The Control of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Blood Stream infections in England

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) blood stream infection (BSI) is a major healthcare burden in some but not all healthcare settings, and it is associated with 10%–20% mortality. The introduction of mandatory reporting in England of MRSA BSI in 2001 was followed in 2004 by the setting of target reductions for all National Health Service hospitals. The original national target of a 50% reduction in MRSA BSI was considered by many experts to be unattainable, and yet this goal has been far exceeded (∼80% reduction with rates still declining). The transformation from endemic to sporadic MRSA BSI involved the implementation of serial national infection prevention directives, and the deployment of expert improvement teams in organizations failed to meet their improvement trajectory targets. We describe and appraise the components of the major public health infection prevention campaign that yielded major reductions in MRSA infection. There are important lessons and opportunities for other healthcare systems where MRSA infection remains endemic

Ten commandments for the future of ageing research in the UK: a vision for action

Increases in longevity resulting from improvements in health care and living conditions together with a decrease in fertility rates have contributed to a shift towards an aged population profile. For the first time the UK has more people over age 60 than below 16 years of age. The increase in longevity has not been accompanied by an increase in disease-free life expectancy and research into ageing is required to improve the health and quality of life of older people. However, as the House of Lords reported, ageing research in the UK is not adequately structured and a clear vision and plan are urgently required. Hence, with the aim of setting a common vision for action in ageing research in the UK, a 'Spark Workshop' was organised. International experts from different disciplines related to ageing research gathered to share their perspectives and to evaluate the present status of ageing research in the UK. A detailed assessment of potential improvements was conducted and the prospective secondary gains were considered, which were subsequently distilled into a list of 'ten commandments'. We believe that these commandments, if followed, will help to bring about the necessary implementation of an action plan for ageing research in the UK, commensurate with the scale of the challenge, which is to transform the manifold opportunities of increased longevity into actual delivery of a society living not only for longer, but also healthier, wealthier and happier

A crisis for the future of forensic science: Lessons from the UK of the importance of epistemology for funding research and development

This study presents analysis of forensic science research funded by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) research councils (2009–2018), representing 150 projects with a cumulative value of £56.1 m (0.01% of the total UKRI budget over this time period). The findings indicate that dedicated forensic science funding represents only 46.0% of the projects included in the dataset. Research focussed on developing technological outputs represented 69.5% of the total funding (£37.2 m) in comparison to foundational research which represented 19.2% (£10.7 m). Traditional forensic science evidence types such as fingerprints and DNA received 1.3% and 5.1% of the total funding respectively, in comparison to digital and cyber projects which received 25.7%. These data offer insight into the scale of the funding crisis in forensic science in the UK, and the need to increase the resources available, to develop ways of articulating value and to ensure that both technological and foundational research are enabled

Strategic appraisal of environmental risks: a contrast between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

In this article, we compare two high-profile strategic policy reviews undertaken for the U.K. government on environmental risks: radioactive waste management and climate change. These reviews took very different forms, both in terms of analytic approach and deliberation strategy. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change was largely an exercise in expert modeling, building, within a cost-benefit framework, an argument for immediate reductions in carbon emissions. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, on the other hand, followed a much more explicitly deliberative and participative process, using multicriteria decision analysis to bring together scientific evidence and stakeholder and public values. In this article, we ask why the two reviews were different, and whether the differences are justified. We conclude that the differences were mainly due to political context, rather than the underpinning science, and as a consequence that, while in our view “fit for purpose,” they would both have been stronger had they been less different. Stern's grappling with ethical issues could have been strengthened by a greater degree of public and stakeholder engagement, and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management's handling of issues of uncertainty could have been strengthened by the explicitly probabilistic framework of Stern

Strategic appraisal of environmental risks: a contrast between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

In this article, we compare two high-profile strategic policy reviews undertaken for the U.K. government on environmental risks: radioactive waste management and climate change. These reviews took very different forms, both in terms of analytic approach and deliberation strategy. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change was largely an exercise in expert modeling, building, within a cost-benefit framework, an argument for immediate reductions in carbon emissions. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, on the other hand, followed a much more explicitly deliberative and participative process, using multicriteria decision analysis to bring together scientific evidence and stakeholder and public values. In this article, we ask why the two reviews were different, and whether the differences are justified. We conclude that the differences were mainly due to political context, rather than the underpinning science, and as a consequence that, while in our view “fit for purpose,” they would both have been stronger had they been less different. Stern's grappling with ethical issues could have been strengthened by a greater degree of public and stakeholder engagement, and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management's handling of issues of uncertainty could have been strengthened by the explicitly probabilistic framework of Stern

Strategic appraisal of environmental risks: a contrast between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

In this article, we compare two high-profile strategic policy reviews undertaken for the U.K. government on environmental risks: radioactive waste management and climate change. These reviews took very different forms, both in terms of analytic approach and deliberation strategy. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change was largely an exercise in expert modeling, building, within a cost-benefit framework, an argument for immediate reductions in carbon emissions. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, on the other hand, followed a much more explicitly deliberative and participative process, using multicriteria decision analysis to bring together scientific evidence and stakeholder and public values. In this article, we ask why the two reviews were different, and whether the differences are justified. We conclude that the differences were mainly due to political context, rather than the underpinning science, and as a consequence that, while in our view “fit for purpose,” they would both have been stronger had they been less different. Stern's grappling with ethical issues could have been strengthened by a greater degree of public and stakeholder engagement, and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management's handling of issues of uncertainty could have been strengthened by the explicitly probabilistic framework of Stern