PubMed · 10276535
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R G Rosenberg. 1986. Join the revolution!. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10276535/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Very few studies have been done of occupational health provision across an entire employment sector and universities are particularly understudied. The British government published updated guidance on university occupational health in 2006. AIM: To describe the occupational health services to all the universities in the UK. METHODS: All 117 universities in the UK were included. Detailed surveys were carried out in 2002, 2003 and 2004 requesting self-completed information from each university occupational health service. This paper presents information on general characteristics of the service, staffing, services provided and outcome reporting. RESULTS: There was variation in the type of occupational health provision; half the universities had an in-house occupational health service, 32% used a contractor, 9% relied on the campus primary care or student health service and 9% had ad hoc or no arrangements. In all, 93 of the 117 (79%) universities responded to the detailed questionnaire, the response rate being higher from in-house services and from larger universities. There was a wide variation in staffing levels but the average service was small, staffed by one full-time nurse with one half-day of doctor time per week and a part-time clerical or administrative member of staff. A range of services was provided but, again, there was wide variation between universities. CONCLUSIONS: It is unclear if the occupational health provision to universities is proportional to their needs. The wide variation suggests that some universities may have less adequate services than others.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Seven years after the end of war in Kosovo, Final Status Negotiations have begun to determine the long-term political future of the province. This article provides an overview of the present situation regarding ethnic groups and their relations in Kosovo's health care system that might be helpful in preparing for the array of potential ramifications and repercussions that could arise at the conclusion of the negotiations. METHODS: A review of the literature (including grey) was performed, and 16 interviews and two focus groups with key informants were conducted in Kosovo during October and November 2004. In addition, six informal discussions were held in-person or by telephone in London. Information collected in 2004 was re-confirmed and partially updated in October and November 2005, when three additional interviews were conducted in Kosovo. RESULTS: Ongoing ethnic tensions in Kosovo, mainly between the Albanian and Serb populations, perpetuate a rigidly segregated health care system. Some other minority communities, such as the Roma, Ashkali and Egyptians, are afflicted by the double burden of getting caught up in the middle of these ethnic disputes and at the same time suffering from poverty and discrimination. CONCLUSION: While efforts have been put forward to promote peace-building within Kosovo's post-war health sector, very little progress has been achieved in fostering ethnic integration, reconciliation, cooperation or even co-existence. This failure reflects Kosovo's broader unresolved inter-ethnic problems. Final Status Negotiations are one of the last opportunities for the international community to address the problems of ethnic segregation in the province.