US public views toward biosocial risk factors for criminality: a brief report

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 294-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colleen M. Berryessa
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Survey Data ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Risk Factors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Public Views ◽  
Lay Public ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present preliminary survey data measuring attitudes of members of the US public on the importance, existence, and potential legal use of biological risk factors for criminality. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from an online sample of US public in conjunction with an experiment not included in this report. Findings Data suggest that the public generally agrees that there are certain biological characteristics that make one more likely to exhibit criminality. The public does not appear to agree on whether or not this type of evidence should be allowed in court, but the large majority of respondents were worried about its potential misuse. Practical implications Social risk factors were generally viewed by respondents as more important to explaining criminality, suggesting that sociological views of crime may be still more prevalent in the lay public. Worries about biosocial risk factor evidence being misused in court have been previously discussed in academic literature, but the public also appears to share these concerns. The public especially worries that this kind of evidence could be used to incorrectly excuse an offender’s behavior, showing that they may be weary of this evidence in court as potential jurors. Attitudes of many members of the public on these issues may be affected by academic disagreement in the criminology community on the importance of these issues. Originality/value Scholars have emphasized the need for discussion on how the US public views biosocial risk factors for criminality. As there are no known data of this type, these data are the first of their kind.

scholarly journals REDUCING HEALTH DISPARITIES IN THE ERA OF VALUE-BASED CARE

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S562-S563
Author(s):  
Amit Kumar ◽  
Elham Mahmoudi ◽  
Maricruz Rivera-Hernandez
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Puerto Rico ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Minority Populations ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Risk Factors ◽  
Physician Visits ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The US health care system is at a critical moment of transformation. The implementation of value-based models has made significant progress towards improving care quality and coordination, continuity of care and reducing cost. However, concerns have been raised regarding “cherry-picking” healthier people that may negatively impact patients with more complex needs and minority populations. Given that the US is becoming more diverse, there is a need for understanding the impact of social risk factors including ethnicity, immigration status, income and geography on health outcomes and issues of health care disparities. This panel brings together four studies that examine these phenomena in minority populations. These studies will provide novel insight regarding 1) healthcare utilization in Mexican-American Medicare beneficiaries and showing that social determinants of health are associated with a higher risk of hospitalization, emergency room admissions, and outpatient visits. 2) Mortality rates and predialysis care among Hispanics in the US, Hispanics in Puerto Rico, and Whites in the US demonstrating substantial disparities in access to recommended nephrology care for Hispanics in Puerto Rico; 3) Trends in age-adjusted mortality rates and supply of physicians in states with different nurse-practitioners regulation. 4) The impact of social risk factors on disenrollment from Fee-For-Service and enrollment in a Medicare Advantage plan in older Mexican-Americans. 5) Racial disparities in access to physician visits, prescription drugs, and healthcare spending among older adults with cognitive limitation. Studies in this panel will also discuss the effects of changes in care delivery and payment innovations in improving health equity.

Healthcare fraud under the microscope: improving its prevention

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 1039-1061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole F. Stowell ◽  
Martina Schmidt ◽  
Nathan Wadlinger
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Health Institutions ◽  
The Government ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to make readers aware of the extensiveness of healthcare fraud in the USA and how it involves and affects the government, healthcare providers, insurance companies, patients and the public. In addition, recommendations are made that may help control this pervasive type of fraud. Design/methodology/approach A range of different journal publications, information from government health institutions and law enforcement websites, healthcare fraud cases and healthcare laws are used as a basis to provide information about how fraudsters are committing healthcare fraud and how to prevent this fraud from occurring. Findings Despite increased funding and prosecution efforts by the government, healthcare fraud continues to be a major threat to the US economy and public. While healthcare fraud will never be eradicated, specific efforts can be deployed to help rein in these complex fraud schemes. Practical implications The paper provides a useful resource of information on healthcare fraud for healthcare providers, insurance companies, patients and the public that may help combat healthcare fraud and prevent financial losses. Social implications Every dollar saved from combating fraud could be used to improve access to more or better health services and can, thereby, save lives. Originality/value This paper provides recommendations regarding healthcare fraud that could help prevent this large drain on the US economy.

