Sustainable management of the building stock: A Delphi study as a decision-support tool for improved inspections

2020 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 102184
Author(s):  
Cristina Jiménez-Pulido ◽  
Ana Jiménez-Rivero ◽  
Justo García-Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Building Stock ◽  
Support Tool

VP163 Patient Involvement In The Development Of Multi-Criteria Decision Tool

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 223-223
Author(s):  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
Sylvain L'Espérance ◽  
Carmen Lindsay ◽  
Marc Rhainds ◽  
Martin Coulombe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Patient Representatives

INTRODUCTION:Healthcare organizations should assess the relevance of both existing and new practices. Involving patients in decisions regarding which health technologies and interventions should be prioritized could favor a better fit between strategic choices and patients needs.METHODS:Following a systematic review of existing multi-criteria decision support tools and a consultation with hospital clinicians and managers, a set of potentially relevant criteria was identified. A three-round modified Delphi study was then conducted among four groups (hospital managers, heads of department, clinicians, and patient representatives) in order to reach consensus on criteria that should be considered in the tool.RESULTS:In total, seventy-four participants completed the third round of the Delphi study. Consensus was obtained on twelve criteria. There were some significant differences between groups in priority scores given to criteria. Patient representatives differed significantly from other groups on two criteria. Their ranking of the accessibility criteria was higher, and their ranking of the organizational aspect criteria was lower than for the other groups.CONCLUSIONS:Patient representatives can be involved in the development of a multi-criteria decision support tool to identify, evaluate and prioritize high value-added health technologies and interventions in order to enhancing clinical appropriateness The fact that accessibility aspects were more important for patient representatives calls for specific attention to these criteria when prioritizing health technologies or interventions. Furthermore, we need to ensure that the decisions made regarding the relevance of these technologies and interventions also reflect patients’ preferences.

Developing a decision support tool for responding to patients’ reported levels of information needs, family anxiety, depression, and breathlessness.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 173-173
Author(s):  
Liesbeth van Vliet ◽  
Richard Harding ◽  
Claudia Bausewein ◽  
Sheila Payne ◽  
Irene J. Higginson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
Patient Reported

173 Background: Routine clinical use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) such as the Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS) may be prevented by a lack of guidance on how to respond to reported symptoms. When using POS in clinical care, clinicians encounter the most difficulties with responding to information needs, depression and family anxiety while breathlessness remains a difficult to treat symptom. We aimed to create a Decision Support Tool (DST) on how to respond to different levels of these patient-reported symptoms. Methods: A systematic search for guidelines and systematic reviews on these topics was conducted (in Pubmed, Cochrane and York DARE databases, Googlescholar, NICE, National Guideline Clearinghouse, Canadian Medical Association, Google.com). In a two-round online Delphi study purposefully sampled international experts (clinicians, researchers, patient representatives) judged the appropriateness (1-9 scale + do not know option) of drafted recommendations for each POS answer category (0-4) and provided qualitative remarks. Recommendations with a median of 7-9 and <30% of scores between 1-3 and 7-9 were included in the DST. Quality was assessed using an adapted GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-five out of 38 (66%) experts participated in round 1, 23 out of 37 (62%) in round 2. Higher POS scores were related to more included recommendations. The DST consists of both a manual and flow-charts of included recommendations for each topic. Overall, psychosocial interventions were recommended for lower levels of depression and breathlessness than drug interventions (e.g., goal-setting/coping versus morphine for breathlessness). Good communication and emotional support were recommended for low family anxiety levels, but a social needs assessment only for higher levels. For information needs recommendations were least discriminative; almost all recommendations (e.g., assess patients’ understanding of information, show empathy) seemed always relevant. Conclusions: The developed DST can assist clinical responses to patient-reported symptoms in palliative care. Future work is needed to test the effect of using the DST on patients’ outcomes.

scholarly journals Integrating ecosystem services into decision support for management of agroecosystems: Viva Grass tool

One Ecosystem ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivo Vinogradovs ◽  
Miguel Villoslada ◽  
Oļģerts Nikodemus ◽  
Anda Ruskule ◽  
Kristina Veidemane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Land Use Planning ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Analysis Tool ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
Low Input

The area covered by low-input agroecosystems (e.g. semi-natural and permanent grasslands) in Europe has considerably decreased throughout the last century. To support more sustainable management practices and to promote biodiversity and ecosystem service values of such agroecosystems, a decision support tool was developed. The tool aims to enhance the implementation of ecosystem services and address the challenge of their integration into spatial planning. The Viva Grass tool aims to enhance the maintenance of ecosystem services delivered by low-input agroecosystems. It does so by providing spatially-explicit decision support for land-use planning and sustainable management of agroecosystems. The Viva Grass tool is a multi-criteria decision analysis tool for integrated planning. It is designed for farmers, spatial planners and policy-makers to support decisions for management of agroecosystems. The tool has been tested to assess spatial planning in eight case studies across the Baltic States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document