PubMed · 11637807
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
H A Bosman-Jelgersma. 1983. [Not Available].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11637807/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
PURPOSE: Precision medicine, also known as personalized medicine, enables the provision of tailored health services to patients. In the prevention, early detection, and treatment of cancers, precision medicine is highly promising, given the increasing use of genomic profiling for diagnosis and adapting therapies in several tumor types. Artificial Intelligence (AI) can support this process by analyzing vast amounts of relevant data. However, high-quality data and financial investments in the health system are essential for the implementation of precision medicine and AI solutions in routine cancer care. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Building on the quantitative outcomes of a foresight exercise published in another study, this article collects qualitative data to gain more detailed insights into the future of precision oncology in Belgium and discusses the role of AI in this field. It reports the results of a series of expert workshops, focusing on four hypothetical future scenarios that are centered around technological and economic issues that must be overcome for the widespread use of precision oncology in Belgium. FINDINGS: The study concludes that all four scenarios discussed in the workshops would require supportive policy measures in Belgium, which should go beyond mere technological and economic considerations, such as involving patient associations and the public in policy design or creating multi-disciplinary expert groups for precision medicine. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to employ foresight methodology to illustrate possible future scenarios, scrutinize feasible approaches for implementing precision oncology in Belgium, and discuss the use of AI in this context.
IRSN (France) and SCK-CEN (Belgium), two institutes of research and expertise in radiation protection and nuclear safety, simultaneously organised a very similar public opinion survey in their respective countries in November 2002. The study explores subjects such as: major people's concerns, perception of environmental risks, perception of risks in general, the role of experts in decision making, opinions on nuclear matters and aspects of nuclear emergency preparedness. In each country, more than 1000 citizens representing the general public have been consulted in face-to-face interviews. The field work has been performed by professional companies (BVA in France and Research International in Belgium). The paper shows that industrial and technological risks are not perceived as one of the major public concerns, although many other risks, of different nature are considered to be high. The actions of the authorities to provide protection against the consequences of many risks or disasters are not considered to be sufficient, and many respondents claim not to believe the information they receive. There exists a large difference between the opinion of French and Belgian public, and within the different language groups in Belgium, with regard to who should be in charge of the control of the hazardous industries. Many of the "actors" within the nuclear industry are not known by the respondents. The perception of the technical competence or the truth being told shows large variations between the main actors (such as members of the nuclear industry, the government or the media). Majorities within the population believe that a disaster as serious as the Chernobyl one can happen in their country and that in case of a nuclear accident, the authorities would not be capable to protect the population adequately.
Feedback of operating experience has always been an important issue in the nuclear industry. A probabilistic safety analysis (PSA) can be used as a tool to analyse how an operational event might have developed adversely in order to obtain a quantitative assessment of the safety significance of the event. This process is called PSA-based event analysis (PSAEA). A comprehensive set of PSAEA guidelines was developed by an international project. The main characteristics of this methodology are summarised. This approach to analyse incidents can be used to meet different objectives of utilities or nuclear regulators. The paper describes the main objectives and the experiences of the Belgian nuclear regulatory organisation AVN with the application of PSA-based event analysis. Some interesting aspects of the process of PSAEA are further developed and underlined. Several case studies are discussed and an overview of the obtained results is given. Finally, the interest of a broad and interactive forum on PSAEA is highlighted.