URHIS 50 Workshop - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 8
About This Presentation
Title:

URHIS 50 Workshop

Description:

Tina Blain, Brussells, Belgium. Dr Neville Calleja, Malta. Dr Guilia Cesaroni, Italy. Norbert Kiss, Budapest, Hungary. Dr Ifeoma Onyia, Liverpool, UK ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:49
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 9
Provided by: NTUs72
Category:
Tags: urhis | workshop

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: URHIS 50 Workshop


1
  • URHIS 50 Workshop

2
Workshop Groups
  • Group 1
  • Mr Constantinos Astreos, Manchester, UK
  • Tina Blain, Brussells, Belgium
  • Dr Neville Calleja, Malta
  • Dr Guilia Cesaroni, Italy
  • Norbert Kiss, Budapest, Hungary
  • Dr Ifeoma Onyia, Liverpool, UK
  • Ms Lesley Patterson, Manchester, UK
  • Dr Jude Robinson, Liverpool, UK
  • Dr Islay Gemmell, Manchester, UK
  • Group 2
  • Professor Michal Bedlicki, Krakow, Poland
  • Professor Ioan Bocsan, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Dr Pais, Clemente, Lisboa, Portugal
  • Professor Jurate Klumbiene, Kaunas, Lithuania
  • Dr Andre Ochoa, Paris, France
  • Ms Angela Pilkington Merseyside, UK
  • Jolanta Skrule Riga, Latvia
  • Group 3
  • Mr Kaspar Bams, Utrecht, Netherlands
  • Ms Jana Brozova, Prague, Czech Republic
  • Dr Nesrin Cilingiroglu, Ankara, Turkey
  • Dr Wolfgang Hellmeier, Bielefeld, Germany
  • Dr Igor Krampac, Maribor, Slovenia
  • Dr Alexis Macherianakis, Manchester, UK
  • Dr Arpana Verma, Manchester, UK
  • Dr Yannis Skalkidis, Athens, Greece
  • Chris White, Brussells, Belgium
  • Group 4
  • Dr Christopher Birt, Liverpool, UK
  • Dr Maria Irina Brumboiu, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Professor Alain Deccache, Brussels, Belgium
  • Dominique Doumont, Brussels, Belgium
  • Professor Dick Heller, Manchester, UK
  • Ms Heidi Lyshol, Oslo, Norway
  • Dr Iveta Rajnicova-Nagyova, Kosice, Slovakia

3
Questions for Discussion
  • Start at different indicator sections
  • Have we captured urban health issues?
  • Are the definitions written clearly?
  • Are there too many?
  • Suggestions for improvements?
  • If you could remove 10 indicators, which ones
    would they be?

4
Feedback Group 1
  • Problems
  • Q3 Population by ethnicity
  • Definition may vary between countries
  • Countries may refuse
  • Q5 Mothers age
  • Also below 15
  • Q6
  • Projections longer than 10 years ? Value
  • Q7
  • Not available in most countries but of relevance
  • Q9
  • Sources vary between countries most have
    register but some has survey
  • Q10
  • Definition?
  • Q11
  • Definition of city, conurbation?
  • Q12
  • Value of items
  • Look at migration in and out of city

5
Feedback Group 2
  • Section 3
  • Tackled urban population well
  • Q35
  • Drinks daily what is a drink
  • Q36
  • Friut consumption in grams-daily consumption?
  • Q39
  • Appendix 2 qs relevance
  • Does it relate to social isolation
  • Is it validated across different populations
  • Q42
  • Relates to where live/work
  • subjective?
  • Adding
  • No of patients/GP
  • Age groupings to be uniform thru questionnaire
  • Other section
  • Change Chlamydia to STD

6
Feedback Group 3
  • Add
  • No. of gt65 living alone (institutions)
  • Welfare recipients
  • Problems
  • If making international comparisons need
    countries to collect same types of data
  • Ethnicity
  • Not the same in every country ?exclude
  • Perinatal mortality
  • Change to x 100,000
  • Exclude Breast Cancer
  • Low birth rate - ?exclude
  • Road Traffic Injuries
  • Define source
  • Should be deaths or define injuries
  • Occupational
  • Definition clearer
  • Change bringing about to resulting in
  • Distress
  • How to define exclude

7
Feedback Group 4
  • Negative Indicators propose positive indicators
    so health rather than illness indicators
  • Breast cancer exclude
  • Cervical screening remain
  • Q48 exclude
  • Q49 reformulate
  • How many people hospitalised are uninsured?
  • Reflect homeless other populations
  • Q50 more elaboration, more age groups and
    details
  • Q34-36 frequency of data collection and when
    was last collection, how measurements made
  • Q36 gender differences
  • Q37 more clarification on ht/wt and more detail
    for age groups
  • Add
  • q on saturated fat consumption
  • Physical activity

8
General Feedback
  • Remove colloquial terms
  • Mortality rates
  • Use standard rates
  • Elderly alone
  • May not be an accurate indicator as they may have
    external support
  • Use unmet need
  • Prevalence for diabetes
  • Proxy for access?
  • Cervical cancer
  • HPV vaccination programme may make it redundant
  • Prevalence with Hypertension
  • If the urban prevalence of a disease mirrors the
    national prevalence, should it be included?
  • Should focus on whether an indicator is an
    important urban issue
  • Standardised groups
  • Deadline 25th April 2007
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com