Questo è quello che abbiamo trovato per te
Circulation, Volume 147, Issue 12, Page 988-989, March 21, 2023.
Circulation, Volume 147, Issue 12, Page 985-986, March 21, 2023.
Circulation, Volume 147, Issue 12, Page 987-987, March 21, 2023.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines include screening-colonoscopy and sequential high sensitivity fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT), with expectation of similar effectiveness based on the assumption of similar high adherence. However, adherence to screening-colonoscopy compared to sequential HSgFOBT has not been reported. In this randomized clinical trial, we assessed adherence and pathology findings for a single screening-colonoscopy versus sequential and non-sequential HSgFOBT.
Lilt, in Italia 476 morti al giorno. Al via Settimana sensibilizzazione con esami gratis
Due anticorpi monoclonali raddoppiano l’efficacia della cura
Procedura eseguita durante una normale gastroscopia
Ok Aifa rimborsabilità molecola, migliora probabilità guarigione
Prima terapia per mutazione che interessa 1% tumori polmonari
Nel 2022 in Italia 40.500 diagnosi. +16% in cinque anni
Spot Tv per campagna informativa nazionale ‘Hai prenotato vero?’
Autore/Fonte: Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal)
Spot Tv per campagna informativa nazionale ‘Hai prenotato vero?’
Persiani, camminare e mangiare sano fondamentali per la prevenzione
E’ un tampone nasale, risultati in 30 minuti
Objective
Most health literacy measures rely on subjective self-assessment. The Critical Thinking about Health Test is an objective measure that includes two multiple-choice questions (MCQs) for each of the nine Informed Health Choices Key Concepts included in the educational resources for secondary schools. The objective of this study was to determine cut-off scores for passing (the border between having and not having a basic understanding and the ability to apply the nine concepts) and mastery (the border between having mastered and not having mastered them).
Design
Using a combination of two widely used methods: Angoff’s and Nedelsky’s, a panel judged the likelihood that an individual on the border of passing and another on the border of having mastered the concepts would answer each MCQ correctly. The cut-off scores were determined by summing up the probability of answering each MCQ correctly. Their independent assessments were summarised and discussed. A nominal group technique was used to reach a consensus.
Setting
The study was conducted in secondary schools in East Africa.
Participants
The panel included eight individuals with 5 or more years’ experience in the following areas: evaluation of critical thinking interventions, curriculum development, teaching of lower secondary school and evidence-informed decision-making.
Results
The panel agreed that for a passing score, students had to answer 9 of the 18 questions and for a mastery score, 14 out of 18 questions correctly.
Conclusion
There was wide variation in the judgements made by individual panel members for many of the questions, but they quickly reached a consensus on the cut-off scores after discussions.
