Explore the vast range of titles available.

Artificial intelligence (AI) holds immense potential for enhancing clinical and administrative health care tasks. However, slow adoption and implementation challenges highlight the need to consider how humans can effectively collaborate with AI within broader socio-technical systems in health care. In the example of intensive care units (ICUs), we compare data scientists' and clinicians' assessments of the optimal utilization of human and AI capabilities by determining suitable levels of human-AI teaming for safely and meaningfully augmenting or automating 6 core tasks. The goal is to provide actionable recommendations for policy makers and health care practitioners regarding AI design and implementation. In this multimethod study, we combine a systematic task analysis across 6 ICUs with an international Delphi survey involving 19 health data scientists from the industry and academia and 61 ICU clinicians (25 physicians and 36 nurses) to define and assess optimal levels of human-AI teaming (level 1=no performance benefits; level 2=AI augments human performance; level 3=humans augment AI performance; level 4=AI performs without human input). Stakeholder groups also considered ethical and social implications. Both stakeholder groups chose level 2 and 3 human-AI teaming for 4 out of 6 core tasks in the ICU. For one task (monitoring), level 4 was the preferred design choice. For the task of patient interactions, both data scientists and clinicians agreed that AI should not be used regardless of technological feasibility due to the importance of the physician-patient and nurse-patient relationship and ethical concerns. Human-AI design choices rely on interpretability, predictability, and control over AI systems. If these conditions are not met and AI performs below human-level reliability, a reduction to level 1 or shifting accountability away from human end users is advised. If AI performs at or beyond human-level reliability and these conditions are not met, shifting to level 4 automation should be considered to ensure safe and efficient human-AI teaming. By considering the sociotechnical system and determining appropriate levels of human-AI teaming, our study showcases the potential for improving the safety and effectiveness of AI usage in ICUs and broader health care settings. Regulatory measures should prioritize interpretability, predictability, and control if clinicians hold full accountability. Ethical and social implications must be carefully evaluated to ensure effective collaboration between humans and AI, particularly considering the most recent advancements in generative AI.

Disputing Discipline explores how global and local children’s rights activists’ efforts within the school systems of Zanzibar to eradicate corporal punishment are changing the archipelago’s moral and political landscape. Through an equal consideration of child and adult perspectives, Fay explores what child protection means for Zanzibari children who have to negotiate their lives at the intersections of universalized and local child protection aspirations while growing up to be pious and responsible adults. Through a visual and participatory ethnographic approach that foregrounds young people’s voices through their poetry, photographs, and drawings, paired with in-depth Swahili language analysis, Fay shows how children’s views and experiences can transform our understanding of child protection. This book demonstrates that to improve interventions, policy makers and practitioners need to understand child protection beyond a policy sense of the term and respond to the reality of children’s lives to avoid unintentionally compromising, rather than improving, young people’s well-being.  

A growing number of policy-makers and program leaders at the federal, state, and community levels are committed to using unbiased evidence to guide them in solving tough problems. This progress should be celebrated. The bipartisan Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, which sought to ensure that policy-makers have reliable information and evidence to help them decide how best to manage and improve government programs and policies, has already played an important role in institutionalizing the use of evidence and scientific facts to create federal policy. In fact, many of its recommendations have already been incorporated in bipartisan legislation. Here, we illustrate the role that evidence can play in informing policy through an issue about which the three authors of this article care deeply - improving the lives of American children and families by reducing unplanned pregnancy. Specifically, we focus on evidence and policy regarding one of the most powerful and effective strategies to achieve this goal: increasing access to the most effective forms of contraception.

The Ukrainian refugee crisis highlights the many issues associated with trauma, distress, mental and physical health, culturally competent assessments, and meaningful support and interventions. This crisis requires international support and a global response, as hosting countries have specific competencies and capacities. The authors hope that the groundswell of international concern over the crisis in Ukraine will lead not only to a comprehensive response to the needs of refugees from that country but also to a recognition of the needs of other asylum seekers and refugees and to our collective moral obligation to address those needs equitably.

The aim of this essay is to assess the impact of the Chechen Wars on the international community and to analyze the motives behind the modest international response to the issue. While the first section of the paper provides an overview of the conflicts, their background and their nature, the second section analyzes the international context in which the wars occurred and attempts to offer scholarly results to the following questions: What caused the indifferent international reaction to the Chechen Wars? What was different in these wars that prompted the neglect of the Western policy makers?

