Search

Background: The benefit of pharmacogenetic testing before starting drug therapy has been well documented for several single gene–drug combinations. However, the clinical utility of a pre-emptive genotyping strategy using a pharmacogenetic panel has not been rigorously assessed. Methods: We conducted an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised, crossover implementation study of a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel in 18 hospitals, nine community health centres, and 28 community pharmacies in seven European countries (Austria, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK). Patients aged 18 years or older receiving a first prescription for a drug clinically recommended in the guidelines of the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (ie, the index drug) as part of routine care were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included previous genetic testing for a gene relevant to the index drug, a planned duration of treatment of less than 7 consecutive days, and severe renal or liver insufficiency. All patients gave written informed consent before taking part in the study. Participants were genotyped for 50 germline variants in 12 genes, and those with an actionable variant (ie, a drug–gene interaction test result for which the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group [DPWG] recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) were treated according to DPWG recommendations. Patients in the control group received standard treatment. To prepare clinicians for pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing, local teams were educated during a site-initiation visit and online educational material was made available. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions within the 12-week follow-up period. Analyses were irrespective of patient adherence to the DPWG guidelines. The primary analysis was done using a gatekeeping analysis, in which outcomes in people with an actionable drug–gene interaction in the study group versus the

Item does not contain fulltext

The influence of the EU (and the IMF) on domestic cutback management were studied in nine European countries. In this concluding article, a cross-country comparative analysis is presented. The influence of the EU and the IMF being most evident in bailed-out countries, we first take a closer look at the loan programmes in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain, plus the hardly-known earlier bailouts in Hungary and Latvia. We then turn to two factors that influence cutbacks and reforms: economics and politics. Finally, the concept of the influence of the EU (and the IMF) is differentiated into degrees and types of influence.

Contains fulltext : 199847.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 199847.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179684.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Policy evaluations are increasingly considered a taken-for-granted prerequisite for a well-performing public sector. In this chapter, we address the question whether this view reflects the actual situation concerning evaluation capacity and culture in Europe. First, we reflect on the history of policy evaluation in Europe, by distinguishing between two ‘waves of evaluation’: the countries in Northwestern Europe that have conducted evaluations since the 1960s and the countries in the rest of Europe for which evaluation is a more recent phenomenon. Next, to illustrate the two waves of evaluation, we zoom in on three political systems that represent the national, regional and international level in Europe: the United Kingdom (UK), Flanders (Belgium) and the EU. For each system, we map evaluation culture and capacity by analysing six indicators. The chapter concludes with a reflection on current trends in evaluation research and possibilities for future research.

Contains fulltext : 182846.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This chapter addresses the progress seen in PA research in Central and Eastern Europe. It does so by first describing the societal contexts with their problems, historical legacies and transformation during the last 25 years. Subsequently it addresses the professionalization of the civil service and other important dimensions of PA reforms in the region. The main conclusion is that, although huge differences are seen in the context of varying countries in the CEE-region, especially the Baltics and most countries in Central Europe are rapidly catching up. The same tendency is seen in the study of Public Administration. PA-research in this region may also still be seen as lagging behind, but is rapidly developing.

Contains fulltext : 179771.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Serious incidents are often followed by a framing contest during which, for instance, a consensus is reached whether the incident was a crisis, how serious the crisis was, what caused the crisis, and whether someone can be blamed for the crisis or its mismanagement. If someone can be blamed, a blame game can ensue. Improper handling of this blame could result in resignation or electoral loss—hence actors—preoccupation with how to avoid and deal with blame. This chapter describes how blame games work, focusing on presentational strategies, rituals, context, and sub-blame games.

Contains fulltext : 179695.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Negotiation is ubiquitous in the public sector, from policy formation to budget allocation or the coordination of public–private partnerships. The focus on negotiations has nevertheless been somewhat limited in public administration research, but in neighboring disciplines such as behavioral economics and social psychology, negotiations have been studied extensively. This chapter aims at filling this gap.This chapter discusses negotiations by focusing on the individual negotiator. I focus on what a negotiation is and who negotiates in the public sector by discussing some substantive examples. Distributive and integrative negotiations are discerned and are accompanied by some public sector illustrations. Specific attention is given to public sector distinctiveness in context and its workers and its potential consequences for negotiations.

Contains fulltext : 177080.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), The various chapters in this handbook show that public administration as a science has developed very strongly in Europe, leading to more publications and increased presence in the international debates, both in academia as well as in practice. A research agenda is described calling for more research using new theories and methods (e.g. behavioural public administration and experiments), focusing on new(er) topics (e.g. public procurement, implementation of EU policies, results of management reforms), but also to continue the strong tradition of comparative research (between countries, at different levels) that is nowadays so strongly rooted in Europe, and to maintain a relationship with practitioners (e.g. offering policy advice).

Contains fulltext : 177071.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177069.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This book aims to offer a systematic review of the state-of-the-art knowledge about public administration in Europe produced by the European scholarly community. The first chapter describes the rationale for this endeavor, and offers an overview of the various contributions.

Contains fulltext : 177070.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), The chapter reviews the evolution of the state of the art of research in public administration and management in Europe since WWII. It argues that a pan-European community has developed, flanking and in many respects integrating the distinct national communities that characterised the field till the 1970s/1980s. After a bibliographical review of the main themes that catalyse the interest of PA scholars, it focuses on the most researched theme in Europe, namely public management reform. The ways in which the topic has been studied before, during and after the NPM ideological wave are examined by looking into country clusters across Europe: Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, Southern European, Nordic European, and Central-Eastern European. Concluding points include the theoretical importance of context in European research, and the profile of the European scholar.

