Defines the five common parts of a critique essay and provides a formula for completing each part.
Views: 323924 David Taylor
Article Review for Program Evaluation and Research
Views: 275 Daniel D'Aniello
This video “Pre-Operative Assessment” is part of the Lecturio course “Anesthesiology” ► WATCH the complete course on http://lectur.io/preoperativeassessment ► LEARN ABOUT: - Pre-operative assessment of the patient - Reasons for a pre-operative assessment - History of previous anesthetics of the patient - Physical assessment of the patient - Evaluation of the airway - How to use the Guedel airway - How to use the laryngeal mask airway - How to use the Stylet - How to use the Bougie - How to use Mallampati Score ► THE PROF: Your lecturer is Dr. Brian Warriner. He has been an active clinician and teacher in the University of British Columbia for years. He has published in various medical journals and was head of different anesthesiology departments. Dr. Warriner’s research is focused on the use of blood substitutes in surgical patients, the value of preoperative beta blockers, the reversal of muscle relaxants and the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting. ► LECTURIO is your single-point resource for medical school: Study for your classes, USMLE Step 1, USMLE Step 2, MCAT or MBBS with video lectures by world-class professors, recall & USMLE-style questions and textbook articles. Create your free account now: http://lectur.io/preoperativeassessment ► INSTALL our free Lecturio app iTunes Store: https://app.adjust.com/z21zrf Play Store: https://app.adjust.com/b01fak ► READ TEXTBOOK ARTICLES related to this video: Types and Procedures of General Anesthesia http://lectur.io/preoperativeassessmentarticle ► SUBSCRIBE to our YouTube channel: http://lectur.io/subscribe ► WATCH MORE ON YOUTUBE: http://lectur.io/playlists ► LET’S CONNECT: • Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lecturio.medical.education.videos • Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lecturio_medical_videos • Twitter: https://twitter.com/LecturioMed
Views: 51527 Lecturio Medical Education
How to write evaluation report. Writing an evaluation report is an essential component when it comes to M&E reporting. How to write a good evaluation? Writing a report is a skill that requires that report findings are communicated in a concise manner. At whatever point making and creating an evaluation report, endeavor to address the going with issues, as proposed by A Thompson (2005), Guide to business report forming, open at bestentrepreneur.murdoch.edu.au/Guide_To_Report_Writing.pdfexternal associate. http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/4cmas/tipsevalreports.htm YouTube Channel; https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxxZ... Google Plus; https://plus.google.com/u/0/100637621... Twitter; https://twitter.com/manuscriptceo Facebook; https://web.facebook.com/profile.php?... YouTube Video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHSmb0RnwsM Choose the degree of the report: Be clear about the purpose behind the report and recollect this when gathering information and reporting revelations and proposition. Consider the expected intrigue amass, its needs and essential administration frames while choosing the report's style and course of action including: gathering of spectators demographics, for instance, age, associations, perspectives, et cetera. preparing level, especially as to experience and learning of NRM obligation with respect to fundamental authority level of detail required and establishment required level of specific lingo and need to portray terms, perhaps in a glossary directions to help understanding by using visual aides. Gather and organize information by giving: establishment information with targets, expand plans, wander organizes, methodology environment, et cetera. Report mastermind must reflect the reason, social event of individuals, kind of information being represented and fancied result. Ensure information is passed on accurately and impartially. Presentation quality will affect the impression of information quality, so ensure the report is exact, smaller and that emphasis and semantic utilize push proposed meaning. Use an evidentiary approach which demonstrates the relationship between the substances and the recommendations and as needs be grants confide in accomplices and gatherings of spectators. how to write evaluation report| how to write a good evaluation| how to write summary report| what to include in an evaluation| example of evaluation report| how to write an evaluation report| project evaluation report| how to write a summary of findings| program evaluation sample report| evaluation how to write| evaluation report sample template| evaluative writing examples| what is an evaluative summary| how to write a final report|sample writing evaluation report format| how to make an evaluation| how do you do an evaluation| project evaluation report example| how to write an effective evaluation| how to do a good evaluation|how to write a programme evaluation report| how to evaluate a report| how to make evaluation report| what makes a good evaluation| how to write a program evaluation| what is evaluation report| how to write evaluation questions| how to do an evaluation report| what is evaluation in writing| how to write evaluation paper| what should an evaluation include| what is a evaluation report| how to write monitoring report| evaluation report| what to include in evaluation|
Views: 9771 M&E Made Simple
