A hitchhikers' guide to the terminology of accreditation processes for health professionals and institutions

Accreditation processes for health care professions are designed to ensure that individuals and programs in these fields meet established standards of quality and effectiveness. The accelerating pace of globalization in the health care professions has increased the need for a shared understanding of the vocabulary of evaluation, assessment, and accreditation. The psychometric principles of valid and reliable assessment are commonly accepted, but the terminology is confusing. We believe that all stakeholders - evaluators, faculty, students but also the community - will benefit from a shared language and common set of definitions. We recognize that not all readers will agree with the definitions we propose, but we hope that this guide will help to ensure clarity, consistency, transparency, and fairness, and that it will promote through the stimulation of a debate greater collaboration across national and international boundaries.

Improving Academic Biobank Value and Sustainability Through an Outputs Focus

Although it is generally accepted that human tissue biobanks are important to facilitate progress in health and medical research, many academic biobanks face sustainability challenges. We propose that biobank sustainability is challenged by a lack of available data describing the outputs and benefits that are produced by biobanks, as reflected by a dearth of publications that enumerate biobank outputs. We further propose that boosting the available information on biobank outputs and using a broader range of output metrics will permit economic analyses such as cost-consequence analyses of biobank activity. Output metrics and cost-consequence analyses can allow biobanks to achieve efficiencies, and improve the quality and/or quantity of their outputs. In turn, biobank output measures provide all stakeholders with explicit and accountable data on biobank value, which could contribute to the evolution of biobank operations to best match research needs, and mitigate some threats to biobank sustainability.

Comprehensive Researcher Achievement Model (CRAM): a framework for measuring researcher achievement, impact and influence derived from a systematic literature review of metrics and models

OBJECTIVES

Effective researcher assessment is key to decisions about funding allocations, promotion and tenure. We aimed to identify what is known about methods for assessing researcher achievements, leading to a new composite assessment model.

DESIGN

We systematically reviewed the literature via the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols framework.

DATA SOURCES

All Web of Science databases (including Core Collection, MEDLINE and BIOSIS Citation Index) to the end of 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) English language, (2) published in the last 10 years (2007-2017), (3) full text was available and (4) the article discussed an approach to the assessment of an individual researcher's achievements.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Articles were allocated among four pairs of reviewers for screening, with each pair randomly assigned 5% of their allocation to review concurrently against inclusion criteria. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using Cohen's Kappa (ĸ). The ĸ statistic showed agreement ranging from moderate to almost perfect (0.4848-0.9039). Following screening, selected articles underwent full-text review and bias was assessed.

RESULTS

Four hundred and seventy-eight articles were included in the final review. Established approaches developed prior to our inclusion period (eg, citations and outputs, h-index and journal impact factor) remained dominant in the literature and in practice. New bibliometric methods and models emerged in the last 10 years including: measures based on PageRank algorithms or 'altmetric' data, methods to apply peer judgement and techniques to assign values to publication quantity and quality. Each assessment method tended to prioritise certain aspects of achievement over others.

CONCLUSIONS

All metrics and models focus on an element or elements at the expense of others. A new composite design, the Comprehensive Researcher Achievement Model (CRAM), is presented, which supersedes past anachronistic models. The CRAM is modifiable to a range of applications.

Effect of the rearing system on financial returns from Murciano-Granadina breed goats

In dairy goats, the kid rearing system can have critical importance in financial returns. Commonly used criteria for the choice of rearing system are not always clear due to the high number of factors involved. The aim of this study was to quantify all those factors to facilitate decision making. So, the effect of two different kid rearing systems, mixed rearing system (MRS) and artificial rearing system (ARS), on milk yield, milk composition and somatic cell count (SCC), milk yield loss at weaning for MRS, kid growth and costs of the different traits on the financial returns in Murciano-Granadina breed goats was studied. Twenty-four goats per group were used. In the MRS, goats reared only one kid, which had free access to goat milk 24 h a day and were weaned at week 6 of lactation, whereas kids in the ARS were separated from their mothers at kidding, colostrum and artificially reared. In both systems, dams were machine-milked once a day throughout lactation and the records took place weekly. Potential milk yield was estimated according to the oxytocin method up to week 12 of lactation, and was similar for both rearing systems, although a 12.3% drop in potential milk yield at weaning was observed for MRS. During the first 6 weeks of lactation, marketable milk was lower for dams in MRS compared to those in ARS (72.1 v. 113.0 l), but similar for the rest of the experiment (101.5 v. 99.4 l, respectively). Marketable milk composition and SCC throughout the 12 weeks of lactation were unaffected by the rearing system. Artificial rearing system entailed an increment in production cost of 22.2€ per kid compared to the rearing by MRS. A similar economic return per goat and kid was obtained from ARS and MRS in this experiment, although, due to one herd's prolificacy of 1.8, the actual results would be 16.2€ per goat in favour of MRS. The real interest of this experiment may be the possibility of extrapolation to different flocks with diverse levels of milk production, prolificacy and prices and costs for incomes and outputs, to estimate the production system that increases returns. In conclusion, the results showed an increase in the cost of €22.2 per kid bred in the ARS, compared to the MRS, and a final return of 16.2€ per goat in favour of the mixed system.

15. Evaluation

Evaluations are an essential part of disaster management and preparedness. Evaluations provide the evidence necessary to build the science. The deconstructed processes from assessments through implementation and conclusion of the interventions have been outlined and can now be evaluated so as to define critical points of success and/or failure within the respective processes. Interventions should be examined for their effectiveness in achieving the objectives for which they were selected and for their contributions to attaining the goal outlined in the strategic plan. Effects of an intervention other than those for which the intervention was selected may have an additive benefit or they may have a negative impact on the affected society. Resource consumption (costs) is an important element of evaluations. Health disaster management evaluations aim at quality improvement for future interventions (preparedness). However, evaluation based on participating and/or concomitant observation also may open for improvement of ongoing interventions.