Search This Blog

Friday, December 6, 2024

Health policy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Health policy can be defined as the "decisions, plans, and actions that are undertaken to achieve specific healthcare goals within a society". According to the World Health Organization, an explicit health policy can achieve several things: it defines a vision for the future; it outlines priorities and the expected roles of different groups; and it builds consensus and informs people.

Different approaches

Health policy often refers to the health-related content of a policy. Understood in this sense, there are many categories of health policies, including global health policy, public health policy, mental health policy, health care services policy, insurance policy, personal healthcare policy, pharmaceutical policy, and policies related to public health such as vaccination policy, tobacco control policy or breastfeeding promotion policy. Health policy may also cover topics related to healthcare delivery, for example of financing and provision, access to care, quality of care, and health equity.

Health policy also includes the governance and implementation of health-related policy, sometimes referred to as health governance, health systems governance or healthcare governance. Conceptual models can help show the flow from health-related policy development to health-related policy and program implementation and to health systems and health outcomes. Policy should be understood as more than a national law or health policy that supports a program or intervention. Operational policies are the rules, regulations, guidelines, and administrative norms that governments use to translate national laws and policies into programs and services. The policy process encompasses decisions made at a national or decentralized level (including funding decisions) that affect whether and how services are delivered. Thus, attention must be paid to policies at multiple levels of the health system and over time to ensure sustainable scale-up. A supportive policy environment will facilitate the scale-up of health interventions.

There are many aspects of politics and evidence that can influence the decision of a government, private sector business or other group to adopt a specific policy. Evidence-based policy relies on the use of science and rigorous studies such as randomized controlled trials to identify programs and practices capable of improving policy relevant outcomes. Most political debates surround personal health care policies, especially those that seek to reform healthcare delivery, and can typically be categorized as either philosophical or economic. Philosophical debates center around questions about individual rights, ethics and government authority, while economic topics include how to maximize the efficiency of health care delivery and minimize costs.

  Countries with universal health care
  Countries with universal health care
  Countries without universal healthcare
  Countries without universal healthcare
  Unknown

The modern concept of healthcare involves access to medical professionals from various fields as well as medical technology, such as medications and surgical equipment. It also involves access to the latest information and evidence from research, including medical research and health services research.

In many countries it is left to the individual to gain access to healthcare goods and services by paying for them directly as out-of-pocket expenses, and to private sector players in the medical and pharmaceutical industries to develop research. Planning and production of health human resources is distributed among labour market participants.

Other countries have an explicit policy to ensure and support access for all of its citizens, to fund health research, and to plan for adequate numbers, distribution and quality of health workers to meet healthcare goals. Many governments around the world have established universal health care, which takes the burden of healthcare expenses off of private businesses or individuals through pooling of financial risk. There are a variety of arguments for and against universal healthcare and related health policies. Healthcare is an important part of health systems and therefore it often accounts for one of the largest areas of spending for both governments and individuals all over the world.

Personal healthcare policy options

Philosophy: right to health

Many countries and jurisdictions integrate a human rights philosophy in directing their healthcare policies. The World Health Organization reports that every country in the world is party to at least one human rights treaty that addresses health-related rights, including the right to health as well as other rights that relate to conditions necessary for good health. The United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) asserts that medical care is a right of all people:

  • UDHR Article 25: "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, illness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

In some jurisdictions and among different faith-based organizations, health policies are influenced by the perceived obligation shaped by religious beliefs to care for those in less favorable circumstances, including the sick. Other jurisdictions and non-governmental organizations draw on the principles of humanism in defining their health policies, asserting the same perceived obligation and enshrined right to health. In recent years, the worldwide human rights organization Amnesty International has focused on health as a human right, addressing inadequate access to HIV drugs and women's sexual and reproductive rights including wide disparities in maternal mortality within and across countries. Such increasing attention to health as a basic human right has been welcomed by the leading medical journal The Lancet.

There remains considerable controversy regarding policies on who would be paying the costs of medical care for all people and under what circumstances. For example, government spending on healthcare is sometimes used as a global indicator of a government's commitment to the health of its people. On the other hand, one school of thought emerging from the United States rejects the notion of health care financing through taxpayer funding as incompatible with the (considered no less important) right of the physician's professional judgment, and the related concerns that government involvement in overseeing the health of its citizens could erode the right to privacy between doctors and patients. The argument furthers that universal health insurance denies the right of individual patients to dispose of their own income as per their own will.

Another issue in the rights debate is governments' use of legislation to control competition among private medical insurance providers against national social insurance systems, such as the case in Canada's national health insurance program. Laissez-faire supporters argue that this erodes the cost-effectiveness of the health system, as even those who can afford to pay for private healthcare services drain resources from the public system. The issue here is whether investor-owned medical insurance companies or health maintenance organizations are in a better position to act in the best interests of their customers compared to government regulation and oversight. Another claim in the United States perceives government over-regulation of the healthcare and insurance industries as the effective end of charitable home visits from doctors among the poor and elderly.