Video abstract of original research paper "Evaluation of doctors’ performance as facilitators in basic medical science lecture classes in a new Malaysian medical school" published in the open access journal Advances in Medical Education and Practice by Salwani Binti Ismail, Abdus Salam, Ahmed G Alattraqchi, et al. Background: Didactic lecture is the oldest and most commonly used method of teaching. In addition, it is considered one of the most efficient ways to disseminate theories, ideas, and facts. Many critics feel that lectures are an obsolete method to use when students need to perform hands-on activities, which is an everyday need in the study of medicine. This study evaluates students' perceptions regarding lecture quality in a new medical school. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted of the medical students of Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin. The study population was 468 preclinical medical students from years 1 and 2 of academic year 2012–2013. Data were collected using a validated instrument. There were six different sections of questions using a 5-point Likert scale. The data were then compiled and analyzed, using SPSS version 20. Results: The response rate was 73%. Among 341 respondents, 30% were male and 70% were female. Eighty-five percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that the lectures had met the criteria with regard to organization of lecture materials. Similarly, 97% of students agree or strongly agree that lecturers maintained adequate voices and gestures. Conclusion: Medical students are quite satisfied with the lecture classes and the lectures. However, further research is required to identify student-centered teaching and learning methods to promote active learning. See the full paper here: http://www.dovepress.com/evaluation-of-doctors39-performance-as-facilitators-in-basic-medical-s-peer-reviewed-article-AMEP
Views: 188 Dove Medical Press
National Conference “Scientific publications in science metrics evaluation system”, 14.05.2014, Institute of Aviation. Organisers: Editors Board of scientific quarterly journal “Marketing of Scientific and Research Institutions” and Scientific Publishing Houses of the Institute of Aviation. The lecturers were representatives of: Index Copernicus, DOAJ, CEEOL, BazEkon, Elsevier, Thomson Reuters, Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education. www.ioa.edu.pl/ISSUE www.ilot.edu.pl/ISSUE
Views: 174 Scientific Journal MINIB
Purchase the spreadsheet (formulas included!) that's used in this tutorial for $5: https://gum.co/satisfactionsurvey ----- Soar beyond the dusty shelf report with my free 7-day course: https://depictdatastudio.teachable.com/p/soar-beyond-the-dusty-shelf-report-in-7-days/ Most "professional" reports are too long, dense, and jargony. Transform your reports with my course. You'll never look at reports the same way again.
Views: 375792 Ann K. Emery
Trial NVivo free for 30 days: http://bit.ly/178Wn1s or visit the QSR International website: http://bit.ly/HyGdD3. NVivo is software that supports qualitative and mixed methods research. Join Dr Tuija Turunen from the University of Lapland, Finland, as she discusses her research on peoples' memories of starting school and how these memories influence how they deal with transitions later in life.
Views: 972 NVivo by QSR
monitoring and evaluation interview questions are usually no different from any common interview. Talking is for the most part a vital part of the interview process in almost toward looking for some kind of employment. It's a crucial that in answering M&E interview questions a relationship between the potential employee and employer is built The Job Interview Process If an occupation seeker's resume passes the resume screen, the planned representative would like to learn more about the person applying for the job. In the midst of this screening strategy, managers much of the time focus on getting rid of hopefuls who are not fitting for the business or the condition. Nevertheless, a considerable number of people are gotten every month in the USA, even in extraordinary money related times. The articles around there will help you appreciate what you need to do, help you get prepared, and succeed. The best strategy to Answer the Common monitoring and evaluation interview questions is to get prepared. See, the most a significant part of the time in the interview is about knowing about your work experience, your interpersonal skills and your technical abilities Taking note of the Common Job Interview Questions is crucial and some of them are listed below. Examiners routinely ask comparative request in imminent representative gatherings. It's basic for them to do so, consistently working from a prepared once-over of request. After the gatherings are over, taking a gander at contenders is in like manner less requesting. if you like the content of this video to learn more about M&E please subscribe to this channel YouTube Video; https://youtu.be/QJBQIOmG1CA YouTube Channel; https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxxZi-3pPl3TCUPLsW-g7Yw Google Plus; https://plus.google.com/u/0/100637621... Twitter; https://twitter.com/manuscriptceo Facebook; https://web.facebook.com/profile.php?... below is a summary of the common interview questions asked Will you educate me a touch of concerning yourself? How might you be able to have possessed the capacity to you find out about the position? What do you think about the association? Why do you require this occupation? Why might it be a smart thought for us to contract you? What are you hunting down in another position? m&e officer interview questions | monitoring and evaluation interview questions | m&e interview questions | interview questions for m&e officer | monitoring and evaluation interview questions and answers | typical second interview questions
Views: 33796 M&E Made Simple
