Evaluación independiente de la crisis de la COVID-19. Lecciones por aprender

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Gaceta Sanitaria Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.gaceta.2024.102375
Beatriz González López-Valcárcel , Ildefonso Hernández Aguado
{"title":"Evaluación independiente de la crisis de la COVID-19. Lecciones por aprender","authors":"Beatriz González López-Valcárcel ,&nbsp;Ildefonso Hernández Aguado","doi":"10.1016/j.gaceta.2024.102375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The independent evaluation report on the performance of the National Health System in the face of the COVID crisis is rigorous, well thought out and well executed. It has benefited from the participation of numerous experts and institutions. The altruistic effort of the coordinators and hundreds of experts, professionals and citizens is noteworthy, which does not justify the asymmetry between “everything for free” when it comes to shared intelligence, and market prices when it comes to commissioning reports from consultancy firms that are sometimes not worth the cost. The valuable work has suffered from unexplained delays and delayed dissemination that do not bode well for whether there is interest in learning from the pandemic or leaving it behind and forgetting it. Indeed, valuable reports provided by the public administration itself (listed in the report) have still not been made public, despite the request of the coordinators. However, the mere fact that the evaluation has been carried out under the influence and pressure of scientists and professionals should encourage the actions of civil society organisations. Advocacy is needed to ensure that public administrations see collective intelligence as an invaluable resource to be nurtured and stimulated. Regular accountability of executive powers at all levels needs to be pursued vigorously. Many sensible proposals to improve healthcare have been ignored, but we learned that achievements are made with perseverance. It is not an option, it is part of the core business of public health.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12494,"journal":{"name":"Gaceta Sanitaria","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0213911124000220/pdfft?md5=85fc728d7cf03997007e73eb82344161&pid=1-s2.0-S0213911124000220-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaceta Sanitaria","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0213911124000220","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The independent evaluation report on the performance of the National Health System in the face of the COVID crisis is rigorous, well thought out and well executed. It has benefited from the participation of numerous experts and institutions. The altruistic effort of the coordinators and hundreds of experts, professionals and citizens is noteworthy, which does not justify the asymmetry between “everything for free” when it comes to shared intelligence, and market prices when it comes to commissioning reports from consultancy firms that are sometimes not worth the cost. The valuable work has suffered from unexplained delays and delayed dissemination that do not bode well for whether there is interest in learning from the pandemic or leaving it behind and forgetting it. Indeed, valuable reports provided by the public administration itself (listed in the report) have still not been made public, despite the request of the coordinators. However, the mere fact that the evaluation has been carried out under the influence and pressure of scientists and professionals should encourage the actions of civil society organisations. Advocacy is needed to ensure that public administrations see collective intelligence as an invaluable resource to be nurtured and stimulated. Regular accountability of executive powers at all levels needs to be pursued vigorously. Many sensible proposals to improve healthcare have been ignored, but we learned that achievements are made with perseverance. It is not an option, it is part of the core business of public health.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对 COVID-19 危机的独立评估。应吸取的经验教训
关于国家卫生系统在面对 COVID 危机时的表现的独立评估报告是严谨的、经过深思熟 虑的,而且执行得很好。报告得益于众多专家和机构的参与。协调员以及数百名专家、专业人士和公民的无私努力值得一提,但这并不能证明在共享情报时 "一切免费 "与委托咨询公司编写报告时的市场价格不对称是合理的,因为后者有时并不值得花钱。有价值的工作受到了不明原因的拖延和传播的延误,这对人们是否有兴趣从大流行病中吸取教训或将其抛在脑后、遗忘并不是一个好兆头。事实上,尽管协调员提出了要求,但公共行政部门本身提供的宝贵报告(列在报告中)仍未公开。然而,评估是在科学家和专业人员的影响和压力下进行的,这一事实本身就应鼓励民间社会组织采取行动。需要进行宣传,确保公共行政部门将集体智慧视为一种宝贵的资源,加以培养和激励。需要大力推行各级行政权力的定期问责制。许多改善医疗保健的合理建议都被忽视了,但我们认识到,只要坚持不懈,就能取得成就。这不是一种选择,而是公共卫生核心业务的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Gaceta Sanitaria
Gaceta Sanitaria 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
80
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: Gaceta Sanitaria (Health Gazette) is an international journal that accepts articles in Spanish and in English. It is the official scientific journal of the Sociedad Española de Salud Publica y Administración Sanitaria (Spanish Society of Public Health and Health Administration) (SESPAS). The Journal publishes 6 issues per year on different areas of Public Health and Health Administration, including: -Applied epidemiology- Health prevention and promotion- Environmental health- International health- Management and assessment of policies and services- Health technology assessments- Health economics. The editorial process is regulated by a peer review system. It publishes original works, reviews, opinion articles, field and methodology notes, protocols, letters to the editor, editorials, and debates.
期刊最新文献
Juntas directivas, comités y revisores Informe del Comité Científico Mesas espontáneas/Tabelas espontâneas Comunicaciones orales/Comunicações orais Comunicaciones orales rápidas/Comunicações orais rápidas
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1