Economics: healthcare financing

Public and private health expenditure by country

Many types of health policies exist focusing on the financing of healthcare services to spread the economic risks of ill health. These include publicly funded health care (through taxation or insurance, also known as single-payer systems), mandatory or voluntary private health insurance, and complete capitalization of personal health care services through private companies, and medical savings accounts, among others. The debate is ongoing on which type of health financing policy results in better or worse quality of healthcare services provided, and how to ensure allocated funds are used effectively, efficiently and equitably.

There are many arguments on both sides of the issue of public versus private health financing policies:

Claims that publicly funded healthcare improves the quality and efficiency of personal health care delivery:

  • Government spending on health is essential for the accessibility and sustainability of healthcare services and programmes.
  • For those people who would otherwise go without care due to lack of financial means, any quality care is an improvement.
  • Since people perceive universal healthcare as free (if there is no insurance premium or co-payment), they are more likely to seek preventive care which may reduce the disease burden and overall healthcare costs in the long run.
  • Single-payer systems reduce wastefulness by removing the middle man, i.e. private insurance companies, thus reducing the amount of bureaucracy. In particular, reducing the amount of paperwork that medical professionals have to deal with for insurance claims processing allows them to concentrate more on treating patients.

Claims that privately funded healthcare leads to greater quality and efficiencies in personal health care:

  • Perceptions that publicly funded healthcare is free can lead to overuse of medical services, and hence raise overall costs compared to private health financing.
  • Privately funded medicine leads to greater quality and efficiencies through increased access to and reduced waiting times for specialized health care services and technologies.
  • Limiting the allocation of public funds for personal healthcare does not curtail the ability of uninsured citizens to pay for their healthcare as out-of-pocket expenses. Public funds can be better rationalized to provide emergency care services regardless of insured status or ability to pay, such as with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act in the United States.
  • Privately funded and operated healthcare reduces the requirement for governments to increase taxes to cover healthcare costs, which may be compounded by the inefficiencies among government agencies due to their greater bureaucracy.

Other health policy areas

Health policy options extend beyond the financing and delivery of personal health care, to domains such as medical research and health workforce planning, both domestically and internationally.

Medical research policy

Medical research can be both the basis for defining evidence-based health policy, and the subject of health policy itself, particularly in terms of its sources of funding. Those in favor of government policies for publicly funded medical research posit that removing profit as a motive will increase the rate of medical innovation. Those opposed argue that it will do the opposite, because removing the incentive of profit removes incentives to innovate and inhibits new technologies from being developed and utilized.

The existence of sound medical research does not necessarily lead to evidence-based policymaking. For example, in South Africa, whose population sets the record for HIV infections, previous government policy limiting funding and access for AIDS treatments met with strong controversy given its basis on a refusal to accept scientific evidence on the means of transmission. A change of government eventually led to a change in policy, with new policies implemented for widespread access to HIV services. Another issue relates to intellectual property, as illustrated by the case of Brazil, where debates have arisen over government policy authorizing the domestic manufacture of antiretroviral drugs used in the treatment of HIV/AIDS in violation of drug patents.

Health workforce policy

Some countries and jurisdictions have an explicit policy or strategy to plan for adequate numbers, distribution and quality of health workers to meet healthcare goals, such as to address physician and nursing shortages. Elsewhere, workforce planning is distributed among labour market participants as a laissez-faire approach to health policy. Evidence-based policies for workforce development are typically based on findings from health services research.

Health in foreign policy

Many governments and agencies include a health dimension in their foreign policy in order to achieve global health goals. Promoting health in lower income countries has been seen as instrumental to achieve other goals on the global agenda, including:

  • Promoting global security – linked to fears of global pandemics, the intentional spread of pathogens, and a potential increase in humanitarian conflicts, natural disasters, and emergencies;
  • Promoting economic development – including addressing the economic effect of poor health on development, of pandemic outbreaks on the global market place, and also the gain from the growing global market in health goods and services;
  • Promoting social justice – reinforcing health as a social value and human right, including supporting the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals.

Global health policy

Global health policy encompasses the global governance structures that create the policies underlying public health throughout the world. In addressing global health, global health policy "implies consideration of the health needs of the people of the whole planet above the concerns of particular nations." Distinguished from both international health policy (agreements among sovereign states) and comparative health policy (analysis of health policy across states), global health policy institutions consist of the actors and norms that frame the global health response.

EU health policy

The EU contributes to the improvement of public health through financing and laws addressing medications, patient rights in cross-border healthcare, illness prevention, and the promotion of good health. EU countries hold primary responsibility for organizing and delivering health services and medical care. Therefore, EU health policy works to supplement national policies, assure health protection in all EU measures and to strengthen the Health Union. The goals of EU public health policies and initiatives are to protect and improve the health of EU residents, promote the modernization and digitalization of health systems and infrastructure, increase the resilience of Europe's health systems, and improve the ability of EU member states to prevent and respond to pandemics in the future. In a senior-level working group on public health, representatives from the European Commission and national governments debate strategic health concerns. The EU's health policy and yearly work programmes are implemented with the assistance of member states, institutions, and other interest groups.