1) SEC.gov search company page: https://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html 2) 13 papers retracted by this Cornell food researcher. Based on his "sexy" research results, he was appointed head of the USDA in 2007 and guided the food pyramid on 2010.: https://www.motherjones.com/food/2018/09/cornell-food-researcher-brian-wansink-13-papers-retracted-how-were-they-published/ Please like, share, and subscribe to my YouTube page! Tap the bell to get notified when I post a new video. -Dr. Schmidt Please email [email protected] to become a patient and order the products we carry. Please do not use the YouTube comments section for personal questions that are appropriately addressed in a doctor-patient private conversation. Please do not start a question with “What about..?” or generally ask “Your thoughts, please”. Please reword your question to be very specific. Thank you! My Professional FB page: https://www.facebook.com/Lacticacidosisguide/ My office FB page: https://www.facebook.com/realfoodcures/ Buy Good Fat Bars here: https://www.goodfat.bar/ You have already taken the first step to better your health by watching my video! Next, I recommend that you join our office and become a patient. We have a local and a long distance program. You will get diet modifications and supplement recommendations designed specifically for you by me or one of my fellow practitioners in our Ann Arbor, Michigan office. You have to be a patient of our office in order to purchase most supplements per our distribution agreement with Standard Process and other brands that are only sold through physicians. Becoming a Local or Long Distance Patient as outlined below allows you that access. In order to be part of our Long Distance Patient program, you purchase an annual membership for $200. This membership includes an initial 30 minute phone appointment with me or one of our practitioners. At that time, the practitioner will make a recommendation to you for diet modifications, supplements and the quantities that you should take. After the phone call, you are able to order supplements for a year, as needed, directly from our website and our app. We will then promptly ship the supplements out to you. Follow up phone calls with your practitioner are $125 for a 20 minute phone or skype appointment. If you would like to move forward and take advantage of this opportunity, please call: (734) 302-7575 or email [email protected] to schedule, and make the $200 payment. You can reach us by phone Monday through Saturday 9am-5pm EST. To learn more about our office and clinical practice, go to: http://thenutritionalhealingcenter.com Since not everyone is fortunate enough to live within driving distance of Ann Arbor, Michigan, and many feel that an telephone/online consultation is not enough to meet their clinical needs, I am happy to offer you our Long Distance Patient Travel Package. The package is comprised of a series of appointments in a few days with myself or another practitioner. Not only are your health issues of concern thoroughly evaluated, but you receive a comprehensive full body evaluation, two different computerized health evaluations and a great deal of teaching and health education. You leave with a program of diet modification and supplement support that the practitioner is confident will improve your health and quality of life. This program can initiate your relationship with our clinic, and be followed up with telephone/online consultations, or it can be incorporated into your already existing program with our clinic to further enhance the program you already have in place. The cost for the Long Distance Travel Package is $560 and includes everything mentioned above. We also have a relationship with a lovely landmark hotel conveniently located 1 mile from our office that offers a reduced nightly rate to our patients. In the meantime, if you are truly interested in what we have to offer, please watch the top 5 most important videos for you: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLNvew6525LFhZ-aewK4IxoHcQXgLlelw&disable_polymer=true We look forward to helping you feel your best! DISCLAIMER: The products and the claims made about specific products on or through this site have not been evaluated by the United States Food and Drug Administration and are not approved to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease. Individual results may vary. You should not use the information on this site for diagnosis or treatment of any health problem or for prescription of any medication or other treatment. UCC 1-308 without prejudice.
Views: 1268 Dr. Darren Schmidt
Scientific Writing Assistant (SWAN) video tutorial by Jean-Luc Lebrun Part 3: How to start using SWAN? Jean-Luc Lebrun shows second of the possible ways to use SWAN: the Full evaluation mode. Full evaluation allows you to make evaluations with the standard part of your paper (title, abstract, introduction, conclusions) as well as with your structure! In full evaluation mode, you will import your whole paper into SWAN, and with the semiautomatic import process, determine the structure of your paper. You may also have your text fluidity evaluated by using either automatic or manual text progression assesment tool! Video from Scientific Writing 2.0 A Reader and Writer's Guide by Jean-Luc Lebrun http://www.scientific-writing.com/ http://cs.uef.fi/swan/
Views: 3281 ScienceSwan
This tutorial will explain levels of evidence, based on research study design, so that you can find the best evidence for your practice using a database. It was developed by the Physiotherapy Association of British Columbia for PABC members and for members of the Ontario Physiotherapy Association.
Views: 91354 BCPhysio
Dr. Pasikhova disusses a rational approach for reviewing the medical literature for accuracy and content.
