Search

Your search keyword '"Rees, C. J."' showing total 146 results
Start Over Author "Rees, C. J."
146 results on '"Rees, C. J."'

1. Special Issue: Entrepreneurship and Africa's cultural context.

Author

Mamman, A., Branine, M., Bawole, J., and Rees, C. J.

Subjects
BUSINESS success, ENTREPRENEURSHIP, BUSINESSPEOPLE, AFRICANS, BUSINESS failures, INFORMAL sector
Abstract

The subject of entrepreneurship has generated swathes of interest from a variety of stakeholders seeking to address economic challenges in Africa. At the heart of this interest is the fact that the businesses created by entrepreneurs create employment opportunities which, in turn, have the potential to reduce poverty at all levels of African society. Yet, while research into entrepreneurial activity is well established in the developed countries of the western world, there remain large gaps in knowledge about key issues such as why entrepreneurs in Africa start businesses, how these businesses are sustained, and the specific contextual influences and challenges which affect African entrepreneurs' decision-making and behavior. In this introductory paper, we highlight the importance of attempting to understand how African entrepreneurs, working outside the strictures of strong formal institutions, navigate difficult challenges and make decisions using fragments of informal traditions originating from prevalent African philosophies such as Ubuntu. We also draw attention to the need to assess the notion of entrepreneurial business success or failure in Africa from a cultural context perspective which takes into account considerations aside from the solely rational-economic. We conclude with a series of questions which remain largely unanswered but will, we trust, be addressed in future research on entrepreneurship and Africa's cultural context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. The influence of "pressure groups" on British foreign policy during the "Scramble for Africa" c.1880-95

Author

Rees, C. J.

Subjects
327.42
Abstract

The aim of this research is to determine the extent to which commercial and religious "pressure groups" could influence the conduct of British foreign policy with specific regard to the phenomenon most commonly referred to as the "Scramble for Africa". A concomitant of this approach is the attempt to understand the general factors driving the partition of the African continent, as well as establishing the relevance of British commercial and religious interests to the 'decision-making' process of government. With these aims in mind, an examination of the constituent elements of the commercial and religious lobbies is undertaken, specifically to determine the degree of contact that was available with the 'decision-making' process and also the possible degree of influence that could be exerted through the many lobbying methods available. To establish the effectiveness of the lobbying process, three regions are examined, all of which reveal the diverse nature of the imperial phenomenon. The first example is the Congo, with an examination of the campaign against the Anglo-Portuguese Treaty of 1884. Secondly, the role of the National African Company as an instrument of British expansion in the Niger region is examined, with the final example being provided by the British role in East Africa, with specific reference to the campaign to retain Uganda. The study reveals how a great diversity of factors influenced British expansion in tropical Africa, and shows how the influence exerted by the various "pressure groups" was specifically related to the prevailing circumstances, with the British Government primarily operating upon its own perception of the British interest. From the cases examined, it clearly emerges that British expansion into tropical Africa was fragmented in nature, in direct contrast to the all-embracing interpretations that abound.

Published
1995

10. Performance measures for endoscopy services: A European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) quality improvement initiative

Author

Valori, R., Cortas, G., de Lange, T., Salem Balfaqih, O., de Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Senore, C., Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Valori, R., Cortas, G., de Lange, T., Salem Balfaqih, O., de Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Senore, C., Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., and Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960)

Abstract

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology present a list of key performance measures for endoscopy services. We recommend that these performance measures be adopted by all endoscopy services across Europe. The measures include those related to the leadership, organization, and delivery of the service, as well as those associated with the patient journey. Each measure includes a recommendation for a minimum and target standard for endoscopy services to achieve. We recommend that all stakeholders in endoscopy take note of these ESGE endoscopy services performance measures to accelerate their adoption and implementation. Stakeholders include patients and their advocacy groups; service leaders; staff, including endoscopists; professional societies; payers; and regulators.

Published
2019

11. ESGE Quality Improvement Initiative: Quality indicators of endoscopy services

Author

Senore, C., Minozzi, S., Cristina, B., Valori, R., Cortas, G., de Lange, T., Balfaqih, O. S., de Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Bel-Lisario, C., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Senore, C., Minozzi, S., Cristina, B., Valori, R., Cortas, G., de Lange, T., Balfaqih, O. S., de Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Bel-Lisario, C., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., and Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960)

Abstract

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology (UEG) have identified that the quality of endoscopy procedures as a major priority. Aiming to raise the quality of everyday endoscopy, the ESGE Quality Improvement Initiative has developed a set of consensus-and evidence-based key performance measures for the main activity areas of clinical endoscopy (i.e. upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy, small bowel, pancreas and biliary tract) and for endoscopy services. Each measure includes a recommendation for a minimum and target standard to achieve. The list of key performance measures for endoscopy services includes those related to the leadership, organization and delivery of the service, as well as those associated with the patient journey. The adoption and implementation of these measures by all relevant stakeholders (including patients and their advocacy groups, health professionals, scientific societies, payers and regulators) would favour the provision of high quality, safe, accurate, patient-centered and accessible endoscopic care.

