Democracy and Amateurism -the Informed Citizen
In: Government & opposition: an international journal of comparative politics, Band 24, Heft 4, S. 489
ISSN: 0017-257X
5 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Government & opposition: an international journal of comparative politics, Band 24, Heft 4, S. 489
ISSN: 0017-257X
In: Strategic change, Band 32, Heft 6, S. 223-237
ISSN: 1099-1697
AbstractThis article aimed to capture and understand individual's intentions to share data, focusing on data individuals perceive as most sensitive: healthcare data. The study reviews literature related to the decision‐making process with regard to sharing personal data. The context is the UK National Health Service, and measures from literature are used to analyze individual's intention to share healthcare data. A scale is developed and applied to evaluate the decision to share healthcare data. Measurement constructs include intention to disclose, perceived protection, benefits, risk, subjective norms, and perception of use. Analysis draws on data from 129 survey respondents. Though numerous measurements are reported in literature and used in this study, two predictors dominate intention to disclose healthcare data: perceived information risk (PIR) and perceived societal benefit (PSB), and both are significant. PIR contributes negatively, whereas PSB contributes positively to predict intention. For personal healthcare, the privacy paradox applies as though risk may outweigh benefit people rarely opt out of data sharing. Individuals consciously or unconsciously consider their perception of the risk and broader benefits of data sharing. Both risk and benefit are both significant and important; perceived risk carries more weight than perceived benefits. Organizations need to develop campaigns to very clearly explain risks and benefits of personal data sharing to ensure that individuals can make truly informed decisions.
Economic policies tend to downplay social and community considerations in favour of market-led and business-focussed support. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for greater and deeper social cohesion and local social support networks while highlighting that an overreliance on market forces can create social problems at times of need. Community businesses (CBs) are not for profit organisations that provide services and produce goods where the profit (or surplus) is reinvested back into that community. This article explores why CBs in England responded in a variety of ways to the COVID-19 pandemic, assesses what government policy did to help and hinder their place-based operations, and explores the observed socioeconomics of their age-related volunteer staff churn. Some CBs were ravaged by the consequences of the pandemic and associated government policies with many becoming unsustainable, while others evolved and augmented their support for and services to their communities, thereby enhancing their community's resilience. We highlight how adjustments to government policies could enhance the sustainability of CBs, making them and the communities they serve more resilient.
BASE
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine hospital services globally. This study estimated the total number of adult elective operations that would be cancelled worldwide during the 12 weeks of peak disruption due to COVID-19. Methods: A global expert response study was conducted to elicit projections for the proportion of elective surgery that would be cancelled or postponed during the 12 weeks of peak disruption. A Bayesian β-regression model was used to estimate 12-week cancellation rates for 190 countries. Elective surgical case-mix data, stratified by specialty and indication (surgery for cancer versus benign disease), were determined. This case mix was applied to country-level surgical volumes. The 12-week cancellation rates were then applied to these figures to calculate the total number of cancelled operations. Results: The best estimate was that 28 404 603 operations would be cancelled or postponed during the peak 12 weeks of disruption due to COVID-19 (2 367 050 operations per week). Most would be operations for benign disease (90·2 per cent, 25 638 922 of 28 404 603). The overall 12-week cancellation rate would be 72·3 per cent. Globally, 81·7 per cent of operations for benign conditions (25 638 922 of 31 378 062), 37·7 per cent of cancer operations (2 324 070 of 6 162 311) and 25·4 per cent of elective caesarean sections (441 611 of 1 735 483) would be cancelled or postponed. If countries increased their normal surgical volume by 20 per cent after the pandemic, it would take a median of 45 weeks to clear the backlog of operations resulting from COVID-19 disruption. Conclusion: A very large number of operations will be cancelled or postponed owing to disruption caused by COVID-19. Governments should mitigate against this major burden on patients by developing recovery plans and implementing strategies to restore surgical activity safely.
BASE