European Commission's role

The European Commission's Directorate for Health and Food Safety assists member states in their efforts to protect and improve the health of their people and to guarantee the accessibility, efficiency, and resilience of their healthcare structures. This is accomplished in a number of ways, such as by proposing legislation, providing financial support, coordinating and facilitating the exchange of best practices between EU countries and health experts and by health promotion activities.

Legislation

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union grants the EU the authority to enact health legislation in accordance with Article 168 (protection of public health), Article 114 (single market), and Article 153 (social policy). The EU has adopted legislation in following areas: Patient's rights in cross-border healthcare, Pharmaceuticals and medical devices (pharmacovigilance, falsified medicines, clinical trials), Health security and infectious diseases, Digital health and care, Tobacco, organs, blood, tissues and cells. The Council of the EU can also send recommendations on public health to member states.

Patients' rights in cross-border healthcare

EU citizens are entitled, by law, to receive healthcare in any member state of the EU and to have their home nation compensate them for care received elsewhere. The European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) guarantees that essential medical care is given under the same conditions and at the same cost as people insured in that country.

Medicines and medical devices

The EU regulates the authorisation of medicines at EU level by the European Medicines Agency or at the national level by the appropriate authorities in the EU member states.

Cross-border health threats

To guarantee a high degree of health protection in the European Union, monitoring, early warning, preparedness, and reaction measures to counter major cross-border threats to health are crucial. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) offers EU member states independent scientific advice, support, and knowledge on public health risks, including infectious diseases.

Promoting health and tackling diseases

  • Tobacco - With over 700 000 deaths annually, tobacco use is the single biggest preventable health risk and the leading contributor to premature mortality in the European Union (Approximately 50% of smokers pass away too soon, on average, 14 years before non-smokers). The tobacco products directive establishes guidelines for the production, labeling, and retailing of tobacco and associated goods. High tariffs on tobacco products were implemented by another directive on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco, with the goal of reducing tobacco consumption, particularly among youth. The 2009 Council recommendation on smoke-free environments requires all EU member states to take precautions against tobacco smoke exposure for individuals at public places and work.
  • Vaccination - Vaccination policy is a competence of member states. The EU helps its member states coordinate their policies and initiatives. In December 2018 the Council approved a recommendation to enhance EU cooperation on diseases that can be prevented by vaccination. This project sets out guidance on addressing vaccine hesitancy, increasing vaccination rates, encouraging procurement coordination for vaccines, and supporting research and innovation. In December 2022, EU ministers of health approved Council conclusions on vaccination as one of the best methods for preventing illness and improving public health. The conclusions focus on two areas of action: fighting vaccine reluctance and preparing for upcoming challenges through EU cooperation.

Investing in health

The EU4Health program provides funds to tackle cross-border health concerns, improve the availability and cost of medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, other crisis-relevant items, and strengthen the resilience of health systems. Other EU programmes further finance healthcare systems, health research, infrastructure and other broader health-related issues, in particular:

  • Horizon Europe health cluster - supports innovation and research to create a resilient EU ready to face new challenges, for high-quality digital services that are available to everyone, and accessible, high-quality healthcare.
  • EU cohesion funds - invest in health in EU countries and regions.
  • Resilience and recovery facility.

Intellectual disability and higher education in the United States

Post-secondary education for students with intellectual disabilities in the United States refers to the opportunities and challenges faced by these students when pursuing higher education. Historically, individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) have faced barriers in accessing post-secondary education, primarily due to restrictions in federal student aid and academic prerequisites. However, the enactment of the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 introduced significant changes, allowing students with ID to qualify for federal student grants and work-study programs. Over the last two decades, there has been a growth in specialized PSE programs designed for students with ID, focusing on fostering skills beyond traditional academic achievements, such as increased independence, self-determination, and employment readiness.

Background

In previous years, students in the United States who have been diagnosed to have intellectual disabilities (ID) cannot have access or have difficulty having access to post-secondary education (PSE). One significant reason why these students have been marginalized from continuing their education is their being denied federal student aid. Many were disqualified due to the lack of having a high school diploma while others were not able to pass standardized tests which should indicate if their claim to secure aid is justified. With the legislation of the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008, students with ID can now qualify for student grants and work-study programs.

History

Over the past two decades, PSE programs for students with ID have surged in the U.S., with financial backing from the Office of Post-secondary Education starting in 2010.

Although attaining any type of academic degree is not possible for many students with ID, they do stand to benefit from participating in PSE programs. The benefits do not necessarily lead to traditional measures of academic achievement. Instead, students gain increased independence, self-determination, positive social experiences, self-advocacy, problem solving, self-monitoring and goal setting and time management skills. All of these skills help students be more independent, improve their psychological well-being and provide them stronger opportunities to find employment.

In a study conducted by Ross and colleagues, researchers compared employment and independent living outcomes of 125 graduates from the Taft College Transition to Independent Living (TIL) program designed for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities with outcomes from the general population of people with ID and developmental disabilities. The researchers found that 94% of TIL graduates lived by themselves, with their spouse or roommates in a home that they rented or owned compared to only 16% in the general population. Furthermore, the study found that 95% of graduates continue to socialize with fellow alumni through home visits, phone calls or email.