Published
2019

14. Performance measures for endoscopy services: A European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative

Author

Valori, R., Cortas, G., De Lange, T., Balfaqih, O. S., De Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Senore, C., Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Valori, R., Cortas, G., De Lange, T., Balfaqih, O. S., De Pater, M., Eisendrath, P., Falt, P., Koruk, I., Ono, A., Rustemovic, N., Schoon, E., Veitch, A., Senore, C., Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Domagk, D., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Bisschops, R., Rutter, M., Hassan C., and Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960)

Abstract

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology present a list of key performance measures for endoscopy services. We recommend that these performance measures be adopted by all endoscopy services across Europe. The measures include those related to the leadership, organization, and delivery of the service, as well as those associated with the patient journey. Each measure includes a recommendation for a minimum and target standard for endoscopy services to achieve. We recommend that all stakeholders in endoscopy take note of these ESGE endoscopy services performance measures to accelerate their adoption and implementation. Stakeholders include patients and their advocacy groups; service leaders; staff, including endoscopists; professional societies; payers; and regulators.

Published
2018

15. Performance measures for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound: A European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative

Author

Domagk, D., Oppong, K. W., Aabakken, L., Czako, L., Gyokeres, T., Manes, G., Meier, P., Poley, J. -W., Ponchon, T., Tringali, Andrea, Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Senore, C., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Valori, R., Bisschops, R., Rutter, M. D., Tringali A. (ORCID:0000-0002-9614-3449), Hassan C., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Domagk, D., Oppong, K. W., Aabakken, L., Czako, L., Gyokeres, T., Manes, G., Meier, P., Poley, J. -W., Ponchon, T., Tringali, Andrea, Bellisario, C., Minozzi, S., Senore, C., Bennett, C., Bretthauer, M., Hassan, Cesare, Kaminski, M. F., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Rees, C. J., Spada, Cristiano, Valori, R., Bisschops, R., Rutter, M. D., Tringali A. (ORCID:0000-0002-9614-3449), Hassan C., and Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960)

Abstract

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). We recommend that endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key and one minor performance measures for EUS and ERCP, for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at centre and endoscopist level: 1 Adequate antibiotic prophylaxis before ERCP (key performance measure, at least 90%); 2 antibiotic prophylaxis before EUS-guided puncture of cystic lesions (key performance measure, at least 95%); 3 bile duct cannulation rate (key performance measure, at least 90%); 4 tissue sampling during EUS (key performance measure, at least 85%); 5 appropriate stent placement in patients with biliary obstruction below the hilum (key performance measure, at least 95%); 6 bile duct stone extraction (key performance measure, at least 90%); 7 post-ERCP pancreatitis (key performance measure, less than 10%); and 8 adequate documentation of EUS landmarks (minor performance measure, at least 90%). This present list of quality performance measures for ERCP and EUS recommended by the ESGE should not be considered to be exhaustive; it might be extended in future to address further clinical and scientific issues.

Published
2018

18. Performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy: a European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Quality Improvement Initiative

Author

Kaminski, M. F., Thomas-Gibson, S., Bugajski, M., Bretthauer, M., Rees, C. J., Dekker, E., Hoff, G., Jover, R., Suchanek, S., Ferlitsch, M., Anderson, J., Roesch, T., Hultcranz, R., Racz, I., Kuipers, E. J., Garborg, K., East, J. E., Rupinski, M., Seip, B., Bennett, C., Senore, C., Minozzi, S., Bisschops, R., Domagk, D., Valori, R., Spada, Cristiano, Hassan, C., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Rutter, M. D., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Kaminski, M. F., Thomas-Gibson, S., Bugajski, M., Bretthauer, M., Rees, C. J., Dekker, E., Hoff, G., Jover, R., Suchanek, S., Ferlitsch, M., Anderson, J., Roesch, T., Hultcranz, R., Racz, I., Kuipers, E. J., Garborg, K., East, J. E., Rupinski, M., Seip, B., Bennett, C., Senore, C., Minozzi, S., Bisschops, R., Domagk, D., Valori, R., Spada, Cristiano, Hassan, C., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Rutter, M. D., and Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960)

Abstract

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and United European Gastroenterology present a short list of key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend that endoscopy services across Europe adopt the following seven key performance measures for lower gastrointestinal endoscopy for measurement and evaluation in daily practice at a center and endoscopist level: 1 Rate of adequate bowel preparation (minimum standard 90 %); 2 Cecal intubation rate (minimum standard 90 %); 3 Adenoma detection rate (minimum standard 25 %); 4 Appropriate polypectomy technique (minimum standard 80 %); 5 Complication rate (minimum standard not set); 6 Patient experience (minimum standard not set); 7 Appropriate post-polypectomy surveillance recommendations (minimum standard not set). Other identified performance measures have been listed as less relevant based on an assessment of their importance, scientific acceptability, feasibility, usability, and comparison to competing measures.

