title: Mercenaries and the law

authors: Smith, Ron C.

subjects: mercenary

abstract: The International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries arose from understandable African concerns about the influence of European mercenaries in the continent during decolonisation in the 1960s and early 1970s. These same concerns also gave rise to a vary adverse treatment of the concept ‘mercenary’ in Protocol 1 (1977) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. However, these events do not justify, in 2004, further anti-mercenary measures and, particularly, they do not require the ratification of the convention against mercenary activity, about which even the existing small number of parties have considerable doubt. As the British Foreign Secretary said in his foreword to an official green paper on the subject, ‘Today’s world is a far cry from the 1960s when private military activity usually meant mercenaries of the rather unsavoury kind involved in post-colonial and neo-colonial conflicts’.

text: Mercenaries and the law The International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries arose from understandable African concerns about the influence of European mercenaries in the continent during decolonisation in the 1960s and early 1970s. These same concerns also gave rise to a vary adverse treatment of the concept ‘mercenary’ in Protocol 1 (1977) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. However, these events do not justify, in 2004, further anti-mercenary measures and, particularly, they do not require the ratification of the convention against mercenary activity, about which even the existing small number of parties have considerable doubt. As the British Foreign Secretary said in his foreword to an official green paper on the subject, ‘Today’s world is a far cry from the 1960s when private military activity usually meant mercenaries of the rather unsavoury kind involved in post-colonial and neo-colonial conflicts’.

year: 2004

title: Developing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future infertility research

authors: Duffy, J.M.N.

abstract: Background: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and outcome reporting bias, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret.
Objectives: To develop a core outcome set to standardise outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility.
Methods: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods including a three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries) (1).
Results: The core outcome set consists of: (1) viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancies); (2) pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); (3) live birth; (4) gestational age at delivery; (5) birth weight; (6) neonatal mortality; and (7) major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable.
Conclusions: Embedding the core outcome set within randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set.

text: Developing a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future infertility research Background: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions, and outcome reporting bias, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret.
Objectives: To develop a core outcome set to standardise outcome selection, collection, and reporting across future randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility.
Methods: Healthcare professionals, researchers, and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods including a three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries) (1).
Results: The core outcome set consists of: (1) viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin, and higher multiple pregnancies); (2) pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth, and termination of pregnancy); (3) live birth; (4) gestational age at delivery; (5) birth weight; (6) neonatal mortality; and (7) major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable.
Conclusions: Embedding the core outcome set within randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection, and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility, and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set.

year: 2020

title: Experiences of Māori of Aotearoa New Zealand's public health system: a systematic review of two decades of published qualitative research

authors: Graham, Rebekah Sarah

subjects: Indigenous health

abstract: Objective: This paper aims to synthesise the broader perspectives of Māori patients and their whānau (extended family, family group) of their treatment within the public health system. Our research question was ‘What are the experiences of Māori in the public health and/or hospital system in Aotearoa New Zealand?’ Methods: A systematic search using PRISMA protocols and reflexive typology organised around the categories of Māori, public healthcare and qualitative research identified 14 papers that covered all three categories. We undertook a qualitative metasynthesis on these papers using a critical community psychology approach. Results: Māori patients and whānau from the included papers mention both barriers and facilitators to health. We categorised barriers as organisational structures, staff interactions and practical considerations. Facilitators were categorised as the provision of whānau support in the form of practical assistance, emotional care and health system navigation. Conclusions: For many Māori, the existing public health system is experienced as hostile and alienating. Whānau members provide support to mitigate this, but it comes as a cost to whānau. Implications for public health: Public health providers must find ways to ensure that Māori consistently experience positive, high-quality healthcare interactions that support Māori ways of being.

text: Experiences of Māori of Aotearoa New Zealand's public health system: a systematic review of two decades of published qualitative research Objective: This paper aims to synthesise the broader perspectives of Māori patients and their whānau (extended family, family group) of their treatment within the public health system. Our research question was ‘What are the experiences of Māori in the public health and/or hospital system in Aotearoa New Zealand?’ Methods: A systematic search using PRISMA protocols and reflexive typology organised around the categories of Māori, public healthcare and qualitative research identified 14 papers that covered all three categories. We undertook a qualitative metasynthesis on these papers using a critical community psychology approach. Results: Māori patients and whānau from the included papers mention both barriers and facilitators to health. We categorised barriers as organisational structures, staff interactions and practical considerations. Facilitators were categorised as the provision of whānau support in the form of practical assistance, emotional care and health system navigation. Conclusions: For many Māori, the existing public health system is experienced as hostile and alienating. Whānau members provide support to mitigate this, but it comes as a cost to whānau. Implications for public health: Public health providers must find ways to ensure that Māori consistently experience positive, high-quality healthcare interactions that support Māori ways of being.

year: 2020