Employment Outcomes

Historically, students with ID have faced poor employment prospects. For instance, in 2009, only 35% of young adults aged 21–25 with ID were employed, compared to a 90.2% employment rate among the general population. That same year, 40.3% of employees with ID earned less the federal minimum wage. The combination of an increasing number of jobs requiring some type of education after high school and their history of exclusion from the higher education system have led to this conclusion. In the past, employment options for people with ID have been limited to supported employment and sheltered workshops.

Going to college is often connected with getting well paying jobs and higher employment rates. This premise applies to students with disabilities including those with ID. Students that attend a PSE program are more likely to find employment than those who only complete high school. Using the American Community Survey (ACS) researchers compared findings on people with disabilities, with cognitive disabilities and no disabilities. They found that 43% of people with cognitive disabilities and some college credit were employed compared to 31% who had only completed high school.

Additionally, students with ID who attend a PSE program are more likely to earn higher wages. For example, Ross and colleagues (2012) found that 87% of TIL graduates who were employed earned at least the minimum wage. In one study, researchers compare the employment outcomes of alumni from two PSE programs and a control group made up of people who never attended a program by surveying the participants. They found that students who attended a PSE program were employed at higher frequencies in office support at 58%, sales at 17% and teaching at 17%.

Inclusion in Higher Education

Advocacy groups like the DREAM Partnership and Think College have pioneered the effort to make college accessible and achievable for students with ID. Despite the evident advantages of PSE, only 37% of students with ID pursue higher education after high school. Once in college, even though students with disabilities participate in campus events and students life, they tend to feel as lonely as non-students.) Still, progress has been made. For example, in K-12 education, students with disabilities are increasingly getting more integrated into mainstream classrooms and are succeeding with reasonable supports.

Supports and accommodations

In the U.S., several laws ensure individuals with disabilities receive adequate accommodations in education. Notably, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act ensure that these students receive required supports. These supportive accommodations may vary from college to college but usually include the assistance of a designated note taker, extended time for tests, taking tests at a designated quiet space, voice recorders for lectures and assistive technology computer software such as text-to-speech and speech recognition software. Additionally, peer mentors, coaches, or ambassadors often support students by assisting with assignments and campus activities.[1]

Post-secondary education programs

There are two main paths for students with ID that are interested in continuing their education after high school. One path, known as the inclusive, individual support model, is to complete entrance examinations, applications and complete degree requirements with the use of accommodations (Hart, Grigal & Weir, 2015). The second path is to not matriculate but instead enter into PSE program designed for students with ID. In these programs, students may take credit or non credit courses, audit courses or take extended study courses. The minimum requirements to be admitted into a PSE program are to read at a third grade minimum and not be considered able to attain a degree with support.

Currently, there are over 220 PSE programs in the United States. While wide variation exists among programs, they do share several features. For example, they do not focus on academic access; the focus is on independent living skills and employment development. Programs usually collaborate with outside organizations such as local school districts, the department of rehabilitation and local non-profit community organizations. In addition, programs use person centered planning to develop a structure that will help the student meet their goals.

PSE programs can be categorized into three types: the dual enrollment model, the substantively separate model and the mixed model. Close to a third of PSE programs in the United States follow the dual enrollment model. Programs with this model are funded through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004. The act provides for special education transition services to students with ID up to the age of 21 to attend college. In these programs, students attend high school and college courses simultaneously. The college courses may be restricted to non-credit, continuing education or to courses specifically designed for students with ID.

Programs that follow the substantively separate approach hold student courses and social activities on campus yet the courses are restricted to their program. These programs tend to serve larger student populations compared to the mixed programs. Moreover, students who participate in this type of programs usually have very little interaction with other students outside of the program. Mixed model programs attempts to include their students with the rest of the student body. Students are encouraged to be very active in campus activities and they take mostly inclusive courses while completing their program courses which focus on employment building skills.

Stock market index

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A comparison of three major U.S. stock indices: the NASDAQ Composite, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and S&P 500 Index. All three have the same height at March 2007. The NASDAQ spiked during the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s, a result of the large number of technology companies on that index.

In finance, a stock index, or stock market index, is an index that measures the performance of a stock market, or of a subset of a stock market. It helps investors compare current stock price levels with past prices to calculate market performance.

Two of the primary criteria of an index are that it is investable and transparent: The methods of its construction are specified. Investors may be able to invest in a stock market index by buying an index fund, which is structured as either a mutual fund or an exchange-traded fund, and "track" an index. The difference between an index fund's performance and the index, if any, is called tracking error.

Types of indices by coverage

Stock market indices may be classified and segmented by the set of underlying stocks included in the index, sometimes referred to as the "coverage". The underlying stocks are typically grouped together based on their underlying economics or underlying investor demand that the index is seeking to represent or track. For example, a 'world' or 'global' stock market index—such as the MSCI World or the S&P Global 100—includes stocks from all over the world, and satisfies investor demand for an index for broad global stocks.

