Implicit and Self-Attributed Dependency Needs in Homeless Men and Women

Recent metaanalyses indicate that women consistently obtain higher scores than men do on self-report dependency measures, but not on projective dependency tests (R. F. Bornstein, 1995, 1996). To explore this issue in a heretofore unexamined population, we analyzed archival data from 85 homeless participants (40 women and 45 men) enrolled in a vocational rehabilitation program, using the MMPI Dependency (Dy) Scale (L. Navran, 1954) and the Rorschach Oral Dependency (ROD) Scale (J. M. Masling, L. Rabie, & S. H. Blondheim, 1967). Consistent with earlier results, there were no gender differences in projective dependency scores, but contrary to earlier results, there were also no gender differences in self-reports of dependency. These findings suggest that stressful conditions like homelessness may mitigate the impact of gender on self-reported dependency.     

Patterns of entry to community‐based services for families with children with developmental disabilities: implications for social work practice

The purpose of the present study was to understand, from parents' perspectives, the process of entry to community‐based services for children with developmental disabilities and to explore the relationship between patterns of entry and parent‐reported needs and priorities for service. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 43 mothers and 29 fathers of children with developmental disabilities approximately 6 months after the families entered community‐based childhood disability support services in Manitoba, Canada. Analysis of the coded interview data resulted in the identification of three process factors influential in the entry of families to community‐based support services: recognition of problems in child development, formal diagnosis of child disability and linkage between diagnostic services and the community‐based support system. Analysis of these processes identified four patterns of service entry associated with differing family needs for service: early entry, prompt entry, delayed entry and atypical entry. The results can be understood as a typology useful for social workers in the assessment of family needs and priorities at the point of entry to community‐based services.     

Beyond Assessment: Social Work Intervention in Family Court Enquiries

Most parents or carers who separate or divorce are able to makearrangements themselves about where their children will resideand how the children’s contact with the non-resident parentwill be managed. A further group of parents or carers are ableto come to agreement with the assistance of community- or court-baseddispute resolution/ mediation services. There are times, however,when disputes cannot be resolved without recourse to the courtsand, when this happens, the court will normally request thata welfare report be prepared by a CAFCASS (Children and FamilyCourt Advisory and Support Service) practitioner. While theboundary between assessment and intervention in social workis often less than clear, the commissioning of a court welfarereport in family proceedings strongly suggests an assessmentfocus and appears to carry little expectation that the practitionershould intervene in order to meet the needs of the childrenor adults involved. This article presents recent research findingsthat illustrate ways in which CAFCASS practitioners do go beyondthe assessment role expected of them in the course of the enquiriesthey undertake. Implications for policy and practice in thisarea of social work are then discussed.     

Global benefit-risk assessment in designing clinical trials and some statistical considerations of the method

When characterizing a therapy, the efficacy and the safety are two major aspects under consideration. In prescribing a therapy to a patient, a clinician puts the two aspects together and makes a decision based on a consolidated thought process. The global benefit-risk (GBR) measures proposed by Chuang-Stein et al. (Stat. Med. 1991; 10:1349-1359) are useful in facilitating the thinking, and creating the framework for making statistical comparisons based on benefit-risk point of view. This article describes how a GBR linear score was defined and used as the primary outcome measure in a clinical trial design. The robustness of the definitions of 'benefit' and 'risk' are evaluated using different criteria. The sensitivity of the pre-specified weights is also analyzed using alternative weights; one of those was determined by the relative to an identified distribution integral transformation approach (Biometrics 1958; 14:18-38). Statistical considerations are illustrated using pooled data from clinical trials studying antidepressant. The pros and cons for using GBR assessments in the setting of clinical trials are discussed.     

试论社区矫正评估对象的构建

社区矫正评估体系的构建对于我国社区矫正工作的开展具有重要意义,而评估对象内容和范围的确定是整个评估体系的基本组成部分。评估对象的确定是一个科学的过程,因此必须在一定的方法论指导下进行。美国的项目评估方法非常先进,可以作为确定评估对象的方法论。现阶段我国社区矫正评估对象包括五个方面的内容,对这些内容进行细化,可以得出具体的评估对象。     