Views: 6608 IDPodcasts
EAPRIL2014 - Flipping the Session - A self-evaluation tool to make course material more research informed Liesbeth Spanjers Group T University College, Belgium
Views: 61 EAPRIL vzw
As part of its promotion of greater transparency and the assessment of rigor in psychological science, the American Psychological Association has released new Journal Article Reporting Standards for researchers seeking to publish in scholarly journals. The standards are specific to psychological research and offer guidelines on the information needed in a research article to ensure that the elements included are comprehensible and that the study can be replicated. The new standards: - Recommend the division of hypotheses, analyses and conclusions into primary, secondary and exploratory groupings to allow for a full understanding of quantitative analyses presented in a manuscript and enhance reproducibility. - Offer modules for authors reporting on N-of-1 design, replication, clinical trials, longitudinal studies and observational studies, as well as the analytic methods structural equation modeling and Bayesian analysis. - Address the plurality of inquiry traditions, methods and goals, providing guidance on material to include across diverse qualitative research methods. - Provide standards for reporting research using mixed-method designs, drawing on both qualitative and quantitative standards. For more information: “Journal Article Reporting Standards for Quantitative Research in Psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board Task Force Report” - http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-amp0000151.pdf “Journal Article Reporting Standards for Qualitative Primary, Qualitative Meta-Analytic, and Mixed Methods Research in Psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board Task Force Report” - http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-amp0000151.pdf "Editorial: Journal Article Reporting Standards” - http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-amp0000263.pdf __ The American Psychological Association is the leading scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States, with more than 115,700 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members. To learn more about the APA visit http://www.apa.org Follow APA on social media: Facebook https://www.facebook.com/AmericanPsychologicalAssociation/ Twitter https://twitter.com/apa LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/10738/ Google+ https://plus.google.com/+americanpsychologicalassociation
Views: 3494 American Psychological Association
This video highlights key features of the Research Impact Evaluation (ResEval) tool developed by the LiquidPub project. ResEval manages and computes metrics of scientific entities, such as authors and contributions. Supported metrics range from traditional citation-based metrics, such as h-index to novel metrics customly defined by users. Read more about ResEval at http://reseval.org/
Views: 298 liquidjournals
Open Science goes Geo - Part IV: Winning Horizon 2020 with Open Science This short course forms Part IV in the Short Course series 'Open Science goes Geo', and will pull together all the advice covered in the previous short courses to a very specific task: scoring high proposal evaluations across all Horizon2020 instruments (Marie Curie Fellowships, European Training Networks, Integrated Project in the Societal Challenges). The 90 min session will analyze the application requirements of Horizon2020 funding instruments, and offer proven and implementable Open Science strategies that can optimize on evaluation procedure and maximize funding chances for research proposals. The lesson will make reference as much as possible to national funding instruments. Open Science is a broad movement looking beyond Open Access to publish openly and share scientific research immediately. Accessibility is addressed on all levels for everyone, without fees. Beyond the ethical arguments, Open Science also offer an opportunity for young researchers to adapt to a new workflow for performing impacting research and forming unexpected collaborations. Open Science can significantly contribute to building a strong research profile, while address funder ambitions on stimulating innovation and economic growth through removing all barriers to data and knowledge (EU Digital Agenda, EC Blue Growth Agenda). European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2015 Vienna | Austria | 12 – 17 April 2015 Fri, 17 Apr, 08:30–10:00 http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2015/session/19166
Views: 49 Martin Hammitzsch
Group 17 Professor: João Carapinha
Views: 129 Anh Ho
Impact evaluations need to go beyond assessing the size of the effects (i.e., the average impact) to identify for whom and in what ways a programme or policy has been successful. This video provides an overview of the issues involved in choosing and using data collection and analysis methods for impact evaluations
Views: 59492 UNICEF Innocenti
This lecture was part of the 2012 CPRE Retreat, Session 1: Accountability and Evaluation Systems - Research and National Trends. In "Teacher Evaluation: Actions and Research Possibilities", CPRE co-director Allan Odden discusses the changing systems by which to evaluate and manage teachers in order to improve school organization and increase teacher effectiveness.
Views: 839 CPREresearch
(Visit: http://www.uctv.tv/) Student evaluations of teaching are widely used in academic personnel decisions as a measure of teaching effectiveness. Research shows that these evaluations are biased against female instructors by an amount that is large and statistically significant. Philip Stark, Professor of Statistics and Associate Dean at the UC Berkeley shows that gender biases can be large enough to cause more effective instructors to get lower scores than less effective instructors. Recorded on 04/11/2016. Series: "Center for Studies in Higher Education" [6/2016] [Education] [Show ID: 30870]
Views: 2482 University of California Television (UCTV)
askfuse is the responsive research and evaluation service run by Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health. With askfuse we respond to requests made by our partners working in public health and social care, and work in collaboration to find research solutions to address pressing local issues. To find out more, call 01642 342757 email [email protected] or visit http://www.fuse.ac.uk/askfuse Fuse is the brand name of a partnership between public health researchers across the five universities in the North East: Durham, Newcastle, Northumbria, Sunderland and Teesside. The focus of Fuse is about working with policy makers and practitioners, enabling research findings to be understood and applied to public health issues, for example, diet and exercise, and socio-economic inequalities. Animation by Lynchpin Productions.