Regional indices that make up the MSCI World index, such as the MSCI Emerging Markets index, include stocks from countries with a similar level of economic development, which satisfies the investor demand for an index for emerging market stocks that may share similar economic fundamentals. The coverage of a stock market index is separate from the weighting method. For example, the S&P 500 market-cap weighted index covers the 500 largest stocks from the S&P Total Market Index, but an equally weighted S&P 500 index is also available with the same coverage.

Global coverage
These indices attempt to represent the performance of the global stock market. For example, the FTSE Global Equity Index Series includes over 16,000 companies.
Regional coverage
These indices represent the performance of the stock market of a single geographical region. Some examples of these indices are the FTSE Developed Europe Index, and the FTSE Developed Asia Pacific Index.
Country coverage
These indices represent the performance of the stock market of a single country—and by proxy, reflects investor sentiment on the state of its economy. The most frequently quoted market indices are national indices composed of the stocks of large companies listed on a nation's largest stock exchanges, such as the S&P 500 Index in the United States, the Nikkei 225 in Japan, the DAX in Germany, the NIFTY 50 in India, and the FTSE 100 in the United Kingdom.
Exchange-based coverage
These indices may be based on the exchange on which the stocks are traded, such as the NASDAQ-100, or groups of exchanges, such as the Euronext 100 or OMX Nordic 40.
Sector-based coverage
These indices track the performance of specific market sectors. Some examples are the Wilshire US REIT Index, which tracks more than 80 real estate investment trusts, and the NASDAQ Biotechnology Index which consists of about 200 firms in the biotechnology industry.

Types of indices by weighting method

Chart of S&P BSE SENSEX Index monthly data from August 2, 1995, to August 2, 2017. The SENSEX represents the top 30 companies by market cap.
 
National Stock Exchange of India from 2000 to 2020. (Indices NIFTY 50). The NIFTY 50 represents the top 50 companies by market cap.

Stock market indices may be categorized by their index weight methodology, or the rules on how stocks are allocated in the index, independent of its stock coverage. For example, the S&P 500 and the S&P 500 Equal Weight each cover the same group of stocks, but the S&P 500 is weighted by market capitalization, while the S&P 500 Equal Weight places equal weight on each constituent. Some common index weighting methods are listed below. In practice, many indices will impose constraints, such as concentration limits, on these rules.

Market-capitalization weighting
This method weights constituent stocks by their market capitalization (often shortened to "market cap"), i.e. the stock price multiplied by the number of shares outstanding. Under the capital asset pricing model, a market-cap weighted market portfolio (which could be approximated by a market-cap weighted equity index portfolio) is mean-variance efficient, meaning that it can be expected to produce the highest available return for a given level of risk. A market-cap weighted index might also be thought of as a liquidity-weighted index, since the largest-cap stocks tend to have the highest liquidity and the greatest capacity to handle investor flows; portfolios with such stocks could have very high investment capacity.
Free-float adjusted market-capitalization weighting
This method adjusts each company's market-cap index weight by excluding closely or strategically held shares that are not generally available to the public market. Such shares may be held by governments, affiliated companies, founders, and employees. Foreign ownership limits imposed by government regulation could also be subject to free-float adjustments. These adjustments inform investors of potential liquidity issues from these holdings that are not apparent from the raw number of a stock's shares outstanding. Free-float adjustments are not easy to calculate, and different index providers have different free-float adjustment methods, which could sometimes produce different results.
Price weighting
This method weights each constituent stock by its price per share divided by the sum of all share prices in the index. A price-weighted index can be thought of as a portfolio with one share of each constituent stock. However, a stock split for any constituent stock of the index would cause the weight in the index of the stock that split to decrease, even in the absence of any meaningful change in the fundamentals of that stock. This feature makes price-weighted indices unattractive as benchmarks for passive investment strategies and portfolio managers. Nonetheless, many price-weighted indices, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nikkei 225, are followed widely as visible indicators of day-to-day market movements.
Equal weighting
This method gives each constituent stocks weights of 1/n, where n represents the number of stocks in the index. This method produces the least-concentrated portfolios. Equal weighting of stocks in an index is considered a naive strategy because it does not show preference towards any single stock. Zeng and Luo (2013) notes that broad market equally weighted indices are factor-indifferent and randomizes factor mispricing. Equal weight stock indices tend to overweight small-cap stocks and to underweight large-cap stocks compared to a market-cap weighted index. These biases usually result in higher volatility and lower liquidity than market-cap weight indices. For example, the Barron's 400 Index assigns an equal value of 0.25% to each of the 400 stocks included in the index, which together add up to the 100% whole.
Fundamental factor weighting
This method, also known as fundamentally based indexes, weights constituent stocks based on arbitrarily selected "stock fundamental factors" rather stock financial market data. Fundamental factors could include sales, income, dividends, and other factors analyzed in fundamental analysis. Similar to fundamental analysis, fundamental weighting assumes that stock market prices will converge to an intrinsic price implied by fundamental attributes. Certain fundamental factors are also used in generic factor weighting indices.
Factor weighting
This method weights constituent stocks based on market risk factors of stocks as measured in the context of factor models, such as the Fama–French three-factor model. Such factors commonly include Growth, Value, Size, Yield, Momentum, Quality, and Volatility. Passive factor investing strategies are sometimes known as "smart beta" strategies. Investors could use factor investment strategies or portfolios to complement a market-cap weighted indexed portfolio by tilting or changing their portfolio exposure to certain factors.
Volatility weighting
This method weights constituent stocks by the inverse of their relative price volatility. Price volatility is defined differently by each index provider, but two common methods are the standard deviation of the past 252 trading days (approximately one calendar year), and the weekly standard deviation of price returns for the past 156 weeks (approximately three calendar years).
Minimum variance weighting
This method weights constituent stocks using a mean-variance optimization process. In a volatility weighted index, highly volatile stocks are given less weight in the index, while in a minimum variance weighting index, highly volatile stocks that are negatively correlated with the rest of the index can be given relatively larger weights than they would be given in the volatility weighted index.

