Events
1 December 2010: Procurement in the NHS 2010: Ensuring Value for Money |
|
|
Venue: Savoy Place, London The way procurement and commissioning is undertaken in the NHS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland will soon change under sweeping new reforms being implemented by the government. Procurement in the NHS 2010 provides an ideal opportunity to consider the proposed changes in the NHS, the potential consequences of the planned shake-up of procurement and how it will impact on the recently established NHS Commercial Operating Model and the CSUs. Delegates will be updated on the new CSUs; are they bridging the gap effectively between commissioners and procurers, promoting value for money and sustainable and innovative procurement practices, and should they continue once NHS realignment is completed? This is also an ideal opportunity for delegates to meet and network with fellow professionals from the healthcare sector in the UK |
Conference
1 December 2010
Keywords
Health Service |
| Contact : | |
2 December 2010: Nutrition Society and Molecular Epidemiology Group Winter Meeting 2010 |
|
|
The Nutrition Society Winter meeting 2010 'Functional genomic biomarkers, nutrition and disease susceptibility' will be held jointly with the Molecular Epidemiology Group at The Royal Institute of British Architects, London, UK on 02 December 2010. |
Meeting
2 December 2010
Keywords
Other Science |
| Contact : | |
5 December 2010: BRCA Gene Research & Medical Practices - A comparative transnational social science workshop |
|
|
Brocher Foundation, Switzerland
|
Workshop
3 day event :
5 December 2010
to
7 December 2010
Keywords
Genetics |
| Contact : | |
7 December 2010: PatientPartner Final Workshop |
|
|
Venue: Management Centre Europe, Brussels, Belgium |
Workshop
2 day event :
7 December 2010
to
8 December 2010
Keywords
Europe/EU |
| Contact : | |
9 December 2010: Health Care Rationing Conference |
|
|
Venue: Erasmus University Campus, Rotterdam, The Netherlands In the late 1990s, the Dutch government started to experiment with ‘regulated competition’ in social health insurance. A milestone was the new Health Insurance Act in 2006 introducing a compulsory health insurance scheme for the entire population, carried out by (for-profit) health insurers, contracting individual and institutional health professionals. Safeguarding equal access, the new health insurance scheme introduced several preconditions like compulsory insurance, a basic benefit package, the prohibition of risk selection, a risk-equalization fund, etc. The idea of competitive health insurance was combined with deregulating hospital planning and liberalizing health care tariffs.In the new scheme medical need is still decisive in health care access decision-making, but merit-considerations are becoming important too. Shortening waiting times, priority arrangements were considered and/or introduced, based on non-medical criteria. Simultaneously, in terms of financing, health status has become important due to own payments-arrangements, limited insurance package options, etc. At the same time, health status disparities due to socioeconomic inequalities seem to be increasing. Under these circumstances, confronted with increased health spending, we can expect the R-word becoming more eminent in the Dutch health care debate. Emerging relevant questions are: Who is responsible for rationing (the market, governments, bureaucrats, physicians or others)?; How does it function (explicit or implicit)?; What are relevant and acceptable selection criteria (QUALYs, DALYs, health status, sexe, age, etc)?; To what extent is current rationing just?; What can be done to make it more just?; How will health care rationing affect equal access to health care?; What is the relationship between health care rationing and differences in health status?, etc. There is a wealth of literature in political theory, as well as in health care policy, economics, social medicine and law addressing these issues. What is needed is a consideration of the values involved and the impact of policy decisions on the expression of these values. Therefore, the Erasmus Observatory organizes an international conference, discussing health care rationing from a wide range of perspectives. |
Conference
9 December 2010
to
10 December 2010
Keywords
Health Service |
| Contact : | |
9 December 2010: PUBLIC SERVANT ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2010 - Think Big: Opening Up Government & Public Services |
|
|
Venue: Central Hall Westminster |
9 December 2010
Keywords
Policy |
| Contact : | |
14 December 2010: Epidemiology Genomics & Risk: A Series of 4 Workshops in Cambridge |
|
|
Workshop 4: Causation in Epidemiology 14 December 2010, 10.30–17.30 Registration is not yet open. There has been a rash of epidemiological literature on the traditionally philosophical topic of the nature of causation. Why is this? Epidemiologists often seek to infer causation, but then so do many other scientists. There are at least three (and probably more) reasons that causation is an issue in epidemiology. First, it is a science relying heavily on observational studies; this means that the difference between cause and coincidence cannot be easily reduced to a difference between repeatability and coincidence. Second, epidemiology deals with general causal claims, such as 'Smoking causes lung cancer'. These claims are hard to interpret. Do they express a relation between two properties, smoking and lung cancer? Or are they (exception-ridden) generalisations over individual cases of smoking causing lung cancer? These questions relate to the interpretation of probability, discussed in the second workshop, since causal generalisations in epidemiology are usually probabilistic. There is a related question here about whether epidemiology deals with laws of nature. Are there epidemiological laws, or are the relevant laws all biological – or even physical? And what is the relation between each of the aforementioned concepts of general causation and ceteris paribus laws? Finally, the identification of causes in many sciences is tied up with the process of explanation. In epidemiology, however, causes may not be explanatory. An epidemiological study might establish that smoking causes lung cancer, to the satisfaction of governments and the general public, without explaining why people get lung cancer. Intuitively, this is because the link between smoking and lung cancer is not illuminated by establishing that smoking causes lung cancer. This links back to the topic of the third workshop, since it is unclear how the identification of causes for the purpose of devising interventions relates to causal explanation (which has traditionally received a great deal more attention from philosophers of science). Moreover, the kind of cause that we focus our attention on may bear both on the chances of a good explanation and of devising a good intervention. For example, identifying readily manipulable socioeconomic causes of illness may offer promising interventions but little understanding; with genetic causes, the reverse may be true. These are, of course, disputable claims, relating to the topic of the first workshop. This final workshop therefore ties together some of themes of the previous three. Speakers (confirmed so far)Professor Nancy Cartwright Professor Dan Hausman Professor John Worrall |
Workshop
1030 - 1730 :
14 December 2010
Keywords
Genomics |
| Contact : Alex Broadbent | |