New Start Research Articles

Teaching staff are often exposed to stressors. Stress as a state of emotional imbalance reduces work efficiency and makes the person more vulnerable to challenges. The teachers’ view of stress is one of a state of imbalance, tension. Workplace stressors such as overwork, overtime, as well as the lack of clear goals of the institution, poor communication between colleagues lead

Teaching staff are often exposed to stressors. Stress as a state of emotional imbalance reduces work efficiency and makes the person more vulnerable to challenges. The teachers’ view of stress is one of a state of imbalance, tension. Workplace stressors such as overwork, overtime, as well as the lack of clear goals of the institution, poor communication between colleagues lead to physical and social isolation of the person. The development of an anti-stress code through the needs of affiliation, security, the novelty of the experience, the relaxations methods, as well as the involvement in the NEW–START program are obvious premises in this context.

Facilitating bias in cost-effectiveness analysis: CHEERS 2022 and the creation of assumption-driven imaginary value claims in health technology assessment

The current standards for health technology cost-effectiveness assessment rest on the creation of lifetime assumption-driven modeled simulations for imaginary pricing and consequent patient access recommendations. A recent BMJ paper reports a detailed assessment of 8,192 cost-effectiveness analyses, concluding that industry-sponsored modeled claims were more likely to publish incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) below a USD 50,000 threshold than non-industry sponsored studies, supporting the claim that the product was cost-effective. This is unsurprising; indeed, the opposite can occur with a modeled claim deliberately resulting in ICER is excess of USD 50,000. This methodology is well entrenched with the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 guidance for creating imaginary cost-effectiveness modeled claims ensuring the opportunity for deliberately manipulated cost-effectiveness claims. This overlooks limitations imposed by fundamental measurement, rendering assumption-driven simulations redundant analytical exercises. Manipulation of ICERs and claims for cost-effectiveness are mathematically impossible; including cost-utility thresholds, because the preference or utilities supporting creation of quality-of-life years (QALYs) are ordinal scores. Nevertheless, with the promotion of CHEERS 2022, the belief in imaginary modeled value claims is both facilitated and reinforced. With CHEERS 2022, there is a concerted effort, largely in self-interest, to perpetuate the current belief system. This is a self-defeating strategy. Rather than admitting to the deficiencies of assumption-driven simulated imaginary claims, leaders are maintaining that health system decision makers can ignore standards of normal science and fundamental measurement in value claims for pharmaceutical products. This disregard of standards that are commonplace in the sciences and mainstream social sciences perpetuates the opportunity for self-serving modeled claims; where models are a marketing vehicle leading to sponsored systematic bias in formulary submissions. This supports the need for a NEW START paradigm for health technology assessment, focusing on evaluable single-attribute value claims, meeting the required standards for normal science and fundamental measurement.

Facilitating bias in cost-effectiveness analysis: CHEERS 2022 and the creation of assumption-driven imaginary value claims in health technology assessment.

The current standards for health technology cost-effectiveness assessment rest on the creation of lifetime assumption-driven modeled simulations for imaginary pricing and consequent patient access recommendations. A recent BMJ paper reports a detailed assessment of 8,192 cost-effectiveness analyses, concluding that industry-sponsored modeled claims were more likely to publish incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) below a USD 50,000 threshold than non-industry sponsored studies, supporting the claim that the product was cost-effective. This is unsurprising; indeed, the opposite can occur with a modeled claim deliberately resulting in ICER is excess of USD 50,000. This methodology is well entrenched with the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 guidance for creating imaginary cost-effectiveness modeled claims ensuring the opportunity for deliberately manipulated cost-effectiveness claims. This overlooks limitations imposed by fundamental measurement, rendering assumption-driven simulations redundant analytical exercises. Manipulation of ICERs and claims for cost-effectiveness are mathematically impossible; including cost-utility thresholds, because the preference or utilities supporting creation of quality-of-life years (QALYs) are ordinal scores. Nevertheless, with the promotion of CHEERS 2022, the belief in imaginary modeled value claims is both facilitated and reinforced. With CHEERS 2022, there is a concerted effort, largely in self-interest, to perpetuate the current belief system. This is a self-defeating strategy. Rather than admitting to the deficiencies of assumption-driven simulated imaginary claims, leaders are maintaining that health system decision makers can ignore standards of normal science and fundamental measurement in value claims for pharmaceutical products. This disregard of standards that are commonplace in the sciences and mainstream social sciences perpetuates the opportunity for self-serving modeled claims; where models are a marketing vehicle leading to sponsored systematic bias in formulary submissions. This supports the need for a NEW START paradigm for health technology assessment, focusing on evaluable single-attribute value claims, meeting the required standards for normal science and fundamental measurement.