Views: 1235 Fuse0nline
Presented by Professor David C. Berliner In the United States almost all recent designs of teacher evaluation systems rely on standardised tests of student achievement as a substantial part of, or all of the teacher evaluation process. These tests have one characteristic that makes them completely inappropriate for this purpose; namely, they are remarkably insensitive to teacher behaviour. Standardised achievement tests instead reflect demographic characteristics of the students who are tested. In this lecture Professor Berliner will explore how teachers impact individual students enormously, but affect standardised test results only a little. Professor David C. Berliner David C. Berliner is Regents' Professor of Education Emeritus at Arizona State University. He has also taught at the Universities of Arizona and Massachusetts, at Teachers College and Stanford University, and at universities overseas. He is a member of the National Academy of Education, the International Academy of Education, and a past president of both the American Educational Research Association (AERA) and the Division of Educational Psychology of the American Psychological Association (APA). Professor Berliner has authored more than 200 published articles, chapters and books. Among his best known works is the book co-authored with B. J. Biddle, The manufactured crisis, and the book co-authored with Sharon Nichols, Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts American education. He co-edited the first Handbook of educational psychology and the books Talks to teachers, and Perspectives on instructional time. His most recent co-authored book is: 50 myths and lies that threaten America's public schools.
Views: 2869 The University of Melbourne
Scientific Writing Assistant (SWAN) video tutorial by Jean-Luc Lebrun Part 4: Jean-Luc Lebrun shows how to use the fluidity evaluation feature in SWAN. Fluidity evaluation highlights potential text progression problems from your text and gives suggestions of how to fix them. Video from Scientific Writing 2.0 A Reader and Writer's Guide by Jean-Luc Lebrun http://www.scientific-writing.com/ http://cs.uef.fi/swan/
Views: 1595 ScienceSwan
By Monica Lomena Gelis This presentation and related article are embedded in the author's PhD research which will contribute to the theory and practice of evaluation in Senegal through the Meta-evaluation of evaluations of local climate change adaptation initiatives. Building on an earlier analysis of the evaluation practice in Senegal, presented at the 6th AfrEA Conference in January 2012, this paper establishes the methodological framework to analyze the conception, process, results and the utilization of this type of evaluations and presents a preliminary version of a tailored Meta-Evaluation checklist. Meta-evaluation (hereafter MEv) is commonly defined as "the evaluation of evaluations". Its focus is how evaluations are done, not just their results or findings. More than forty years after Michael Scriven coined the term, there are few investigations which have evaluations as their main object of study, and there is still confusion with terms like "meta-analysis", "synthesis of evaluation results" and "systematic review". Meta-evaluation can be applied to individual evaluations, to a set of them, and even to the whole evaluation system in certain circumstances. MEv has been extensively used to foster the improvement of the quality of individual evaluations, frequently focusing on their methodological and robustness of the evidence. This paper explores another use of MEv: the MEv of a set of evaluations which can guide the management of the function and practice of evaluation within an institution or in a substantive policy sector. The article to be presented at the 10th EES Conference outlines the adaptation of the MEv methodology to real evaluations conducted over the past ten years in order to explore the evaluation practice of the local climate change adaptation sector in Senegal. This will contribute to clarify the evaluation function in this policy sector. The paper starts by introducing the concept and describing the methodology used to elaborate the MEv checklist proposed for this research. Afterwards, some frequently misunderstood concepts are presented in order to better distinguish Meta-evaluation. Different types of MEv are explained along with some practicalities of the recommended procedures for MEv, emphasizing the type chosen for the research: summative, ex-post external MEv of the conception, process, results and the utilization of evaluations. In order to craft a MEv checklist for evaluations of local climate change adaptation initiatives in Senegal, the article explores the grey literature on MEv in the field of international aid development and the standards for MEv or for evaluation quality assessment proposed in key academic articles. More than 20 meta-evaluative exercises of development aid covering the past ten years are analyzed, capturing their objectives, standards used and hypotheses. The standards for MEv commonly recommended by the literature and the major evaluation associations are then summarized. Finally, these two flows of information are used to tailor a MEv checklist, bearing in mind the epistemological perspective of MEv endorsed by the article and the context of the Senegalese evaluation system and practice explored in the author's earlier article. A preliminary version of the checklist, including sources of information and guiding Meta-evaluation questions, is proposed as a conclusion.