Presentation of index returns

Some indices, such as the S&P 500 Index, have multiple versions. These versions can differ based on how the index components are weighted and on how dividends are accounted. For example, there are three versions of the S&P 500 Index: price return, which only considers the price of the components, total return, which accounts for dividend reinvestment, and net total return, which accounts for dividend reinvestment after the deduction of a withholding tax.

The Wilshire 4500 and Wilshire 5000 indices have five versions each: full capitalization total return, full capitalization price, float-adjusted total return, float-adjusted price, and equal weight. The difference between the full capitalization, float-adjusted, and equal weight versions is in how index components are weighted.

Criticism of capitalization-weighting

One argument for capitalization weighting is that investors must, in aggregate, hold a capitalization-weighted portfolio anyway. This then gives the average return for all investors; if some investors do worse, other investors must do better (excluding costs).

Indices and passive investment management

Passive management is an investing strategy involving investing in index funds, which are structured as mutual funds or exchange-traded funds that track market indices. The SPIVA (S&P Indices vs. Active) annual "U.S. Scorecard", which measures the performance of indices versus actively managed mutual funds, finds the vast majority of active management mutual funds underperform their benchmarks, such as the S&P 500 Index, after fees.

Unlike a mutual fund, which is priced daily, an exchange-traded fund is priced continuously and is optionable.

Ethical stock market indices

Several indices are based on ethical investing, and include only companies that meet certain ecological or social criteria, such as the Calvert Social Index, Domini 400 Social Index, FTSE4Good Index, Dow Jones Sustainability Index, STOXX Global ESG Leaders Index, several Standard Ethics Aei indices, and the Wilderhill Clean Energy Index. Other ethical stock market indices may be based on diversity weighting (Fernholz, Garvy, and Hannon 1998). In 2010, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation announced the initiation of a stock index that complies with Sharia's ban on alcohol, tobacco and gambling.

Critics of such initiatives argue that many firms satisfy mechanical "ethical criteria" (e.g. regarding board composition or hiring practices) but fail to perform ethically with respect to shareholders (e.g. Enron). Indeed, the seeming "seal of approval" of an ethical index may put investors more at ease, enabling scams. One response to these criticisms is that trust in the corporate management, index criteria, fund or index manager, and securities regulator, can never be replaced by mechanical means, so "market transparency" and "disclosure" are the only long-term-effective paths to fair markets. From a financial perspective, it is not obvious whether ethical indices or ethical funds will out-perform their more conventional counterparts. Theory might suggest that returns would be lower since the investible universe is artificially reduced and with it portfolio efficiency. (It conflicts with the Capital Asset Pricing Model, see above.) On the other hand, companies with good social performances might be better run, have more committed workers and customers, and be less likely to suffer reputation damage from incidents (oil spillages, industrial tribunals, etc.) and this might result in lower share price volatility, although such features, at least in theory, will have already been factored into the market price of the stock. The empirical evidence on the performance of ethical funds and of ethical firms versus their mainstream comparators is very mixed for both stock and debt markets.

National Health Service

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service

The National Health Service (NHS) is the umbrella term for the publicly funded healthcare systems of the United Kingdom, comprising the NHS in England, NHS Scotland and NHS Wales. Health and Social Care in Northern Ireland was created separately and is often locally referred to as "the NHS". The original three systems were established in 1948 (NHS Wales/GIG Cymru was founded in 1969) as part of major social reforms following the Second World War. The founding principles were that services should be comprehensive, universal and free at the point of delivery—a health service based on clinical need, not ability to pay. Each service provides a comprehensive range of health services, provided without charge for residents of the United Kingdom apart from dental treatment and optical care. In England, NHS patients have to pay prescription charges; some, such as those aged over 60, or those on certain state benefits, are exempt.

Taken together, the four services in 2015–16 employed around 1.6 million people with a combined budget of £136.7 billion. In 2024, the total health sector workforce across the United Kingdom was 1,499,368 making it the seventh largest employer and second largest non-military public organisation in the world.