Allied health comprises multiple professional groups including dietetics, medical radiation practitioners, occupational therapists, optometrists and psychologists. Different to medical and nursing, Allied health are often organized in discipline specific departments and allocate budgets within these to provide services to a range of clinical areas. Little is known of how managers of allied health go about allocating these resources, the factors they consider when making these decisions, and the sources of information they rely upon. The purpose of this study was to identify the key factors that allied health consider when making resource allocation decisions and the sources of information they are based upon. Four forums were conducted each consisting of case studies, a large group discussion and two hypothetical scenarios to elicit data. A thematic content analysis commenced during post-forum discussions of key factors by forum facilitators. These factors were then presented to an expert working party for further discussion and refinement. Transcripts were generated of all data recordings and a detailed thematic analysis was undertaken by one author to ensure coded data matched the initial thematic analysis. Twelve factors affecting the decision-making of allied health managers and clinicians were identified. One of these factors was disendorsed by the expert working party. The 11 remaining factors can be considered to be key decision-making principles that should be consistently applied to resource allocation. These principles were clustered into three overarching themes of readiness, impact and appropriateness. Understanding these principles now means further research can be completed to more effectively integrate research evidence into health policy and service delivery, create partnerships among policy-makers, managers, service providers and researchers, and to provide support to answer difficult questions that policy-makers, managers and service providers face.

This article presents findings from a meta-analysis of 213 school-based, universal social and emotional learning (SEL) programs involving 270,034 kindergarten through high school students. Compared to controls, SEL participants demonstrated significantly improved social and emotional skills, attitudes, behavior, and academic performance that reflected an 11-percentile-point gain in achievement. School teaching staff successfully conducted SEL programs. The use of 4 recommended practices for developing skills and the presence of implementation problems moderated program outcomes. The findings add to the growing empirical evidence regarding the positive impact of SEL programs. Policy makers, educators, and the public can contribute to healthy development of children by supporting the incorporation of evidence-based SEL programming into standard educational practice.

Publicly funded prekindergarten programs have achieved small-to-large impacts on children's cognitive outcomes. The current study examined the impact of a prekindergarten program that implemented a coaching system and consistent literacy, language, and mathematics curricula on these and other nontargeted, essential components of school readiness, such as executive functioning. Participants included 2,018 four and five-year-old children. Findings indicated that the program had moderate-to-large impacts on children's language, literacy, numeracy and mathematics skills, and small impacts on children's executive functioning and a measure of emotion recognition. Some impacts were considerably larger for some subgroups. For urban public school districts, results inform important programmatic decisions. For policy makers, results confirm that prekindergarten programs can improve educationally vital outcomes for children in meaningful, important ways.

Increased focus on prevention presents health promoters with new opportunities and challenges. In this context, the study of factors influencing policy-maker decisions to scale up health promotion interventions from small projects or controlled trials to wider state, national or international roll-out is increasingly important. This study aimed to: (i) examine the perspectives of senior researchers and policy-makers regarding concepts of 'scaling up' and 'scalability'; (ii) generate an agreed definition of 'scalability' and (iii) identify intervention and research design factors perceived to increase the potential for interventions to be implemented on a more widespread basis or 'scaled up'. A two-stage Delphi process with an expert panel of senior Australian public health intervention researchers (n = 7) and policy-makers (n = 7) and a review of relevant literature were conducted. Through this process 'scal- ability' was defined as: the ability of a health intervention shown to be efficacious on a small scale and or under controlled conditions to be expanded under real world conditions to reach a greater proportion of the eligible population, while retaining effectiveness. Results showed that in health promotion research insufficient attention is given to issues of effectiveness, reach and adoption; human, technical and organizational resources; costs; intervention delivery; contextual factors and appropriate evaluation approaches. If these issues were addressed in the funding, design and reporting of intervention research, it would advance the quality and usability of research for policy-makers and by doing so improve uptake and expansion of promising programs into practice.

This article is about a six year policy learning process named Gipuzkoa Sarean in the Basque province of Gipuzkoa. In the article we reflect on how action research contributed to policy learning. The process consists of three stages: 2009-2011: Initiation of the project and development of a work method; 2011-2013: Government learning and organisational change; 2013-2014: Social learning and the shift to a new approach to territorial development. For each stage we describe the background and main goal of the research project, the participants in policy learning, the work method and agenda, the status and roles of policy makers and researchers and the results. Our reflections on-action are used to discuss the conditions for social learning. Our argument is that the distinction between practice and praxis is crucial for understanding the conditions for social learning. Our use of the concept praxis is inspired by Paulo Freire and we interpret it as the connection of reflection and action in the same phase of the process. If they are separated into theory and practice they do not create the conditions for social learning in a policy process. They might create outcomes, such as recipes for policy or political discourses, but not social learning. Key words: policy learning, territorial development, territory, policy maker, theory, practice, praxis