An Approach to Selecting Single or Multiple Social Risk Factors for Clinic-Based Screening

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John F. Steiner ◽  
Glenn K. Goodrich ◽  
Kelly R. Moore ◽  
Spero M. Manson ◽  
Laura M. Gottlieb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Social Risk Factors

OCIE issues risk alert on the most frequently identified advisory fee and expense compliance issues

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert Van Grover
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To summarize and interpret a Risk Alert issued on April 12, 2018 by the US SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) on the most frequent advisory fee and expense compliance issues identified in recent examinations of investment advisers. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes deficiencies identified by the OCIE staff pertaining to advisory fees and expenses in the following categories: fee billing based on incorrect account valuations, billing fees in advance or with improper frequency, applying incorrect fee rates, omitting rebates and applying discounts incorrectly, disclosure issues involving advisory fees, and adviser expense misallocations. Findings In the Risk Alert, OCIE staff emphasized the importance of disclosures regarding advisory fees and expenses to the ability of clients to make informed decisions, including whether or not to engage or retain an adviser. Practical implications In light of the issues identified in the Risk Alert, advisers should assess the accuracy of disclosures and adequacy of policies and procedures regarding advisory fee billing and expenses. As a matter of best practice, advisers should implement periodic forensic reviews of billing practices to identify and correct issues relating to fee billing and expenses. Originality/value Expert guidance from experienced investment management lawyer.

Shapeholders: managing them as allies, partners and significant constituents

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 41-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksiy Osiyevskyy ◽  
Vladyslav Biloshapka
Keyword(s):  
Business Models ◽  
Social Activism ◽  
Business Success ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Building Relationships ◽  
The Public ◽  
Short Run ◽  
Common Interests ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The authors review the concept of building relationships with Shapeholders,: a broad group of players that have no financial stake in the company yet can substantively influence it. The process for doing this is the subject of a new book by Mark Kennedy, Shapeholders: Business success in the age of social activism. Design/methodology/approach The authors examine Mark Kennedy’s framework for managing the firm’s shapeholders, a model composed of seven basic steps (7A’s): Align with a purpose, Anticipate, Assess, Avert, Acquiesce, Advance common interests, and Assemble to win. Findings Managing corporate reputation in alliance with enlightened shapeholders is a potential defense against self-aggrandizing schemes to wantonly maximize shareholder value in the short run. Practical implications Managing shapeholders is part of the messy democratic process that works when power is apportioned fairly among those affected by a firm’s decisions, and this process underpins the winning business models of true market leaders. Social implications Stakeholders previously discredited as mere “mosquitos” have gained new power, particularly when their legitimate concerns and unfair treatment resonate with the interests of a significant segment of the public and influential shapeholders. Originality/value Shapeholders can create enormous opportunities for smart managers capable of effectively engaging with them.

Autonomous vehicles: a review of the ethical, social and economic implications of the AI revolution

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shweta Banerjee
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Autonomous Vehicles ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Technological Advancement ◽  
Economic Implications ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Autonomous Cars ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeThere are ethical, legal, social and economic arguments surrounding the subject of autonomous vehicles. This paper aims to discuss some of the arguments to communicate one of the current issues in the rising field of artificial intelligence.Design/methodology/approachMaking use of widely available literature that the author has read and summarised showcasing her viewpoints, the author shows that technology is progressing every day. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are at the forefront of technological advancement today. The manufacture and innovation of new machines have revolutionised our lives and resulted in a world where we are becoming increasingly dependent on artificial intelligence.FindingsTechnology might appear to be getting out of hand, but it can be effectively used to transform lives and convenience.Research limitations/implicationsFrom robotics to autonomous vehicles, countless technologies have and will continue to make the lives of individuals much easier. But, with these advancements also comes something called “future shock”.Practical implicationsFuture shock is the state of being unable to keep up with rapid social or technological change. As a result, the topic of artificial intelligence, and thus autonomous cars, is highly debated.Social implicationsThe study will be of interest to researchers, academics and the public in general. It will encourage further thinking.Originality/valueThis is an original piece of writing informed by reading several current pieces. The study has not been submitted elsewhere.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document