Harvard article on popular science (see link) is an interesting article to discuss the future of applied research in the academia. The underlying assumption of this type of research is based on the increasing level of participation and collaboration among interested individuals. In other words, by working together we decrease the margin of error and we get more work done. This is true almost everywhere, working as group most likely to increase efficiencies and effectiveness of our researcher. The widespread of the internet and mobile phone (ICT) have increased people connected and the possibility to collect different type of data. In addition, these ICT is changing how scientists and citizen interact. The article cited different initiatives that have started harnessing this type of research (foldit, Test my Brain, and so on…). The implication of this type of research can be disputed because of many internal and external factors that may affect this research. For instance, one can think of data quality, citizen knowledge, and research design, and the complexity of the research question. The best avenue is a combination of both citizen research and researchers collaborating together by doing so, it will help disseminate knowledge within the communities. What do you think is the future of citizen research? Please leave a comment
Today, I am really concerned about the transparency of any market that I may think of. The famous Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) that I have been taught to be the key for an efficient market. back then, I did not have enough knowledge to question the underlying assumptions behind it. It is not late to ask people to rally and ask to dismantle any financial market and financial institution. It is really hard to do but we need to start to think about better alternatives. I will try to post a serie of facts and reasons to bring our thinking and engineering to find a better system that will enable everyone to take risk and invest and make a living from his/her sweat.
- The first important underlying assumption that make EMH a bogus of economics thinking it allows fewer to take advantage of many who are working day and night to payback their loan. While the few are enjoy sunny beach and luxury cars. Everyone should acknowledge that when wealth and liquidity is monopolized can create destruction (to big to fail concept).
- Few of us fail to understand that liquidity is important for a market to function. when the liquidity in the market is limited all industries suffer, and everyone is waiting for the bankers to relieve the market. the best example I can think of is anemia. Anemia is a condition that develops when your blood lacks enough healthy red blood cells or hemoglobin. Similarly, Money is like red blood which help the market to function.
- The current banking system is getting richer and richer, and very single time the market lacks liquidity, FED intervenes and rescue the market. Unfortunately it comes with borrowing cost. In Both case (e.g., with or without the Fed intervention) the market is one more time worse.
Worst our business school unfortunately only taught the skills how to rip others off. I am politely asking that everyone contribute to disseminate the ability of the masses to come with a clever or smart system that can bring fairness to the market.
Time has come to condemn what is happening and what is going to happen if we don’t stop the selfish behavior of capitalist mind that has been nurtured and disseminated over time through business school and economic thoughts. This thoughts and profit maximizing behavior without constraint. The lack of teaching ethics in these institution (e.g., business schools, economics and so on) will only exacerbate the predatory behavior of inexperienced capitalists on people Who are experiencing more and more short memory span. I would like to address the issue of the medical debt as one of many problems that many people are experiencing not only in the US but also around the world. This problem is institutionally created because of the hold belief that our high educational institutions can solve our problems and make everybody better off. The medical debt is multifaceted because health providers have become more of profit oriented industry which is wrong approach to solve any health crisis. Health care like education can’t be treated as any other markets because the end consumers in this two market are the most vulnerable. In health care for instance, when someone is sick, one will sell anything and he will trust and buy anything that will heal him/her. One can see this predatory behavior in observing the raise of organ market. I am calling every body to raise against the profit maximizing behavior and predatory behavior that some of our citizen are using to control our fear from sickness.
Great Circle is not-for profit organization that strive to help Missouri’s children and families in difficult circumstances. Yesterday, I attended the Graduate Students Association monthly meeting at Mizzou and one of the managers of Great Circle shared with the audience an interesting program, through which a person participate in soliciting donation to purchase Christmas presents for one of the kids living in the Great Circle campus.
I am writing this blog to share the information so that we can help these kids in need.
I am also interested to create a program where I can sponsor someone back in my home country in his/her school in the future years.
Please if you have any ideas to make this happen reach me out.
Population health management overlaps considerably with public health, in that public health has more of global perspective on changing individual or community behavior to control the spread of a disease or an epidemic (More prevention than treatment), and improve the overall well-being of the community. In short, public health has strong hold on preventing occurrences of diseases and promoting healthy behavior.
The population health is concerned with improving the health outcome of certain population within a given location. By summing up all the interventions implemented within a given locations “Communities” will improve the overall health outcomes of that particular population therefore achieving what a public health program seeks to achieve.
Federal and state government are major contributors to public health programs of their preventive nature. On the other hand, population health programs are initiated by health care system when there are evidence or need to manage diseases or risk factors associated to improve given health outcomes.
Determining the fine lines between public and population health programs will be detrimental in future funding of these programs. I argue that failure to do so may create conflict in future funding for public health programs because of population health initiatives, which may results in spillover in the future if health care system undergo financial calamities.
(Kindig D, Stoddart G. What is population health? Am J Public Health. 2003;93:380–383.)
(University of Wisconsin, Population Health Sciences. Improving Population Health: Policy, Practice and Research. What Is the Difference Between Population Health and Public Health? http://www.improvingpopulationhealth.org/blog/what-is-thedifference- between-population-health-and-publichealth.html. Accessed January 7, 2014.)
Single payer health insurance can’t be a reality without the political well of the people. The Vermont initiative is a good example on how the American political well can show failure, though the business case studies of the initiative support it. The premise of the administrative cost to run the single payer program can surpass the projected savings from launching this type of program. The irony steams from the ability of the american business model to turn failures into a successful opportunities. Apparently, even with more political well, the harm of establishing any social program to serve the poor is far out reaching.
“In reality, the Vermont plan was abandoned because of legitimate political considerations. Shumlin was first elected governor in 2010 promising a single-payer system. But in the 2014 election, his Republican opponent campaigned against single payer. Shumlin won the popular vote by a single-percentage-point margin, 46% to 45%, which sent the election to the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives; though the House reelected him easily in January, a clear public mandate for his health care agenda was nowhere in evidence.”
McDonough JE. The demise of Vermont’s single-payer plan. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(17):1584-5.
In this blog, I would like to discuss the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program.
The program was established by the Congress in 2010 and in March 2014, extended funding through March 2015, building on the initial $1.5 billion investment. This program aims at providing mothers the skills and knowledge to raise their kids from birth to kindergarten. To qualify for this program, the fed funded community assessment need to determine the eligibility criteria of at-risk families.
- Eligible families residing in communities in need of such services, as identified in a State needs assessment
- Low-income eligible families
- Eligible families who are pregnant women under age 21
- Eligible families with a history of child abuse or neglect or have had interactions with child welfare services
- Eligible families with a history of substance abuse or need substance abuse treatment
- Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home
- Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement
- Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities
- Eligible families who, or that include individuals serving or formerly serving in the Armed Forces, including those with members who have had multiple deployments outside the US.
- A woman who is pregnant, and the father of the child if available, or
- A parent or primary caregiver of the child, including grandparents or other relatives and foster parents serving as the child’s primary caregiver from birth until kindergarten entry, including a noncustodial parent with an ongoing relationship with, and at times provides physical care for the child.
Evidence based programs targeted by MIECHV program
Early Head Start – Home Visiting
Early Intervention Program for Adolescent Mothers
Early Start (New Zealand)
Healthy Families America (HFA)
Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY)
Maternal Early Childhood Sustained Home Visiting Program (MESCH)
Minding the Baby
Nurse Family Partnership (NFP)
Oklahoma Community-Based Family Resource and Support Program
Parents as Teachers (PAT)
Play and Learning Strategies (PALS) Infant
Home Visiting Helps At-Risk Families Across the U.S.