Search

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Multiple studies reports a reduction of STEMI hospitalizations rates during COVID 19 pandemic outbreak. Contradictory STEMI complications rates are reported during COVID 19 pandemic regarding case fatalities rates, cardiogenic shock, life threatening arrhythmias and others. Purpose. To evaluate the impact of the COVID 19 outbreak on STEMI patient outcomes and complication rates in country with low COVID 19 incidence and mortality and without changes in Cardiology hospital services. Methods. Was conducted a retrograde study collecting data for STEMI hospitalizations, revascularization procedures and case fatalities and other complications from March 9th 2020 (first COVID 19 case in our country) to April 30th (period of total lockdown) compared with the same period of 2019 in our center. Incidence rate ratio (IRR) was used to compare STEMI admissions and revascularization procedures and risk ratio (RR) to compare case fatality rate and other complications rate. Results Hospital admissions for STEMI declined during 2020 (COVID 19 period) from a total of 217 patients in 2019 to 155 patients hospitalization in 2020 representing IRR 0.72 (p = 0.009). Reduction were observed in the number of primary PCI from 168 procedures in 2019 to 113 in 2020 (IRR 0.67 p = 0.001). Symptom onset to our ICU (including regional transportation) was significantly higher in 2020 than in 2019 (939.97 ± 1122 versus 436.15 ± 383 minutes p Results; Hospitalizations and related invazive revascularization procedures for STEMI significantly reduced during COVID 19 pandemic. We identified a substantial increase of STEMI case fatalities and cardiogenic shock during pandemic outbreak. Delayed timely reperfusion by primary PCI has an important impact on infarct related mortality.

This chapter presents profiles on the delegation and pooling of authority of ten international organizations (IOs) in Africa. Each profile explains how the coding scheme is applied to the IO by charting a path from the primary and secondary evidence to scoring judgments. They tell the reader how the assembly, executive, secretariat, consultative body, and dispute settlement of each IO are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. The profiles chart these developments annually since 1950. The authors indicate four kinds of uncertainty in superscript: α‎ for thin information; β‎ for a case that falls between the intervals on a dimension; γ‎ for disagreement among sources; δ‎ for inconsistency between written rules in the IO. Each profile is followed by tables summarizing the authors’ observations. Data and codebooks for the Measure of International Authority (MIA) are available on the authors’ websites.

This chapter presents profiles on the delegation and pooling of authority in eleven multi-regional or global international organizations (IOs). Each profile explains how the coding scheme is applied to the IO by charting a path from the primary and secondary evidence to scoring judgments. They tell the reader how the assembly, executive, secretariat, consultative body, and dispute settlement of each IO are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. The profiles chart these developments annually since 1950. The authors indicate four kinds of uncertainty in superscript: α‎ for thin information; β‎ for a case that falls between the intervals on a dimension; γ‎ for disagreement among sources; δ‎ for inconsistency between written rules in the IO. Each profile is followed by tables summarizing the authors’ observations. Data and codebooks for the Measure of International Authority (MIA) are available on the authors’ websites.

This part of the book walks through the evidence that we have gathered to estimate international governance. The route takes us through forty-six international organizations (IOs), and tells the reader how IO bodies are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. This sounds simpler than it actually is, and few readers will accompany us on the entire journey. However, it may be reassuring for the expert and the non-expert alike to know that should they have a specific query about any of the organizations covered in this book, they can discover how we code it by looking in the profiles in this book or online....

This chapter presents profiles on the authority of seven international organizations (IOs) in Europe. Each profile explains the coding scheme is applied to the IO by charting a path from the primary and secondary evidence to scoring judgments. They tell the reader how the assembly, executive, secretariat, consultative body, and dispute settlement of each IO are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. The profiles chart these developments annually since 1950. The authors indicate four kinds of uncertainty in superscript: α‎ for thin information; β‎ for a case that falls between the intervals on a dimension; γ‎ for disagreement among sources; δ‎ for inconsistency between written rules in the IO. Each profile is followed by tables summarizing the authors’ observations. Data and codebooks for the Measure of International Authority (MIA) are available on the authors’ websites.