Salmonella Prevalence Alone Is Not a Good Indicator of Poultry Food Safety

Salmonella is a leading cause of foodborne illness (i.e., salmonellosis) outbreaks, which on occasion are attributed to ground turkey. The poultry industry uses Salmonella prevalence as an indicator of food safety. However, Salmonella prevalence is only one of several factors that determine risk of salmonellosis. Consequently, a model for predicting risk of salmonellosis from individual lots of ground turkey as a function of Salmonella prevalence and other risk factors was developed. Data for Salmonella contamination (prevalence, number, and serotype) of ground turkey were collected at meal preparation. Scenario analysis was used to evaluate effects of model variables on risk of salmonellosis. Epidemiological data were used to simulate Salmonella serotype virulence in a dose‐response model that was based on human outbreak and feeding trial data. Salmonella prevalence was 26% (n = 100) per 25 g of ground turkey, whereas Salmonella number ranged from 0 to 1.603 with a median of 0.185 log per 25 g. Risk of salmonellosis (total arbitrary units (AU) per lot) was affected (p ≤ 0.05) by Salmonella prevalence, number, and virulence, by incidence and extent of undercooking, and by food consumption behavior and host resistance but was not (p > 0.05) affected by serving size, serving size distribution, or total bacterial load of ground turkey when all other risk factors were held constant. When other risk factors were not held constant, Salmonella prevalence was not correlated (r = ?0.39; p = 0.21) with risk of salmonellosis. Thus, Salmonella prevalence alone was not a good indicator of poultry food safety because other factors were found to alter risk of salmonellosis. In conclusion, a more holistic approach to poultry food safety, such as the process risk model developed in the present study, is needed to better protect public health from foodborne pathogens like Salmonella.     

关于思想政治理论课考核方式的探索--创建复合式课程考核体系

课程考核是教学的重要环节。思想政治理论课考试普遍存在着与教学目的不一致的缺失，亟待进行改革探索。本文力图探索利用电脑控制系统建立复合式考核体系操作平台，重过程轻结果，平时表现与期末考核结合，理论与实践结合，课内实践与课外实践结合，创建符合思想政治理论课特点的考核方式。     

The [R]Evolving Relationship Between Risk Assessment and Risk Management

In Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, the National Research Council recommends improvements in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's approach to risk assessment. The recommendations aim to increase the utility of these assessments, embedding them within a new risk‐based decision‐making framework. The framework involves first identifying the problem and possible options for addressing it, conducting related analyses, then reviewing the results and making the risk management decision. Experience with longstanding requirements for regulatory impact analysis provides insights into the implementation of this framework. First, neither the Science and Decisions framework nor the framework for regulatory impact analysis should be viewed as a static or linear process, where each step is completed before moving on to the next. Risk management options are best evaluated through an iterative and integrative procedure. The extent to which a hazard has been previously studied will strongly influence analysts’ ability to identify options prior to conducting formal analyses, and these options will be altered and refined as the analysis progresses. Second, experience with regulatory impact analysis suggests that legal and political constraints may limit the range of options assessed, contrary to both existing guidance for regulatory impact analysis and the Science and Decisions recommendations. Analysts will need to work creatively to broaden the range of options considered. Finally, the usefulness of regulatory impact analysis has been significantly hampered by the inability to quantify many health impacts of concern, suggesting that the scientific improvements offered within Science and Decisions will fill an crucial research gap.     

Policy responses to COVID-19 pandemic waves: Cross-region and cross-sector economic impact

This paper proposes a modelling approach to assess the cross-region and cross-sector economic impacts of the restrictions imposed by governments to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. The nationwide lockdown imposed in Italy during the first wave of the pandemic is used as a benchmark. However, the adopted approach allows an ex-ante assessment of alternative policy responses, in the event of successive pandemic waves, in order to rationalise the policy intervention and reach the best possible compromise between containing the risk of contagion and reducing economic losses. The used approach consists of a non-linear programming model based on a multiregional Input-Output (I-O) table, which guarantees greater flexibility than traditional I-O analysis. It is applied to estimate both direct and indirect losses of GDP and employment produced by alternative policy responses represented by general and differentiated lockdowns. The evidence deriving from the Italian experience shows a sort of learning process through successive waves based on the introduction of increasingly flexible and tailored policy responses to the pandemic.     

Risk Assessment and Alternatives Assessment: Comparing Two Methodologies

The selection and use of chemicals and materials with less hazardous profiles reflects a paradigm shift from reliance on risk minimization through exposure controls to hazard avoidance. This article introduces risk assessment and alternatives assessment frameworks in order to clarify a misconception that alternatives assessment is a less effective tool to guide decision making, discusses factors promoting the use of each framework, and also identifies how and when application of each framework is most effective. As part of an assessor's decision process to select one framework over the other, it is critical to recognize that each framework is intended to perform different functions. Although the two frameworks share a number of similarities (such as identifying hazards and assessing exposure), an alternatives assessment provides a more realistic framework with which to select environmentally preferable chemicals because of its primary reliance on assessing hazards and secondary reliance on exposure assessment. Relevant to other life cycle impacts, the hazard of a chemical is inherent, and although it may be possible to minimize exposure (and subsequently reduce risk), it is challenging to assess such exposures through a chemical's life cycle. Through increased use of alternatives assessments at the initial stage of material or product design, there will be less reliance on post facto risk‐based assessment techniques because the potential for harm is significantly reduced, if not avoided, negating the need for assessing risk in the first place.