Part, Chapter, Paragraph
1 I, 2. 10. 1| may not be sufficient to measure the prevalence of diseases
2 II, 4. 1 | based on the disability measure: limitation in activities
3 II, 5. 3. 2| EUROCARE project was set to measure and explain differences
4 II, 5. 3. 8| Cancer prevalence, the measure of living people with a
5 II, 5. 4. 2| Despite the simplicity to measure such condition, mortality
6 II, 5. 5. 3| reviews~ ~It is difficult to measure incidence and prevalence.
7 II, 5. 5. 3| in Europe~ ~ ~Country / Measure~Availability of data item?~ ~
8 II, 5. 5. 3| should support activities to measure disordered eating in Europe
9 II, 5. 5. 3| is an important outcome measure for people with schizophrenia.
10 II, 5. 5. 3| time. The methodology to measure prevalence and the case
11 II, 5. 5. 3| scales have been used to measure disability in MS, aimed
12 II, 5. 9. 4| European cities. It aims to measure exposures, collect information
13 II, 5. 10. 4| linked to them and the first measure to limit the latter. On
14 II, 5. 12. 5| drinking is also the key measure of secondary prevention
15 II, 5. 14. 3| ability to chew (subjective measure) and difficulty to chew
16 II, 5. 14. 3| chew hard foods (objective measure) have been found to be strongly
17 II, 5. 14. 3| dissatisfaction with oral functioning measure. Studies have also shown
18 II, 5. 14. 3| young people. The prevalence measure in a random sample of 1379
19 II, 6. 3. 2| hospitals and services as a measure of own performance using
20 II, 6. 3. 5| an effective preventive measure. In Europe, the last case
21 II, 6. 3. 6| horses. As a preventive measure, all slaughtered pigs and
22 II, 6. 3. 7| and the main preventive measure is to minimise the risk
23 II, 7. 2 | injuries that are used to measure trends and identify factors
24 II, 9 | an essential continuing measure to prevent congenital rubella
25 II, 9. 1. 2| status could be an effective measure to prevent neural tube defects (
26 II, 9. 1. 2| an essential continuing measure to prevent congenital rubella
27 II, 9. 2. 2| of indicators which would measure this subject, and adopted
28 II, 9. 2. 3| to obtain any even crude measure of the comparable incidence
29 II, 9. 2. 3| unable to take action to measure it. This is valid also for
30 II, 9. 2. 3| However, by any individual measure under most European countries
31 II, 9. 2. 3| uncovered. As an outcome measure of service failure, suicide
32 II, 9. 2. 7| Towards A Common Framework To Measure Health Status. Eurostat/
33 II, 9. 3. 1| Towards A Common Framework To Measure Health Status. Eurostat/
34 II, 9. 3. 2| healthcare services must measure interventions implemented
35 II, 9. 3. 2| medical birth registers to measure severe maternal morbidity.~ ~
36 II, 9. 5. 2| principles of epidemiology can measure the status of health within
37 II, 9. 5. 6| Towards A Common Framework To Measure Health Status. Eurostat/
38 III, 10. 1. 1| physical activity are both difficult to measure (Parsons et al, 1999; Titchenal,
39 III, 10. 2. 1| interview survey instrument to measure smoking habits in a population,
40 III, 10. 2. 1| formally introduced this measure as a response to health-risks
41 III, 10. 2. 1| risk factor assessment may measure the potential of prevention.
42 III, 10. 2. 1| universal or even commonly used measure or instrument yet (Bull
43 III, 10. 2. 1| questions are needed to measure activity (e.g. assessing
44 III, 10. 2. 1| However, in Europe, this measure is mostly practised on a
45 III, 10. 2. 1| countries, even mandatory measure. However, the industrial
46 III, 10. 2. 1| reasons, many obesity studies measure the effect of interventions
47 III, 10. 2. 1| incorporated in every policy measure. Obesity urgently needs
48 III, 10. 2. 4| may not be sufficient to measure the prevalence of diseases
49 III, 10. 3. 1| This integrated health measure, which combines information
50 III, 10. 3. 1| effectiveness of any preventative measure. Another source of radon
51 III, 10. 4. 1| mortality, in adults. The measure of exposure combines the
52 III, 10. 4. 2| Depending on the nature of the measure, food law, and in particular
53 III, 10. 4. 2| law as appropriate to the measure under consideration.~ ~Risk
54 III, 10. 4. 2| alert system of: (a) any measure they adopt which is aimed
55 III, 10. 4. 2| dose-response curve and the measure(s) of intakes that would
56 III, 10. 4. 2| legally allowed in foods. The measure of acute dietary exposure
57 III, 10. 5. 3| 1989 on the introduction of measure to encourage improvements
58 III, 10. 6. 1| revised version of the OSS-3 measure of social support. The basic
59 IV, 11. 1. 1| difficult to quantify or measure, the explicit goal is to
60 IV, 11. 1. 3| mechanisms.~ ~In order to measure the health system’s contribution
61 IV, 11. 1. 3| large-scale data sources to measure and improve health system
62 IV, 11. 1. 3| criticisms of any approach to measure performance based on aggregate
63 IV, 11. 1. 3| incredibly difficult to measure and even more difficult
64 IV, 11. 1. 3| health status indicators to measure performance (Retzlaff-Roberts
65 IV, 11. 1. 3| those based on a single measure may be misleading and uninformative,
66 IV, 11. 1. 3| unsolved debates on how to measure and use performance data
67 IV, 11. 1. 3| better understand how to measure performance and how to integrate
68 IV, 11. 1. 4| health status is an adequate measure of health care need or that
69 IV, 11. 1. 5| thereby differing in what they measure, but all enacted to meet
70 IV, 11. 1. 6| development of an appropriate measure of efficiency in a complex
71 IV, 11. 1. 6| attempted to generate a single measure of efficiency, or productivity
72 IV, 11. 1. 6| innovative in developing a measure of health system productivity
73 IV, 11. 1. 6| need. They serve both to measure the costs of treating a
74 IV, 11. 1. 6| specifics of the case-mix measure and/or the application to
75 IV, 11. 2. 2| difficult to accurately measure and compare across countries.
76 IV, 11. 6. 3| study has been conducted to measure the change in progressiveness
77 IV, 11. 6. 3| 2000 devised an alternative measure of fairness of healthcare
78 IV, 11. 6. 3| expenditures at country level) and measure different things (proportionality
79 IV, 11. 6. 4| information at individual level to measure: a) the relative sickness
80 IV, 11. 6. 4| research it is possible to measure the quality of the healthcare
81 IV, 11. 6. 4| situation that exists and to measure changes or trends over a
82 IV, 11. 6. 5| Comment: Utilization as a measure of equity by Mooney, Hall,
83 IV, 11. 6. 5| 1991): "Utilisation as a measure of equity: Weighing heat?"
84 IV, 12. 1 | against cancer contained 22 measure, covering the fields of
85 IV, 13.Acr | difficult to accurately measure and compare across countries.
86 IV, 13. 6. 2| difficult to define and measure. Screening services and
87 IV, 13. 6. 2| however, a good outcome measure. But in general, assessing