Published
2017

19. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - Establishing the key unanswered research questions within gastrointestinal endoscopy

Author

Rees, C. J., Ngu, W. S., Regula, J., Bisschops, R., Saftoiu, A., Dekker, E., Gralnek, I., Ciocirlan, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Jover, R., Meisner, S., Spada, Cristiano, Hassan, Cesare, Valori, R., Hucl, T., Le Moine, O., Domagk, D., Kaminski, M. F., Bretthauer, M., Rutter, M. D., Aabakken, L., Ponchon, T., Fockens, P., Siersema, P. D., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), Hassan C., Rees, C. J., Ngu, W. S., Regula, J., Bisschops, R., Saftoiu, A., Dekker, E., Gralnek, I., Ciocirlan, M., Dinis-Ribeiro, M., Jover, R., Meisner, S., Spada, Cristiano, Hassan, Cesare, Valori, R., Hucl, T., Le Moine, O., Domagk, D., Kaminski, M. F., Bretthauer, M., Rutter, M. D., Aabakken, L., Ponchon, T., Fockens, P., Siersema, P. D., Spada C. (ORCID:0000-0002-5692-0960), and Hassan C.

Abstract

Background and study aim: Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a rapidly evolving research field. The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) plays a key role in shaping opinion and endoscopy activity throughout Europe and further afield. Establishing key unanswered questions within the field of endoscopy and prioritizing those that are important enables researchers and funders to appropriately allocate resources. Methods: Over 2 years, the ESGE Research Committee gathered information on research priorities and refined them through a modified Delphi approach. Consultations were held with the ESGE Governing Board and Quality Improvement Committee to identify important unanswered questions. Research workshops were held at the 21st United European Gastroenterology Week. Research questions were refined by the ESGE Research Committee and Governing Board, compiled into an online survey, and distributed to all ESGE members, who were invited to rank each question by priority. Results: The final questionnaire yielded 291 responses from over 60 countries. The three countries with the highest response rates were Spain, Italy, and United Kingdom. Most responders were from teaching hospitals (62%) and were specialist endoscopists (51%). Responses were analyzed with weighted rankings, resulting in prioritization of 26 key unanswered questions. The top ranked generic questions were: 1) How do we define the correct surveillance interval following endoscopic diagnosis? 2) How do we correctly utilize advanced endoscopic imaging? 3) What are the best markers of endoscopy quality? Conclusion: Following this comprehensive process, the ESGE has identified and ranked the key unanswered questions within the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy. Researchers, funders, and journals should prioritize studies that seek to answer these important questions.

Published
2016

20. Partie D: Domaine d'Omineca [Chapitre 17: Styles Structuraux]

Author

Tempelman-Kluit, D J, primary, Gabrielse, H, additional, Evenchick, C A, additional, Mansy, JL, additional, Brown, R L, additional, Journeay, JM, additional, Lane, L S, additional, Struik, L C, additional, Murphy, D C, additional, Rees, C J, additional, Simony, PS, additional, Fyles, J T, additional, Hoy, T, additional, Gordey, S P, additional, Thompson, R I, additional, and McMechan, ME, additional

Published
1991
Full Text
View/download PDF

21. Part D: Omineca Belt [Chapter 17: Structural Styles]

Author

Tempelman-Kluit, D J, primary, Gabrielse, H, additional, Evenchick, C A, additional, Mansy, JL, additional, Brown, R L, additional, Journeay, JM, additional, Lane, L S, additional, Struik, L C, additional, Murphy, D C, additional, Rees, C J, additional, Simony, PS, additional, Fyles, J T, additional, Hoy, T, additional, Gordey, S P, additional, Thompson, R I, additional, McMechan, ME, additional, and Harms, T A, additional

Published
1991
Full Text
View/download PDF

24. Comptes rendus

Author

Koster, W. J. W., Zuidweg, J. J. A., Schogt, Henry G., Noomen, W., Van Rees, C. J., Crespo, Roberto, Sleumer, Angela, Minis, C., De Bruin, C. C., Wareman, P., Van Ingen, Ferdinand, Verhofstadt, Edward, Steinmetz, Horst, Küpper, Peter, De Boer, R., Furstner, H., Prangel, M. F. R., Gei\ler, Rolf, Onderdelinden, J. W., Storms, G., Boswinkel, J., Scheffer, J., De Vries, F. C., and Van Der Rhee, F.

