Role of village-level workers in the process of political decentralisation

India, the second-largest democratic country in the world with about 1.21 billion people, among which all most half of the total population lives in the villages, and to the welfare of our nation, it is essential to improve the conditions of the villages. Therefore, rural development has become the first and foremost necessity for our country to develop. In India for all-round development of the rural areas the village level worker is responsible. They are recruited by a district-level selection committee chaired by the district collector. Usually, there are ten village-level workers in a development block. They must have passed the matriculation examination and the age limit is 24. They must belong to a rural area. From planning to implementing various policies for the rural people, from making aware the rural poor to ensuring their participation in them are the primary duties of the village level workers.

Impact of Transitioning from In-Person to Virtual Heart Transplantation Selection Committee Meetings: An Observational Study (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Heart transplant selection committee meetings have transitioned from in-person to remote video meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic, but how this impacts committee members and patient outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVE To determine perceived impact of remote video transplant selection meetings on usability and patient care and to measure patient selection outcomes during the transition period from in-person to virtual meetings. METHODS A 35-item anonymous survey was developed and distributed electronically to the heart transplant selection committee. We reviewed medical records to compare outcomes of patients presented at in-person meetings (January-March 2020) to those presented at video meetings (March-June 2020). RESULTS Among 83 committee members queried, 50 were regular attendees (48% physicians, 52% non-physicians), and 46 responses were received (50% physicians, 50% non-physicians) and included in the analysis. Overall, respondents were satisfied with the video conference format, felt that video meetings did not impact patient care and were an acceptable alternative to in-person meetings. However, 54% preferred in-person meetings, with 71% of non-physicians preferring in-person meetings compared to only 35% of physicians (P=.02). Of the 46 new patient evaluations presented, there was a statistically nonsignificant trend towards fewer patients initially declined at video meetings compared with in-person meetings (25% vs. 45%, P=.32). CONCLUSIONS The transition from in-person to video heart transplant selection committee meetings was well-received and did not appear to affect committee members’ perceived ability to deliver patient care. Patient selection outcomes were similar between meeting modalities.

Analysing intra-party power: Swedish selection committees over five decades

Unlike political parties in many other countries, Swedish ones have not adopted more inclusive methods for choosing their election candidates and party leaders. While the party congress formally selects important party offices, the process is managed, prior to the formal vote, by a selection committee vested with the task of filtering the pool of potential leaders and proposing one of them as the new leader. In this article, we survey the composition of these selection committees over time to investigate the extent to which change has taken place. Specifically, we investigate whether the composition of these powerful committees, which decide who joins the ranks of the country’s political leaders, has developed over time in relation to what prominent theories of intra-party power might lead us to expect. We derive testable expectations from prominent conceptualisations of intra-party power and apply these empirically. Specifically, we study the composition of party selection committees in Sweden over 50 years, 1969–2019. In total, this includes 40 different selection committees and almost 400 individuals. Contrary to conventional wisdom on intra-party power relations, the empirical analysis reveals a surprising degree of stability, raising questions about common claims of general power shifts within parties.

Ophthalmology Residency Virtual Interviews in the Setting of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspectives of Applicants, Selection Committee Members, and Current Residents

Background In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic, residency programs implemented videoconferencing “virtual” interviews for the 2020 to 2021 match cycle. There is limited published information on virtual ophthalmology residency interviews. Objective The study aimed (1) to assess applicant, selection committee member, and resident opinions of technical quality, communication quality, and ability to assess applicant or program “fit” during virtual interviews; (2) to determine which interview format—in-person or virtual—each party would prefer in the future; and (3) to survey which residency resources applicants found helpful. Design Surveys were sent to applicants, selection committee members, and residents to assess the above objectives for the 2020 to 2021 match cycle virtual interviews at the Moran Eye Center, University of Utah. Setting This study was conducted in a single residency program interview season from 2020 to 2021. Participants Forty applicants, eight committee members, and seven residents who participated in the virtual interview process were surveyed. Intervention or Exposure Prior to interviews, various avenues were implemented to connect with applicants. A videoconferencing software was utilized for interviews. Applicants and selection committee members met in one-on-one or small group interviews. Residents communicated with applicants in a large group setting between interviews. Main Outcome and Measure The study aims to survey the participants as stated in the objectives. There was no planned outcome for this quality improvement study. Results Survey response rate was 98.2% (54/55). All parties rated the technical components as good or very good. Applicants and selection committee members rated communication as overall good or very good, although residents thought communication was very poor. A total of 92.3% applicants, 75% selection committee members, and 0% residents were reported that they were able to appropriately assess fit of the program with the applicant. However, 46.3% respondents preferred in-person interviews in the future. Popular applicant resources were resident-produced videos (82.1%), conversations with residents (46.2%), and a gift bag (43.6%). Conclusion and Relevance Overall, the technical components of the interview were successful. Small, structured group interactions led to better communication and assessment of fit. There were variable opinions regarding future interview format preference between in-person, virtual, or choice. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, connecting with applicants via various means can optimize the match process.