Contains fulltext : 179673.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This chapter assesses the state of play in Europeanization research, focusing on the impact of European integration on national policies and administrations. After dissecting the concept of Europeanization, it sketches this literature’s guiding question: how to account for differential domestic impacts of European integration. It then describes how much Europeanization research has shifted away from a top down focus on institutional misfits to creative strategic use of EU inputs by domestic stakeholders. Furthermore, it establishes a marked pluralization of policy-oriented research, which now encompasses a great variety of policy sectors, (member) states and EU inputs. In the realm of administrative adaptation, similarly, Europeanization research has clearly gone beyond the initial focus on national coordination systems, to encompass EU-induced changes in administrative structures and individual attitudes.

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), One of the key features of public administration in Europe is that multiple languages are in use, both in the public and academic debates. Language shapes thought, debate and hence also research. To find out which problems researchers run into when they want to convey results of their research and the debates on public administration to academics and practitioners in other countries, we have asked a number of scholars to describe how several key concepts in public administration and public management are translated into their native language and which problems they encounter when doing so. Their contributions make up for the largest part of this chapter, preceded by a short analysis and commentary on some of the common problems and lessons that should be drawn.

Contains fulltext : 179760.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), The third sector is one of the main partners for European governments in policy development and implementation. However, the relationship has often been a delicate one, touching on issues of autonomy and legitimacy. In this chapter, we give an overview of different theoretical reasons for and types of collaboration between the third sector and the state. We also describe the different traditions of collaboration that have emerged across Europe. Finally, we discuss the risks associated with this kind of relationship.

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 179684.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), Policy evaluations are increasingly considered a taken-for-granted prerequisite for a well-performing public sector. In this chapter, we address the question whether this view reflects the actual situation concerning evaluation capacity and culture in Europe. First, we reflect on the history of policy evaluation in Europe, by distinguishing between two ‘waves of evaluation’: the countries in Northwestern Europe that have conducted evaluations since the 1960s and the countries in the rest of Europe for which evaluation is a more recent phenomenon. Next, to illustrate the two waves of evaluation, we zoom in on three political systems that represent the national, regional and international level in Europe: the United Kingdom (UK), Flanders (Belgium) and the EU. For each system, we map evaluation culture and capacity by analysing six indicators. The chapter concludes with a reflection on current trends in evaluation research and possibilities for future research.

Contains fulltext : 182846.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179771.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179695.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177080.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177071.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177069.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177070.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179673.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), This chapter assesses the state of play in Europeanization research, focusing on the impact of European integration on national policies and administrations. After dissecting the concept of Europeanization, it sketches this literature’s guiding question: how to account for differential domestic impacts of European integration. It then describes how much Europeanization research has shifted away from a top down focus on institutional misfits to creative strategic use of EU inputs by domestic stakeholders. Furthermore, it establishes a marked pluralization of policy-oriented research, which now encompasses a great variety of policy sectors, (member) states and EU inputs. In the realm of administrative adaptation, similarly, Europeanization research has clearly gone beyond the initial focus on national coordination systems, to encompass EU-induced changes in administrative structures and individual attitudes.

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179760.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 177070.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177070.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179760.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext

Contains fulltext : 179695.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177080.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177069.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 177070.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179547.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 182846.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)

Contains fulltext : 179771.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

The vast and growing policy diffusion literature analyzes how policy-making in one jurisdiction—be it a country or a subnational unit—is influenced by prior policy decisions in other jurisdictions. Rather surprisingly, Europe remains an understudied area in the recent policy diffusion literature. This comes as a surprise because the European governance structure provides an ideal setting for applying the theories and methods of diffusion, given that policy-making in Europe is embedded in a vertically and horizontally integrated network of jurisdictions. This chapter explores the overlaps and distinctions between the scholarships on policy diffusion and European public policy and discusses how the advances of the more recent policy diffusion literature could stimulate further European public policy research. Particularly, the approach of diffusion scholars to study the mechanisms of interdependent policy-making with data on the connectedness between jurisdictions has great potential for improving our understanding of European public policy-making.

This chapter offers a selective critical review of studies on regulatory regimes in member states and at the EU level, especially regarding the most recent advancements on multi-level regulatory regimes, accountability, and legitimacy. We will briefly examine theoretical work dealing with the conceptualization of such regimes, and compare and contrast it to other notions that are used to denote similar phenomena, i.e. that of so-called regulatory spaces. Further, national and sectoral variations of regulatory regimes allow us to elaborate on the rise and evolution of the regulatory state in Europe. A discussion on the development and effectiveness of multi-level regulatory regimes, which emerge primarily through regulatory networks, follows. Finally, regulatory regimes on finance and environmental sustainability are presented as empirical examples.

This chapter identifies how electronic public service delivery has diffused in various public sector organizations in Europe. Three, in practice intertwined, sources of influence are identified: opportunity (the seemingly inevitable and autonomous impact of technologies), inscription of normative structures (the materialization of abstract ideas and rhetoric in specific types of information and communication technologies) and enthusiasms (the sometimes overstated beliefs, held by various stakeholders, that technology is the answer to all kinds of questions). The way these sources of influences work out in practice is demonstrated by discussing the diffusion of a specific type of electronic government, that is personalized electronic service delivery, in ten Dutch municipalities. The chapter is ended with reflections and directions for future research.