The Mosque schools in Pakistan: an experimant in integration nonformal and formal education
In: IIEP Occasional Papers, 59
12 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: IIEP Occasional Papers, 59
World Affairs Online
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 36, Heft 4, S. 953-954
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: The Parliamentarian: journal of the parliaments of the Commonwealth, Band 88, Heft 3, S. 16-21
ISSN: 0031-2282
In: Alcohol and alcoholism: the international journal of the Medical Council on Alcoholism (MCA) and the journal of the European Society for Biomedical Research on Alcoholism (ESBRA), Band 35, Heft 3, S. 286-295
ISSN: 1464-3502
In: World health forum: an intern. journal of health development, Band 18, Heft 2
ISSN: 0251-2432
In: Man, Band 2, S. 40
Objective: To investigate in a military setting the potential role of intrinsic biomechanical and anthropometric risk factors for, and the incidence of, exertional medial tibial pain (EMTP).
BASE
Teams of collaborators from Colombia, Mexico, Pakistan, and Thailand have adapted a policy tool originally developed for evaluating health insurance reforms in the United States into "benchmarks of fairness" for assessing health system reform in developing countries. We describe briefly the history of the benchmark approach, the tool itself, and the uses to which it may be put. Fairness is a wide term that includes exposure to risk factors, access to all forms of care, and to financing. It also includes efficiency of management and resource allocation, accountability, and patient and provider autonomy. The benchmarks standardize the criteria for fairness. Reforms are then evaluated by scoring according to the degree to which they improve the situation, i.e. on a scale of -5 to 5, with zero representing the status quo. The object is to promote discussion about fairness across the disciplinary divisions that keep policy analysts and the public from understanding how trade-offs between different effects of reforms can affect the overall fairness of the reform. The benchmarks can be used at both national and provincial or district levels, and we describe plans for such uses in the collaborating sites. A striking feature of the adaptation process is that there was wide agreement on this ethical framework among the collaborating sites despite their large historical, political and cultural differences.
BASE
OBJECTIVES. The Aga Khan University in Karachi has a mission to educate leaders and to contribute to the development of health systems for Pakistan amid challenges of scarcity and complexity. METHODS. Its key activities are (1) to design and test urban and rural health system prototypes, (2) to develop faculty in medical and nursing postgraduate community health sciences programs, and (3) to design and implement community-based undergraduate medical and nursing curricula. RESULTS. The university has developed equity-based, cost-effective primary health care prototypes in Karachi slums. With government counterparts it has tested village-, facility-, and district-level interventions in a poor rural district. Federal policymakers have taken models from each for widespread replication. The university is training 49 medical and 19 nursing faculty for postgraduate programs in community health sciences. Most faculty retain institutional leadership positions, including teaching community-based, problem-solving, community health sciences as 20% of the medical and nursing undergraduate curriculum. CONCLUSIONS. The mission and experience of the Aga Khan University in population-based health systems design and health sciences education can guide universities in both developing and developed countries.
BASE
In: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:99775583-6698-44df-850a-830fe9d7b2b1
Background: Since late 2015, an epidemic of Yellow fever virus (YFV) has caused over 6,554 suspected cases in Angola and the Democratic Republic of Congo, including 387 deaths. We sought to understand the spatial spread of this YFV outbreak to optimise the use of the limited available vaccine stock. Methods: We jointly analysed datasets describing the epidemic of YFV, vector suitability, human demography and mobility in Central Africa in order to understand and predict the expansion of YFV. We used a standard logistic model to infer the district YFV infection risk over the course of the epidemic in the region. Findings: Early spread of YFV was characterized by fast exponential growth (doubling time of 5-7 days) and fast spatial expansion (49 districts reporting cases after only three months) from Luanda, the capital of Angola. Early invasion was positively correlated with high population density (0·52, 95% CI: 0·34, 0·66). The further away locations were from Luanda the later the invasion date (0·60, 95% CI: 0·52, 0·66). Districts with higher population densities also featured higher risks of sustained transmission. A model that captured human mobility and vector suitability successfully discriminated districts with high risk of invasion from others. If at the start of the epidemic sufficient vaccines had been available to target 50 out of 313 districts in the area, our model would have correctly identified 27 (84%) of the 32 districts that were eventually affected. Interpretation: Our findings reveal the contributions of ecological and demographic factors to the ongoing spread of the YFV outbreak and provide estimates for where vaccines may be prioritised, although other constraints (e.g. vaccine supply and delivery) need to be accounted for before such insights may be translated into policy.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE