The Case-Problem as a Unit of Measurement of Case Work With Delinquent Boys

Social Forces ◽  
1932 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. Karpf
1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. Fondacaro ◽  
K. Heller
Keyword(s):  

1965 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Blacker ◽  
Harold W. Demone ◽  
Howard E. Freeman

1969 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 408-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert Barry ◽  
Herbert Barry ◽  
Howard T. Blane

Author(s):  
Rajendra Pai N. ◽  
U. Govindaraju

Ayurveda in its principle has given importance to individualistic approach rather than generalize. Application of this examination can be clearly seem like even though two patients suffering from same disease, the treatment modality may change depending upon the results of Dashvidha Pariksha. Prakruti and Pramana both used in Dashvidha Pariksha. Both determine the health of the individual and Bala (strength) of Rogi (Patient). Ayurveda followed Swa-angula Pramana as the unit of measurement for measuring the different parts of the body which is prime step assessing patient before treatment. Sushruta and Charaka had stated different Angula Pramana of each Pratyanga (body parts). Specificity is the characteristic property of Swa-angula Pramana. This can be applicable in present era for example artificial limbs. A scientific research includes collection, compilation, analysis and lastly scrutiny of entire findings to arrive at a conclusion. Study of Pramana and its relation with Prakruti was conducted in 1000 volunteers using Prakruti Parkishan proforma with an objective of evaluation of Anguli Pramana in various Prakriti. It was observed co-relating Pramana in each Prakruti and Granthokta Pramana that there is no vast difference in measurement of head, upper limb and lower limb. The observational study shows closer relation of features with classical texts.


1934 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 674-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lowell S. Selling ◽  
Seymour P. Stein
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Wu ◽  
Paolo Avner ◽  
Genevieve Boisjoly ◽  
Carlos K. V. Braga ◽  
Ahmed El-Geneidy ◽  
...  

AbstractAccess (the ease of reaching valued destinations) is underpinned by land use and transport infrastructure. The importance of access in transport, sustainability, and urban economics is increasingly recognized. In particular, access provides a universal unit of measurement to examine cities for the efficiency of transport and land-use systems. This paper examines the relationship between population-weighted access and metropolitan population in global metropolitan areas (cities) using 30-min cumulative access to jobs for 4 different modes of transport; 117 cities from 16 countries and 6 continents are included. Sprawling development with the intensive road network in American cities produces modest automobile access relative to their sizes, but American cities lag behind globally in transit and walking access; Australian and Canadian cities have lower automobile access, but better transit access than American cities; combining compact development with an intensive network produces the highest access in Chinese and European cities for their sizes. Hence density and mobility co-produce better access. This paper finds access to jobs increases with populations sublinearly, so doubling the metropolitan population results in less than double access to jobs. The relationship between population and access characterizes regions, countries, and cities, and significant similarities exist between cities from the same country.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document