When purchasing consumables such as medications, the four healthcare services have significant market power that influences the global price, typically keeping prices lower. A small number of products are procured jointly through contracts shared between services. Several other countries directly rely on Britain's assessments for their own decisions on state-financed drug reimbursements.

History

Aneurin Bevan, the founder of the NHS

Calls for a "unified medical service" can be dated back to the Minority Report of the Royal Commission on the Poor Law in 1909.

Somerville Hastings, President of the Socialist Medical Association, successfully proposed a resolution at the 1934 Labour Party Conference that the party should be committed to the establishment of a State Health Service.

Following the 1942 Beveridge Report's recommendation to create "comprehensive health and rehabilitation services for prevention and cure of disease", cross-party consensus emerged on introducing a National Health Service of some description. Conservative MP and Health Minister, Henry Willink later advanced this notion of a National Health Service in 1944 with his consultative White Paper "A National Health Service" which was circulated in full and short versions to colleagues, as well as in newsreel.

When Clement Attlee's Labour Party won the 1945 election he appointed Aneurin Bevan as Health Minister. Bevan then embarked upon what the official historian of the NHS, Charles Webster, called an "audacious campaign" to take charge of the form the NHS finally took. Bevan's National Health Service was proposed in Westminster legislation for England and Wales from 1946 and Scotland from 1947, and the Northern Ireland Parliament's Public Health Services Act 1947. NHS Wales was split from NHS (England) in 1969 when control was passed to the Secretary of State for Wales. According to one history of the NHS, "In some respects the war had made things easier. In anticipation of massive air raid casualties, the Emergency Medical Service had brought the country's municipal and voluntary hospitals into one umbrella organisation, showing that a national hospital service was possible." Webster wrote in 2002 that "the Luftwaffe achieved in months what had defeated politicians and planners for at least two decades."

The NHS was born out of the ideal that healthcare should be available to all, regardless of wealth. Although being freely accessible regardless of wealth maintained Henry Willink's principle of free healthcare for all, Conservative MPs were in favour of maintaining local administration of the NHS through existing arrangements with local authorities fearing that an NHS which owned hospitals on a national scale would lose the personal relationship between doctor and patient.

Conservative MPs voted in favour of their amendment to Bevan's Bill to maintain local control and ownership of hospitals and against Bevan's plan for national ownership of all hospitals. The Labour government defeated Conservative amendments and went ahead with the NHS as it remains today; a single large national organisation (with devolved equivalents) which forced the transfer of ownership of hospitals from local authorities and charities to the new NHS. Bevan's principle of ownership with no private sector involvement has since been diluted, with later Labour governments implementing large scale financing arrangements with private builders in private finance initiatives and joint ventures.

At its launch by Bevan on 5 July 1948 it had at its heart three core principles: That it meet the needs of everyone, that it be free at the point of delivery, and that it be based on clinical need, not ability to pay.

Three years after the founding of the NHS, Bevan resigned from the Labour government in opposition to the introduction of charges for the provision of dentures, dentists, and glasses; resigning in support was fellow minister and future Prime Minister Harold Wilson. The following year, Winston Churchill's Conservative government introduced prescription fees. However, Wilson's government abolished them in 1965; they were later re-introduced but with exemptions for those on low income. These charges were the first of many controversies over changes to the NHS throughout its history.

From its earliest days, the cultural history of the NHS has shown its place in British society reflected and debated in film, TV, cartoons and literature. The NHS had a prominent slot during the 2012 London Summer Olympics opening ceremony directed by Danny Boyle, being described as "the institution which more than any other unites our nation".

Eligibility for treatment

Some health services are free to everyone, including accident and emergency room treatment, registering with a GP and attending GP appointments, treatment for some infectious diseases, compulsory psychiatric treatment, and some family planning services.

Everyone living in the UK can use the NHS without being asked to pay the full cost of the service, though NHS dentistry and optometry have standard charges in each of the four national health services in the UK. Most patients in England have to pay charges for prescriptions though some patients are exempted.

People who are not ordinarily resident (including British citizens who may have paid National Insurance contributions in the past) may have to pay for services, with some exceptions such as refugees. Patients who do not qualify for free treatment are asked to pay in advance or to sign a written promise to pay for treatment.

There are some other categories of people who are exempt from the residence requirements such as specific government workers, those in the armed forces stationed overseas, and those working outside the UK as a missionary for an organisation with its principal place of business in the UK.

Citizens of the EU or European Economic Area (EEA) nations holding a valid European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) and people from certain other countries with which the UK has reciprocal arrangements concerning health care can get NHS emergency treatment without charge. People from the EU without an EHIC, Provisional Replacement Certificate (PRC) or S1 or S2 visa may have to pay.

People applying for a visa or immigration application for more than six months have to pay an immigration health surcharge when applying for their visa and can then get treatment on the same basis as a resident. There are some people who do not have to pay, including health and care workers and their dependents, dependents of some members of the armed forces, and victims of slavery or domestic violence. In 2024, the charges were £776 per year for students, their dependents, those on Youth Mobility Schemes, and those under aged 18, and £1035 for all other applicants who are not covered by exemptions.