Views: 287 SEA Change CoP
What is JOURNAL RANKING? What does JOURNAL RANKING mean? JOURNAL RANKING meaning - JOURNAL RANKING definition - JOURNAL RANKING explanation. Source: Wikipedia.org article, adapted under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ license. SUBSCRIBE to our Google Earth flights channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6UuCPh7GrXznZi0Hz2YQnQ Journal ranking is widely used in academic circles in the evaluation of an academic journal's impact and quality. Journal rankings are intended to reflect the place of a journal within its field, the relative difficulty of being published in that journal, and the prestige associated with it. They have been introduced as official research evaluation tools in several countries. Traditionally, journal ranking “measures” or evaluations have been provided simply through institutional lists established by academic leaders or through committee vote. These approaches have been notoriously politicized and inaccurate reflections of actual prestige and quality, as they would often reflect the biases and personal career objectives of those involved in ranking the journals; also causing the problem of highly disparate evaluations across institutions. Consequently, many institutions have required external sources of evaluation of journal quality. The traditional approach here has been through surveys of leading academics in a given field, but this approach too has potential for bias, though not as profound as that seen with institution-generated lists Consequently, governments, institutions, and leaders in scientometric research have turned to a litany of observed bibliometric measures on the journal-level that can be used as surrogates for quality and thus eliminate the need for subjective assessment Consequently, several journal-level metrics have been proposed, most citation-based: Impact factor – Reflecting the average number of citations to articles published in science and social science journals. Eigenfactor – A rating of the total importance of a scientific journal according to the number of incoming citations, with citations from highly ranked journals weighted to make a larger contribution to the eigenfactor than those from poorly ranked journals. SCImago Journal Rank – A measure of scientific influence of scholarly journals that accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from. h-index – Usually used as a measure of scientific productivity and the scientific impact of an individual scientist, but can also be used to rank journals. Expert survey – A score reflecting the overall quality and/or contribution of a journal is based on the results of the survey of active field researchers, practitioners and students (i.e., actual journal contributors and/or readers), who rank each journal based on specific criteria. Publication power approach (PPA) – The ranking position of each journal is based on the actual publishing behavior of leading tenured academics over an extended time period. As such, the journal’s ranking position reflects the frequency at which these scholars published their articles in this journal. Altmetrics – Rate journals based on scholarly references added to academic social media sites. diamScore – A measure of scientific influence of academic journals based on recursive citation weighting and the pairwise comparisons between journals. Source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) – a factor released in 2012 by Elsevier based on Scopus to estimate impact. The measure is calculated as SNIP=RIP/(R/M), where RIP=raw impact per paper, R = citation potential and M = median database citation potential.....
Views: 545 The Audiopedia
Why is it so important? Because manufacturers have to demonstrate the compliance of their devices with the Essential Requirements. They have to show that the products they put on the market do not present any unacceptable risks compared to their clinical benefit and that the devices will provide the expected performance based on their intended use and during normal conditions of utilization. This is relevant not only before placing a new device on the market, but it is also expected that the manufacturer will monitor its clinical performance and safety as part of the Quality Management System once the device is commercialized. - Is the clinical evaluation mandatory for all types of medical devices? - Why is it so important? - What is the best methodology to demonstrate and confirm the clinical performance and safety of the device as requested by EU MDD? - What does the Notified Body look at to assess the clinical evaluation? - How the process can be part of the Quality management system? - What are the common mistakes to avoid? - Will the new MD regulation introduce any new requirements in regards to the clinical evaluation? For the answers to these questions, and more, you can tune to LNE/G-MED North America's upcoming Free webinar on The Clinical Evaluation -- Demonstration of clinical safety and performance
Views: 1807 GMED
GroupComp is a tool for the evaluation of research contributions for individuals and group of researchers. It uses citation-based metrics to quantify the research impact of a group. Read more about GroupComp at http://project.liquidpub.org/groupcomparison/.
Views: 94 liquidjournals
Here we present the findings of Yu Ping and colleagues (2009). They compared a PDA-based method to collect data for public health surveillance to the traditional paper based method.
