scholarly journals DUS(Soil)—A Framework for Developing a Minimum Data Set of Soil Health Indicators and Management Guidelines for Farmers

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
P. M. Govindakrishnan ◽  
A. N. Ganeshamurthy ◽  
N. K. Krishna Kumar ◽  
F. Beggi ◽  
S. Bhaskar ◽  
...  

Soil health information is still not widely used in decision making in agriculture. One of the reasons is the lack of a simple and effective method for selection of soil health indicators that have direct relevance to management decisions. A framework for soil health indicators selection and developing location-specific management practices that improve soil health are presented. The framework involves selection of a minimum data set of soil health indicators based on ‘DUS(Soil)’ criteria. In this framework ‘D’ represents Distinctness (indicators representing distinct functional soil processes), ‘U’ represents Utility (amenability for amelioration of the status of the indicator or altering its impact through management practices) and ‘S’ represents Simplicity (amenability for measurement in the field/small laboratories using simple protocols). This study also outlines a method for developing management guidelines for farmers based on the status of the selected soil health indicators. This involved classifying the status of each of the indicators into three classes. Thereafter, taking cognizance of the agroecological context, suitable field management schedules were developed for each class of the indicators, based on literature and local expert knowledge. The use of this framework was demonstrated by developing management guidelines for a coarse textured soil with optimum pH, low soil carbon, poor in water stable aggregates (highly slaking), optimum porosity and poor in soil macro fauna in Mandla district, Madhya Pradesh, India. The study showed that the framework is flexible, generic as well as simple and is useful to develop site-specific management guidelines logically, to overcome the soil quality constraints.

2013 ◽  
Vol 99 (4) ◽  
pp. 40-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Young ◽  
Philip Davignon ◽  
Margaret B. Hansen ◽  
Mark A. Eggen

ABSTRACT Recent media coverage has focused on the supply of physicians in the United States, especially with the impact of a growing physician shortage and the Affordable Care Act. State medical boards and other entities maintain data on physician licensure and discipline, as well as some biographical data describing their physician populations. However, there are gaps of workforce information in these sources. The Federation of State Medical Boards' (FSMB) Census of Licensed Physicians and the AMA Masterfile, for example, offer valuable information, but they provide a limited picture of the physician workforce. Furthermore, they are unable to shed light on some of the nuances in physician availability, such as how much time physicians spend providing direct patient care. In response to these gaps, policymakers and regulators have in recent years discussed the creation of a physician minimum data set (MDS), which would be gathered periodically and would provide key physician workforce information. While proponents of an MDS believe it would provide benefits to a variety of stakeholders, an effort has not been attempted to determine whether state medical boards think it is important to collect physician workforce data and if they currently collect workforce information from licensed physicians. To learn more, the FSMB sent surveys to the executive directors at state medical boards to determine their perceptions of collecting workforce data and current practices regarding their collection of such data. The purpose of this article is to convey results from this effort. Survey findings indicate that the vast majority of boards view physician workforce information as valuable in the determination of health care needs within their state, and that various boards are already collecting some data elements. Analysis of the data confirms the potential benefits of a physician minimum data set (MDS) and why state medical boards are in a unique position to collect MDS information from physicians.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 191-198
Author(s):  
Karen Van den Bussche ◽  
Sofie Verhaeghe ◽  
Ann Van Hecke ◽  
Dimitri Beeckman

Author(s):  
Cassandra L. Hua ◽  
Kali S. Thomas ◽  
Jennifer Bunker ◽  
Pedro L. Gozalo ◽  
Joan M. Teno

Author(s):  
Charles D. Phillips ◽  
Kathleen M. Spry

RÉSUMÉTrès peu de recherches ont été effectuées sur les pensionnaires des maisons de soins ayant manifestés des troubles mentaux chroniques sans démence avant leur entrée en institution. Les données du Minimum Data Set for Nursing Home Resident Assessment and Care Screening (MDS) de 1993 ont été utilisées pouranalyser les différences dans les caractéristiques et les soins se rapportant à ce type de pensionnaires par rapport aux autres pensionnaires. Cette enquête portait sur 70 000 pensionnaires du Kansas, du Maine, du Mississippi et du Dakota du Sud. Les caractéristiques des pensionnaires qui éprouvaient ce type de troubles mentaux chroniques étaient plus fréquemment les suivantes: sexe masculin, 65 ans et plus, bénéficiaires de Medicaid, moins médicalement inaptes et niveau plus élevé de problèmes de comportements. Ces pensionnaires reçoivent aussi davantage de médicaments psychotropes et suivant une thérapie, la prévalence de la thérapie étant cependant moins éleveé. Les informations recueillies pourraient laisser croire que les soins accordés à ces pensionnaires ne sont pas des plus appropriés.


Burns ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1092-1099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Ahmadi ◽  
Jahanpour Alipour ◽  
Ali Mohammadi ◽  
Farid Khorami

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document