Search

This paper investigates different uses of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) in national journal rankings and discusses the merits of supplementing metrics with expert assessment. Our focus is national journal rankings used as evidence to support decisions about the distribution of institutional funding or career advancement. The seven countries under comparison are China, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Turkey—and the region of Flanders in Belgium. With the exception of Italy, top‐tier journals used in national rankings include those classified at the highest level, or according to tier, or points implemented. A total of 3,565 (75.8%) out of 4,701 unique top‐tier journals were identified as having a JIF, with 55.7% belonging to the first Journal Impact Factor quartile. Journal rankings in China, Flanders, Poland, and Turkey classify journals with a JIF as being top‐tier, but only when they are in the first quartile of the Average Journal Impact Factor Percentile. Journal rankings that result from expert assessment in Denmark, Finland, and Norway regularly classify journals as top‐tier outside the first quartile, particularly in the social sciences and humanities. We conclude that experts, when tasked with metric‐informed journal rankings, take into account quality dimensions that are not covered by JIFs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immigrant minority (IM) languages have a significant presence in certain European regions. Nonetheless, these languages are not usually included in the school curriculum. This paper aims to analyse the studies published between 2010 and 2020 considering IM languages in multilingual European education contexts. The method included a search of academic papers published in the databases ERIC, Web of Science and Scopus, which yielded 42 studies. The studies were analysed by considering: (1) the demographic characteristics of the countries where the studies were conducted, (2) the sociolinguistic or psycholinguistic focus of the papers in relation to the European country, and (3) the characteristics of the bi-multilingual education programme including IM languages. The results indicate that: (1) the demographic characteristics of the country are not strictly related to the number of studies published, (2) most studies have a sociolinguistic approach even though many studies analyse both sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic factors, and (3) only seven multilingual education programmes including IM languages were described in these papers. We conclude that there is a lack of research focusing on IM languages in educational settings and discuss how addressing these gaps could create opportunities for building equitable multilingual communities in Europe.