Views: 577 MobileActiveOrg
Trial NVivo free for 30 days: http://bit.ly/18RIn8w or visit the QSR International website: http://bit.ly/1fKBlde. NVivo is software that supports qualitative and mixed methods research. Improving mixed-method evaluations by incorporating logic models into NVivo Gareth Morrell, Senior Research Director of NatCen Social Research, Britain's leading independent social research agency In this eSeminar, Gareth will show how the content of a logic model can be incorporated into NVivo using the Framework© application to manage qualitative data, ensuring that the best is made of the qualitative data and that it can be systematically linked to data from other evaluation strands. Qualitative research can play a crucial role in programme evaluations. While Randomised Control Trials and quasi-experimental designs can assess whether a given intervention has worked, a parallel qualitative process evaluation can help us to understand why something works. This one-hour eSeminar will cover: - Using templates to systematically collect and analyze data - Organizing large amounts of data in an NVivo project - Creating nodes that further your research and evaluation efforts - Writing and using queries to inform stakeholders of programs and trends and to enhance organizational learning.
Views: 2801 NVivo by QSR
Dr Benjamin Abella, University of Pennysylvania and discussant at the American Heart Association, speaks with Dr. Niklas Nielsen, of Lund University, Sweden, about the Targeted Temperature Management (TTM) Trial for post-arrest care. http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org The European Heart Journal is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal dealing with Cardiovascular Medicine. It is an official Journal of the European Society of Cardiology and is published weekly. The European Heart Journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine. It includes articles related to research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. In addition it provides a forum for the exchange of information on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine, including education issues. Used with permission of the European Society of Cardiology. Produced in association with Zurich House.
Views: 1649 Oxford Academic (Oxford University Press)
This webinar will focus on the student experience within Course Evaluations. This will be a co-presentation involving IDEA Senior Research Officer, Steve Benton, and Campus Labs Implementation Specialist, Nicole Hackbarth. Webinar content will highlight research by IDEA surrounding the student experience throughout evaluations as well as demonstration of the Course Evaluations student interface within the Campus Labs product. Presenters: Nicole Hackbarth & Steve Benton Steve Benton, Ph.D. Senior Research Officer Steve leads a research team that designs and conducts reliability and validity studies for IDEA products. He writes reports and journal articles, edits the longstanding series of IDEA Papers, and occasionally conducts training seminars about IDEA products. Steve weighs in as The IDEA Center’s ultimate commuter, traveling frequently from Florida back to Kansas. He is a Fellow in the American Psychological Association and American Educational Research Association, as well as an Emeritus Professor of Special Education, Counseling, and Student Affairs at Kansas State University. He serves on the editorial boards of Contemporary Educational Psychology, and Educational Psychology Review. Steve earned his Ph.D. in psychological and cultural studies from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in 1983. During his career, his research interests have included cognitive processes involved in writing and learning from text, academic studying, college-student alcohol abuse prevention, and student ratings of instruction. A recognized author of multiple publications and papers, Steve served K-State for more than 25 years as both professor and department chair. With his wife, Sherry, they have a son and daughter who live with their families in Colorado. Steve and Sherry share in the joy of four grandchildren. In addition to spending time with family and friends, they enjoy riding bicycles and kayaking.
Views: 82 Campus Labs
No individual board member has more influence on board culture and performance than the board chair. Yet, most boards do not conduct formal performance evaluations of their chairs. Effective boards strive to oversee their chairs; while ineffective boards are controlled by them. Periodically assessing board chair performance can help board's oversee their chairs and make a good chair even better. Board chair performance evaluation is a governance best practice. In this webinar governance expert Jamie Orlikoff reviews the rationale for board board chair evaluation, and outlines the step by step process for establishing an effective and productive board chair evaluation process. Jamie Orlikoff is president of Orlikoff & Associates, an international consulting firm specializing in health care governance and leadership, strategy, quality, organizational development, and risk management. He is the National Advisor on Governance and Leadership to the American Hospital Association and Health Forum. Jamie has been involved in leadership, quality, and strategy issues for over thirty years. He has consulted with hospitals and health systems in eleven countries, and since 1985 has worked with hospital and system governing boards to strengthen their overall effectiveness and their oversight of quality, safety and strategy. He has worked extensively on improving the relationships between boards, medical staffs, and management. He is the author of 15 books and over 100 articles and has served on hospital, college, and civic boards. Jamie has served as a member of the Virginia Mason Health System Board in Seattle, WA, and chair of their Governance Committee. © 2018 American Hospital Association
Views: 203 American Hospital Association
Step 2 will allow you, as the Editor-in-Chief, to reject the manuscript outright or enter it into the double-blind peer review process. • Click the link in the email notification you receive. • On the subsequent page, download the manuscript for your initial assessment of the submission. • Choosing "initial assessment reject" will automatically reject the paper without additional review and notify the author. • Choosing "initial assessment accept" will enter the manuscript into the peer review process. • At this step you many choose the corresponding routing number to match your naming conventions. • Click initial assessment accept to notify the authors that the paper will be entered into the peer review process. The next step will be to remove all identifying author information from the document and prepare it for peer review.