Published
1968
Full Text
View/download PDF

25. Comptes rendus

Author

Schroten, J. D. W., Bray, Bernard, Van Rees, C. J., Voorwinden, N. Th. J., Küpper, Peter, Lauxtermann, P., Onderdelinden, J. W., Vermeer, Peter M., and Fry, August J.

Published
1970
Full Text
View/download PDF

35. What do patients want from their endoscopy experience? The importance of measuring and understanding patient attitudes to their care.

Author

Tierney, M., Bevan, R., Rees, C. J., and Trebble, T. M.

Abstract

Understanding and addressing patient attitudes to their care facilitates their engagement and attendance, improves the quality of their experience and the appropriate utilisation of resources. Gastrointestinal endoscopy is a commonly performed medical procedure that can be associated with patient anxiety and apprehension. Measuring patient attitudes to endoscopy can be undertaken through a number of approaches with contrasting benefits and limitations. Methodological validation is necessary for accurate interpretation of results and avoiding bias. Retrospective post-procedure questionnaires measuring satisfaction are easily undertaken but have limited value, particularly in directing service improvements. Patient experience questionnaires indicate areas of poor care but may reflect the clinician's not the patient's perspective. Directly assessing patient priorities and expectations identifies what is important to patients in their healthcare experience (patient-reported value) that can also provide a basis for other forms of evaluation. Published studies of patient attitudes to their endoscopy procedure indicate the importance of ensuring that endoscopists and their staff control patient discomfort, have adequate technical skill and effectively communicate with their patient relating to the procedure and results. Environmental factors, including noise, privacy and the single-sex environment, are considered to have less value. There are contrasting views on patient attitudes to waiting times for the procedure. Implementing patient-centred care in endoscopy requires an understanding of what patients want from their healthcare experience. The results from available studies suggest implications for current practice that relate to the training and practice of the endoscopist and their staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

39. Bowel cancer screening is safe, detects earlier stage cancer and adenomas in 50% of cases: experience of the prevalent round of screening from two first wave centres in the North East of England

Author

Rajasekhar, P T, primary, Clifford, G M, additional, Lee, T J W, additional, Rutter, M D, additional, Waddup, G, additional, Ritchie, M, additional, Nylander, D, additional, Painter, J, additional, Singh, J, additional, Ward, I, additional, Dempsey, N, additional, Bowes, J, additional, Handley, G, additional, Henry, J, additional, and Rees, C J, additional

Published
2011
Full Text
View/download PDF

50. Longer mean colonoscopy withdrawal time is associated with increased adenoma detection: evidence from the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme in England.

Author

Lee, T. J. W., Blanks, R. G., Rees, C. J., Wright, K. C., Nickerson, C., Moss, S. M., Chilton, A., Goddard, A. F., Patnick, J., McNally, R. J. Q., and Rutter, M. D.

Subjects
COLONOSCOPY, ADENOMA, SCIENTIFIC observation, REGRESSION analysis, MORTALITY, DIAGNOSIS
Abstract

Background and study aims: Increasing colonoscopy withdrawal time (CWT) is thought to be associated with increasing adenoma detection rate (ADR). Current English guidelines recommend a minimum CWT of 6 minutes. It is known that in the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP) in England there is wide variation in CWT. The aim of this observational study was to examine the relationship between CWT and ADR. Patients and methods: The study examined data from 31 088 colonoscopies by 147 screening program colonoscopists. Colonoscopists were grouped in four levels of mean CWT (<7, 7-8.9, 9-10.9, and⩾11 minutes). Univariable andmultivariable analysis (binary logistic and negative binomial regression) were used to explore the relationship between CWT, ADR, mean number of adenomas and number of right-sided and advanced adenomas. Results: In colonoscopists with a mean CWT<7 minutes, the mean ADR was 42.5% compared with 47.1% in the⩾11-minute group (P<0.001). The mean number of adenomas detected per procedure increased from 0.77 to 0.94, respectively (P<0.001). The increase in adenoma detection was mainly of subcentimeter or proximal adenomas; there was no increase in the detection of advanced adenomas. Regression models showed an increase in ADR from 43% to 46.5% for mean CWT times ranging from 6 to 10 minutes. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that longer mean withdrawal times are associated with increasing adenoma detection, mainly of small or right-sided adenomas. However, beyond 10 minutes the increase in ADR is minimal. Mean withdrawal times longer than 6 minutes are not associated with increased detection of advanced adenomas. Withdrawal time remains an important quality metric of colonoscopy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2013
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results