but regionally delivered service. Design: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and a Framework analysis. Setting: National Health Service dentistry commissioning teams within subregional offices in England. Participants: All 31 individuals holding the relevant role (dental lead commissioner in subregional offices) were approached directly and from this 14 participants were recruited, with 12 interviews completed. Both male and female genders and all regions were represented in the final sample. Results: Three major themes arose. First, 'Methods of priority setting and barriers to explicit approaches' was a common theme, specifically identifying the main methods as: perpetuating historical allocations, pressure from politicians and clinicians and use of needs assessments while barriers were time and skill deficits, a lack of national guidance and an inflexible contracting arrangements stopping resource allocation. Second, 'Relationships with key stakeholders and advisors' were discussed, showing the important nature of relationships with clinical advisors but variation in the quality of these relationships was noted. Finally, 'Tensions between national and local responsibilities' were illustrated, where there was confusion about where power and autonomy lay. Conclusions: Commissioners recognised a need for resource allocation but relied on clinical advice and needs assessment in order to set priorities. More explicit priority setting was prevented by structure of the commissioning system and standard national contracts with providers. Further research is required to embed and simplify adoption of tools to aid priority setting.
BASE
How does priority setting for resource allocation happen in commissioning dental services in a nationally led, regionally delivered system: a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with NHS England dental commissioners
OBJECTIVES: To understand approaches to priority setting for healthcare service resource allocation at an operational level in a nationally commissioned but regionally delivered service. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and a Framework analysis. SETTING: National Health Service dentistry commissioning teams within subregional offices in England. PARTICIPANTS: All 31 individuals holding the relevant role (dental lead commissioner in subregional offices) were approached directly and from this 14 participants were recruited, with 12 interviews completed. Both male and female genders and all regions were represented in the final sample. RESULTS: Three major themes arose. First, 'Methods of priority setting and barriers to explicit approaches' was a common theme, specifically identifying the main methods as: perpetuating historical allocations, pressure from politicians and clinicians and use of needs assessments while barriers were time and skill deficits, a lack of national guidance and an inflexible contracting arrangements stopping resource allocation. Second, 'Relationships with key stakeholders and advisors' were discussed, showing the important nature of relationships with clinical advisors but variation in the quality of these relationships was noted. Finally, 'Tensions between national and local responsibilities' were illustrated, where there was confusion about where power and autonomy lay. CONCLUSIONS: Commissioners recognised a need for resource allocation but relied on clinical advice and needs assessment in order to set priorities. More explicit priority setting was prevented by structure of the commissioning system and standard national contracts with providers. Further research is required to embed and simplify adoption of tools to aid priority setting.
BASE
Correspondence
In: Journal of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies, Band 130, Heft 4, S. 77-78
ISSN: 1744-0378