Why Not Me?

This chapter discusses a system for screening living donors. The chapter begins with a narrative of the author as she was anxiously waiting to hear whether the Transplant Selection Committee at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, was going to approve her as a kidney donor. It then recounts the author's decision to donate one of her kidneys to a stranger. A few months earlier, she had read an article in the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle about a woman who needed a kidney. The article detailed how Deb Porter Gill had been diagnosed with insulin dependent diabetes and developed unrelated chronic kidney disease. The chapter narrates the reasons why Deb's story tugged at the author. Ultimately, the chapter looks at the importance of the whole series of evaluation and screening in kidney transplantation.

Abstract 17014: Cardiologist Assessment and Approval Was the Primary Predictor of Kidney Transplant Candidacy and Transplantation Among Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Introduction: End stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with concomitant heart failure (HF) are often denied kidney transplantation (KTx). The aims of this study were to explore factors predictive of suitability for KTx and to assess cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) presenting for KTx evaluation. Methods: We evaluated 109 consecutive adults with LVEF≤40% at the time of initial KTx evaluation between 2013 and 2018. Post-transplant CV outcomes were defined as non-fatal MI, admission for HF, CV death and all-cause mortality. Results: Mean age was 58.2 years (SD11.9), 78% were male, 58% had diabetes, 70% had history of CV events and 42% had ischemic cardiomyopathy. Mean LVEF was 31.5% (SD 6.47). Eighty patients had nuclear stress imaging; 10% were positive for reversible ischemia and 43% for prior infarct. Mean VO2max was 14.4(SD 5.71)ml/kg/min (31 patients). A cardiologist evaluated 93% of patients and was present at 58% of selection committee meetings. Twenty-four patients (22%) were denied by a cardiologist for KTx and 59 (54%) were denied by the selection committee, of whom 43 were due to CV risk. On univariate analysis, the variables associated with denial for KTx were: cardiologist denial, denial due to CV risk, Native American race (6% of cohort), higher NT-pro-BNP, prior MI, coronary intervention, positive stress study, anemia, lower EF and lower VO2max (all p<0.05). On multivariate analysis, cardiologist denial was the only significant predictor of denial for KTx (OR: 29.4, p=0.0007). At median follow-up of 15 months, 5 (5%) suffered non-fatal MI, 13 (12%) were hospitalized for HF exacerbation and 17 (16%) died. Only 22 (20%) underwent KTx. Post-KTx, there was one death, one non-fatal MI and 3 hospitalizations for HF. Mean LVEF improvement was 16% (SD12.9). Conclusions: Only 38% of ESRD patients with LVEF≤40% presenting for KTx evaluation were approved and of those, only 52% received KTx. Cardiologist approval was the primary predictor of suitability for KTx. Despite careful selection, prevalence of CV events and mortality after KTx was 23%. There is need for a consistent multidisciplinary approach during KTx evaluation, including cardiologist input, to improve CV outcomes.

Legal Certainty Against Not Reporting Assets of State Administrators in Selection of Corruption Eradication Commission Chairmanship Candidates

Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is a state institution that in carrying out its duties and authority is independent and free from the influence of any power. The Report of State Official Assets (LHKPN) is a list of all the assets of the State Administrators as outlined in the LHKPN form determined by the Corruption Eradication Commission. Selection Candidates for the leadership of the Corruption Eradication Commission are not required to submit a Report on the Wealth of State Administrators (LHKPN), the statement was said by the Chairman of the Selection Committee Yenti Garnasih. how the consequences of not considering the LHKPN (Report on the Assets of State Assets) by the KPK leadership candidate selection committee in terms of Article 29 of Law Number 30 Year 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission Jo. Article 5 of Law Number 28 of 1999 concerning State Administration that is Clean and Free of Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism relating in announcing the assets of prospective KPK leaders. The State Administrators are obliged to be willing to inspect their assets before, during and after taking office, report their assets at the first time in office, transfer, promote and retire, and to announce their assets. The purpose of making LHKPN is as part of the authority possessed by the KPK, which is to carry out steps or efforts to prevent the occurrence of other forms of corruption by registering and examining LHKPN. The report on the assets of state administrators should be enforced prior to the completion of the selection of candidates for the leadership of the Corruption Eradication Commission because this is intended as an effort to open the candidates for KPK leaders and as an effort to prevent corruption.