Views: 261 IGI Global
There is a growing interest in quality evaluation of dissertations, both in university institutions or research centers, and also among national and international policy makers. Research evaluation in higher education is a continuous process undertaken in higher education institutions, for improvement, and carried out by social agents and politicians as measure for investment control and in education and research. Usually, PhD realization time is about 3 or 4 years, in which plenty of resources are invested but traditionally the resulting theses have been considered gray literature that produced little or none impact. Changes in higher education models and the change brought by Internet access and new technologies in the scientific media make doctoral theses the most important and highly considered documents. Through the analysis of doctoral thesis, we can obtain information on research agendas of different institutions, hot topics, most used methods, growth and diachronic evolution of production, networks established through the theses juries, most productive supervisors, gender bias in production and supervisions, among other indicators. The quality of a doctoral thesis has a direct impact on the doctorate’s future, but also on the supervisor’s curriculum, the reputation of the department, the doctoral program, university, and even the country of origin. Therefore, the evaluation of theses from a series of quality indicators becomes a pressing need. Such indicators can be classified according to the moment they are applied: ex-ant or appraisal, mid-term or monitoring and ex-post or impact. Ex-ante quality indicators such as: Institutional prestige, supervisor reputation, previous doctoral skills. Appraisal or midterm: Adjustment of the thesis to the research agenda, partial defenses of thesis advances, number and quality of doctoral-director interactions (quality of mentoring). Ex-post or impact: Number and indexation of the derived publications, Google Scholar citations to the thesis, citations in the main databases to the articles derived from the thesis, Altmetric´s social impact, and presence and visibility of the thesis in specific national and international databases. http://colloque.csefrs.ma
Views: 115 المجلس الأعلى للتربية والتكوين والبحث العلمي
The use of NVivo in the evaluation of higher education initiatives. Understand the various challenges faced and successes realized in the analyses of these various data sets. First is a two-year study of an innovative teacher education program where NVivo was used in a comparative analysis. Second was the use of NVivo in the analysis of qualitative responses from surveys.
Views: 460 NVivo by QSR
Thomas Lüscher, Professor and Chairman of Cardiology at the University Hospital Zurich and Editor-in-Chief of the European Heart Journal, speaks with Dr Eugene M. Braunwald, Hersey Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, about life and career in the field of cardiology. http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org The European Heart Journal is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal dealing with Cardiovascular Medicine. It is an official Journal of the European Society of Cardiology and is published weekly. The European Heart Journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine. It includes articles related to research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. In addition it provides a forum for the exchange of information on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine, including education issues. Used with permission of the European Society of Cardiology. Produced in association with Zurich House.
Views: 6381 Oxford Academic (Oxford University Press)
Thomas Lüscher, Professor and Chairman of Cardiology at the University Hospital Zurich and Editor-in-Chief of the European Heart Journal, speaks with Jack V. Tu, Professor of Medicine at University of Toronto, and Leslie H. Curtis, Associate Professor in Medicine at Duke University, about the CANHEART Study at the Annual Scientific Sessions of the American Heart Association, Dallas, Texas. http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org The European Heart Journal is an international, English language, peer-reviewed journal dealing with Cardiovascular Medicine. It is an official Journal of the European Society of Cardiology and is published weekly. The European Heart Journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine. It includes articles related to research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. In addition it provides a forum for the exchange of information on all aspects of Cardiovascular Medicine, including education issues. Used with permission of the European Society of Cardiology. Produced in association with Zurich House.
Views: 178 Oxford Academic (Oxford University Press)
This presentation deals with the conjunction of qualitative and quantitative research, commonly refered to as "Mixed Methods". By the end of it, you will have ● A basic understanding of mixed methods research ● An understanding of 10 recent advances of this methodology ● Specific examples of these advances ● A checklist of advances to determine if your project is rigorous John W. Creswell, PhD is a Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, adjunct professor of Family Medicine and Co-Director of the Michigan Mixed Methods Research and Scholarship Program at the University of Michigan. He was founding Co-Editor for the Journal of Mixed Methods Research and has authored numerous articles and more than 25 books on mixed methods research, qualitative methodology, and general research design. This presentation was given at the MAXQDA user conference (CAQD) March 3rd, 2016. For more information on the CAQD, visit www.caqd.org
Views: 16053 CAQD
cientific Writing and its Evaluations Using SWAN Software- third part
Views: 32 RSOS SEA