Public versus private expectancy of success: Confidence booster or performance pressure?

1985 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 1447-1457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy F. Baumeister ◽  
James C. Hamilton ◽  
Dianne M. Tice
Author(s):  
Sofya Isaakyan ◽  
Elad N. Sherf ◽  
Subrahmaniam Tangirala ◽  
Hannes Guenter

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Mattarella-Micke ◽  
Mareike Wieth ◽  
Sian L. Beilock

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (04) ◽  
pp. 294-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lutz S. Freudenberg ◽  
Ulf Dittmer ◽  
Ken Herrmann

Abstract Introduction Preparations of health systems to accommodate large number of severely ill COVID-19 patients in March/April 2020 has a significant impact on nuclear medicine departments. Materials and Methods A web-based questionnaire was designed to differentiate the impact of the pandemic on inpatient and outpatient nuclear medicine operations and on public versus private health systems, respectively. Questions were addressing the following issues: impact on nuclear medicine diagnostics and therapy, use of recommendations, personal protective equipment, and organizational adaptations. The survey was available for 6 days and closed on April 20, 2020. Results 113 complete responses were recorded. Nearly all participants (97 %) report a decline of nuclear medicine diagnostic procedures. The mean reduction in the last three weeks for PET/CT, scintigraphies of bone, myocardium, lung thyroid, sentinel lymph-node are –14.4 %, –47.2 %, –47.5 %, –40.7 %, –58.4 %, and –25.2 % respectively. Furthermore, 76 % of the participants report a reduction in therapies especially for benign thyroid disease (-41.8 %) and radiosynoviorthesis (–53.8 %) while tumor therapies remained mainly stable. 48 % of the participants report a shortage of personal protective equipment. Conclusions Nuclear medicine services are notably reduced 3 weeks after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic reached Germany, Austria and Switzerland on a large scale. We must be aware that the current crisis will also have a significant economic impact on the healthcare system. As the survey cannot adapt to daily dynamic changes in priorities, it serves as a first snapshot requiring follow-up studies and comparisons with other countries and regions.


Author(s):  
Jeremy Youde

While Chapter 3 focuses primarily on the evolution of global health governance, Chapter 4 pays more attention to its contemporary manifestation as a secondary institution within international society. This chapter discusses the current state of the global health governance architecture—who the important actors are, how they operate, how they have changed over the past twenty-five years, and how they illustrate the fundamental beliefs and attitudes within the global health governance system. In particular, the chapter discusses the relative balance between state-based and non-state actors, as well as public versus private actors. This chapter highlights five key players within contemporary global health governance: states; the World Health Organization; multilateral funding agencies; public–private partnerships; and non-state and private actors


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document