Aim: The goal of this paper is to analyze the COVID-19 policies of 10 European countries, including Sweden, Finland, Norway, Italy, France, Germany, Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Hungary, with a time-series policy analysis tool. Subject and methods: The results of the COVID-19 policy analysis are based on a single time-series indicator, or daily population mortality rate: the number of COVID-19 daily cumulative deaths divided by the population in millions. The lower the score, the better the policy. Although many experts believe that the COVID-19 policy outcome analysis is premature, time series analysis is an excellent analysis that can provide information on the progress and transition of policy outcomes. In other words, the proposed time series analysis tool allows policymakers to identify and quantify when mistakes were made during the on-going COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The COVID-19 policy analysis discovered many useful facts. Sweden failed due to the herd immunity approach. Hungary made a fundamental mistake in COVID-19 tactics. Countries such as Sweden, Hungary, Belgium, and Poland showed time-series changes that differed from the others. Conclusion: Public health interventions can play a key role in mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic. The proposed policy analysis tool, hiscovid demonstrated the effectiveness of the time-series score behavior for discovering when policymakers made mistakes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The European Union has used Healthy Life Years (HLY) as an indicator to monitor the health of its aging populations. Scholarly and popular interest in HLY across countries has grown, particularly regarding the ranking of countries. It is important to note that HLY is based on self-assessments of activity limitations, raising the possibility that it might be influenced by differences in health reporting behaviours between populations, a phenomenon known as differential item functioning (DIF). Methods We estimated DIF-adjusted HLY at age 50 for Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden to determine the extent to which differences in HLY might be influenced by reporting heterogeneity across countries. We used anchoring vignettes, taken from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe, to estimate DIF-adjusted prevalence rates of activity limitations measured by the Global Activity Limitations Indicator (GALI). The Sullivan method was used to calculate DIF-adjusted HLY. Results Changes in HLY before and after adjustment ranged from a 1.20-year decrease for men in Italy to a 1.61-year increase for women in Spain. Adjustment for DIF produced changes in the rankings of the countries by HLY, with upward and downward movements of up to three positions. Conclusion Our results show that DIF is likely to affect HLY estimates, thereby posing a challenge to the validity of comparisons of HLY across European countries. The findings suggest that HLY should be used to monitor population health status within a country, rather than to make comparisons across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Advance care planning supports patients to reflect on and discuss preferences for future treatment and care. Studies of the impact of advance care planning on healthcare use and healthcare costs are scarce. Aim: To determine the impact on healthcare use and costs of an advance care planning intervention across six European countries. Design: Cluster-randomised trial, registered as ISRCTN63110516, of advance care planning conversations supported by certified facilitators. Setting/participants: Patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer from 23 hospitals in Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia and the UK. Data on healthcare use were collected from hospital medical files during 12 months after inclusion. Results: Patients with a good performance status were underrepresented in the intervention group (p < 0.001). Intervention and control patients spent on average 9 versus 8 days in hospital (p = 0.07) and the average number of X-rays was 1.9 in both groups. Fewer intervention than control patients received systemic cancer treatment; 79% versus 89%, respectively (p < 0.001). Total average costs of hospital care during 12 months follow-up were €32,700 for intervention versus €40,700 for control patients (p = 0.04 with bootstrap analyses). Multivariable multilevel models showed that lower average costs of care in the intervention group related to differences between study groups in country, religion and WHO-status. No effect of the intervention on differences in costs between study groups was observed (p = 0.3). Conclusions: Lower care costs as observed in the intervention group were mainly related to patients' characteristics. A definite impact of the intervention itself could not be established. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Return to work is a complex and challenging process which takes various forms in different contexts. The aim of this study is to explore and compare cross-country differences in stakeholders' experiences and views on actors, policies and practices relevant for return to work after long-term sickness absence. The comparative exploration is done in six countries with various legislative backgrounds, welfare and social dialogue systems. Methods Using a purposive sample, six multidisciplinary stakeholders group discussions were conducted in six countries: Belgium, Estonia, Ireland, Italy, Romania and Slovakia. A total of 51 individuals comprised of social partners, policymakers or representatives of public bodies and patient associations participated. An interpretative phenomenological analysis was employed to derive the most important themes in the discussions. Results Five major themes emerged from the group discussions. A graphic model is proposed to emphasize the variety of frameworks and processes across countries. Conclusions The core part of the return to work process is the dynamic relation between legislation, stakeholders and practices, which is influenced by broader national and societal factors. The cross-country variation in legislations, stakeholders and practices can be understood as a continuum, from low to high structuring, development and comprehensiveness. Although social dialogue appears to have a role in return to work process with variation across countries, it is not always on top of the agenda of social partners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With schools and universities closing across Europe, the COVID-19 lockdown left actors in the field of education battling with the unprecedented challenge of finding a meaningful way to keep the wheels of education turning online. The sudden need for digital solutions across the field of education resulted in the emergence of a variety of digital networks and collaborative online platforms. In this joint article from scholars around Europe, we explore the COVID-19 lockdowns of physical education across the European region, and the different processes of emergency digitalization that followed in their wake. Spanning perspectives from Italy, Germany, Belgium, and the Nordic countries, the article's five cases provide a glimpse of how these processes have at the same time accelerated and consolidated the involvement of various commercial and non-commercial actors in public education infrastructures. By gathering documentation, registering dynamics, and making intimations of the crisis as it unfolded, the aim of the joint paper is to provide an opportunity for considering the implications of these accelerations and consolidations for the heterogeneous futures of European education.

The aim of the present study was to examine parental experiences of homeschooling during the COVID-19 pandemic in families with or without a child with a mental health condition across Europe. The study included 6720 parents recruited through schools, patient organizations and social media platforms (2002 parents with a child with a mental health condition and 4718 without) from seven European countries: the UK (n = 508), Sweden (n = 1436), Spain (n = 1491), Belgium (n = 508), the Netherlands (n = 324), Germany (n = 1662) and Italy (n = 794). Many parents reported negative effects of homeschooling for themselves and their child, and many found homeschooling to be of poor quality, with insufficient support from schools. In most countries, contact with teachers was limited, leaving parents with primary responsibility for managing homeschooling. Parents also reported increased levels of stress, worry, social isolation, and domestic conflict. A small number of parents reported increased parental alcohol/drug use. Some differences were found between countries and some negative experiences were more common in families with a child with a mental health condition. However, differences between countries and between families with and without a mental health condition were generally small, indicating that many parents across countries reported negative experiences. Some parents also reported positive experiences of homeschooling. The adverse effects of homeschooling will likely have a long-term impact and contribute to increased inequalities. Given that school closures may be less effective than other interventions, policymakers need to carefully consider the negative consequences of homeschooling during additional waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]