Hovering Clouds of Arsenals across the Globe: Taking into Account Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

Nuclear politics is always a tricky business at international level. To understand the nuclear politics is not easy for the teachers, students, researchers and scholars of nuclear politics and global affairs. Arms Control doesn’t means to control or reduce the arsenals, it is sometimes to build arsenals to influence the opponent as two superpowers expanded their nuclear arsenals and raised the slogan of arms control. In this sense, the world witnessed hovering clouds of arsenals across the globe during the cold war era when USSR and USA plunged into conflict in Korean Peninsula, Cuban Missile Crisis and in European vicinity. Although numbers of agreements have been signed by powerful states to avoid nuclear tussles and they remained successful but the race between USSR and USA stimulated other countries to build nuclear arsenals. The bitter reality is that some countries achieved nuclear technology some trying to get like Iran. However, except nuclear issues there are several issues in global politics because now the world has become multipolar and more interestingly China is the emerging global power and influencing the states across the globe. On the other hand, number of treaties have lost their worth or been withdrawn such like INF Treaty and NEW START Treaty is going to expire in February 2026. The question is that what world leading powers learnt from history in sense ofnuclear tussles? Because INF has been terminated and New START is also going to be expired. What would be next? What will be the consequences of the termination of INF at first hand and New START Treaty if it would be terminated? This research attempts to find out these main questions through descriptive analytical research Methodology.

The New START Extension: The End or the Beginning?

The New START Extension: The End or the Beginning?

New Legs for New START?

New Legs for New START?

Russia-U.S. Relations After the Election: "We Will Be Ready for a New Start"

Russia-U.S. Relations After the Election: "We Will Be Ready for a New Start"

From the Editor of Sexuality and Disability: A New Start and a New Beginning Built Upon the Past

From the Editor of Sexuality and Disability: A New Start and a New Beginning Built Upon the Past

Polanyi’s Economics and the New Start in Europe

Polanyi’s Economics and the New Start in Europe

A new start for ALK transcription

A new start for ALK transcription

A new year, a new start

A new year, a new start

Campus for moms

Having a baby and taking a new start. A program for women on maternity leave, teaches them how to give birth to a startup.

Viewpoint: A new start

Viewpoint: A new start

1940 – 1949: A New Start from the Chaos of War

1940 – 1949: A New Start from the Chaos of War

Dental expertise key to new start for CQC says BDA

Dental expertise key to new start for CQC says BDA

Développement et émergence : nouvelle frontière de la gouvernance économique globale

La création du G20 marque une avancée majeure en matière de gouvernance économique globale. En novembre 2008, pour la première fois, les chefs d’Etat et de gouvernement du G20 se sont réunis. La question du développement y prenant une dimension nouvelle, l’objectif de cet article est de mieux comprendre les défis du monde en développement traités lors de la présidence française du G20 en 2011, ainsi que les politiques et les stratégies à mettre en place afin de faire de la crise et de cette période critique un nouveau départ pour soutenir les pays en développement, et particulièrement les plus pauvres dans leur processus d'émergence économique.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) ‘really is’ the standard of care across the UK

Introduction: In the UK the introduction of SLNB in women with clinical and Ultrasound normal axillae was rolled out with a standardized approach defined by the NEW START program. Our aim was to assess availability and uniformity of practice within breast units and across deaneries and cancer networks.

Anaphylaxis to dye during breast surgery

We read with interest Dr Robinsons’ recent letter concerning anaphylaxis to dye during breast surgery [1]. She reported a high incidence of anaphylaxis to Patent Blue V dye (Guerbet, Cedex, France) in a small number of patients over a 21-month period, compared with the reported incidence of 0.86% allergic reactions to Patent Blue V dye from the combined datasets of the ALMANAC trial and NEW START training programme (n = 7917) [2]. These patients were given either 2 ml aqueous solution of 2.5% Patent Blue V diluted to 5 ml with saline 0.9% or 2 ml undiluted patent blue V dye. It has been shown that there is a trend towards fewer allergic reactions with smaller volumes of blue dye, with no difference in the success of sentinel lymph node identification with dye volumes of 1–5 ml [3]. Considering the high incidence of allergic reactions, could Dr Robinson’s figures relate to higher volume of blue dye usage?

A new start for the society journal of DGLM and SALC

No abstract available

A new start for Science and Engineering of Composite Materials

No abstract available