This chapter presents profiles on the delegation and pooling of authority in four international organizations (IOs) in the Middle East. Each profile explains how the coding scheme is applied to the IO by charting a path from the primary and secondary evidence to scoring judgments. They tell the reader how the assembly, executive, secretariat, consultative body, and dispute settlement of each IO are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. The profiles chart these developments annually since 1950. The authors indicate four kinds of uncertainty in superscript: α‎ for thin information; β‎ for a case that falls between the intervals on a dimension; γ‎ for disagreement among sources; δ‎ for inconsistency between written rules in the IO. Each profile is followed by tables summarizing the authors’ observations. Data and codebooks for the Measure of International Authority (MIA) are available on the authors’ websites.

Chapter One discusses the theoretical-conceptual underpinnings of the Measure of International Authority (MIA). In what respects, and to what extent, do international organizations exert legal rational authority? What powers do non-state actors have in international decision making and dispute settlement? To what extent, when, and how do states sacrifice the national veto in collective decision making? The chapter is structured in a sequence of five steps from the abstract to the particular: conceptualize authority; specify the concept as formal authority of international organizations; unfold in the dimensions of delegation and pooling; operationalize international organization (IO) composition and decision making in indicators that describe institutional alternatives that can be reliably assessed; explicate principles for scoring and adjudicating cases.

This book sets out a measure of authority for seventy-six major international organizations (IOs) from 1950 to 2010 in an effort to provide systematic comparative information on international governance. On the premise that transparency is key in the production of data, the authors chart a path in laying out the assumptions that underpin the measure. Successive chapters detail the authors’ theoretical, conceptual, and coding decisions. In order to assess their authority, the authors model the composition of IO bodies, their roles in decision making, the bindingness of IO decisions, and the mechanisms through which they seek to settle disputes. Profiles of regional, cross-regional, and global IOs explain how they are composed and how they make decisions. A distinctive feature of the measure is that it breaks down the concept of international authority into discrete dimensions. The Measure of International Authority (MIA) is built up from coherent ingredients—the composition and role of individual IO bodies at each stage in policy making, constitutional reform, the budget, financial compliance, membership accession, and the suspension of members. These observations can be assembled—like Lego blocks—in diverse ways for diverse purposes. This produces a flexible tool for investigating international governance and testing theory.

Chapter Two provides a hands-on guide to the coding scheme. The authors measure delegation (the conditional grant of authority by member states to an independent body) and pooling (the joint exercise of authority by member states). They disaggregate by examining 1) the role and composition of institutional actors in an international organization (IO); 2) at distinct stages of decision making (agenda setting, final decision, opt-out, ratification, dispute settlement); 3) across six decision areas (accession, membership suspension, constitutional reform, budgetary allocation, financial compliance, policy making). The authors define the content and specify intervals for each indicator, and discuss how they avoid formalism, triangulate estimates, avoid contagion, and adjudicate ambiguity.

This chapter presents profiles on the delegation and pooling of authority in five international organizations (IOs) in the Asia-Pacific. Each profile explains how the coding scheme is applied to the IO by charting a path from the primary and secondary evidence to scoring judgments. They tell the reader how the assembly, executive, secretariat, consultative body, and dispute settlement of each IO are composed, what decisions each body makes, and how they make decisions. The profiles chart these developments annually since 1950. The authors indicate four kinds of uncertainty in superscript: α‎ for thin information; β‎ for a case that falls between the intervals on a dimension; γ‎ for disagreement among sources; δ‎ for inconsistency between written rules in the IO. Each profile is followed by tables summarizing the authors’ observations. Data and codebooks for the Measure of International Authority (MIA) are available on the authors’ websites.