Funding

The NHS is funded by general taxation and National Insurance contributions, plus around 1% of funding from patient charges for some services.

In 2022/3, £181.7 billion was spent by the Department of Health and Social Care on services in England. More than 94% of spend was on salaries and medicines.

In 2024/5, the NHS in Wales budgeted £11.74 billion for health and social care, which was 49% of its budget.

£19.5 billion was budgeted for health and social care in Scotland for 2024/5.

£7.3 billion was budgeted for health in Northern Ireland in 2024/5.

Staffing

The NHS is the largest employer in Europe, with one in every 25 adults in England working for the NHS. As of February 2023, NHS England employed 1.4 million staff. Nursing staff accounted for the largest cohort at more than 330,000 employees, followed by clinical support staff at 290,000, scientific and technical staff at 163,000 and doctors at 133,000.

Issues

Funding and costs

The funding of the NHS is usually an election issue, and fell under scrutiny during the Covid-19 pandemic.

In July 2022, The Telegraph reported that think tank Civitas found that health spending was costing about £10,000 per household in the UK. They said that this was the third highest share of GDP of any nation in Europe and claimed that the UK "has one of the most costly health systems – and some of the worst outcomes". The findings were made before the government increased health spending significantly, with a 1.25% increase in National Insurance, in April 2022. Civitas said that "runaway" health spending in the UK had increased by more than any country despite the drop in national income due to the COVID pandemic.

The Labour Government elected in 2024 stated that their policy was that the "NHS is broken". They announced an immediate stocktake of current pressures led by Labour peer Lord Ara Darzi. This was to be followed by development of a new "10 year plan" for the NHS to replace the NHS Long Term Plan published in 2019.

The potential rise of the cost of social care has been signaled by research. Professor Helen Stokes-Lampard of the Royal College of GPs said:  "It's a great testament to medical research, and the NHS, that we are living longer – but we need to ensure that our patients are living longer with a good quality of life. For this to happen we need a properly funded, properly staffed health and social care sector with general practice, hospitals and social care all working together – and all communicating well with each other, in the best interests of delivering safe care to all our patients."

Employment and waiting lists

EU workers joining and leaving the NHS in England, annual variation in absolute numbers (2012–2017)
  Joiner
  Leaver

In June 2018, the Royal College of Physicians calculated that medical training places need to be increased from 7,500 to 15,000 by 2030 to take account of part-time working among other factors. At that time there were 47,800 consultants working in the UK of which 15,700 were physicians. About 20% of consultants work less than full-time.

On 6 June 2022, The Guardian said that a survey of more than 20,000 frontline staff by the nursing trade union and professional body, the Royal College of Nursing, found that only a quarter of shifts had the planned number of registered nurses on duty.

The NHS will potentially have a shortage of general practitioners. From 2015 to 2022, the number of GPs fell by 1,622 and some of those continuing to work have changed to work part-time. 

In 2023, a report revealed that NHS staff had faced over incidents of 20,000 sexual misconduct from patients from 2017 to 2022 across 212 NHS Trusts.

In June 2023, the delayed NHS Long Term Workforce Plan was announced, to train doctors and nurses and create new roles within the health service.

The Welsh and UK governments announced a partnership on 23 September 2024 to reduce NHS waiting lists in England and Wales during the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool. This collaboration aimed to share best practices and tackle common challenges. Previously, Eluned Morgan rejected a Conservative proposal for treating Welsh patients in England. The Welsh Conservatives welcomed the new partnership as overdue, while Plaid Cymru criticized it as insufficient for addressing deeper issues within the Welsh NHS.

Mental health

One in four patients throughout the UK wait over three months to see an NHS mental health professional, with 6% waiting at least a year. The National Audit Office found mental health provisions for children and young people will not meet growing demand, despite promises of increased funding. Currently one-quarter of young people needing mental health services can get NHS help.The Department of Health and Social Care hopes to raise the ratio to 35%. Efforts to improve mental health provisions could reveal previously unmet demand.

NHS England is expanding mental health services. The mental health charity, Mind, said that the £2.3bn a year was important and that the "longer-term strategy was developed in consultation with people with mental health problems to ensure their views are reflected."

Inclusion

In 2024, some NHS hospitals required radiographers to ask all male patients aged 12 to 55 if they were pregnant for inclusivity purposes. This received a lot of coverage in the media.

Performance

Performance of the NHS is generally assessed separately at the level of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Since 2004 the Commonwealth Fund has produced surveys, "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall", comparing the performance of health systems in 11 wealthy countries in which the UK generally ranks highly. In the 2021 survey the NHS dropped from first overall to fourth as it had fallen in key areas, including 'access to care and equity.' The Euro Health Consumer Index attempted to rank the NHS against other European health systems from 2014 to 2018. The right-leaning think tank Civitas produced an International Health Care Outcomes Index in 2022 ranking the performance of the UK health care system against 18 similar, wealthy countries since 2000. It excluded the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic as data stopped in 2019. The UK was near the bottom of most tables except households who faced catastrophic health spending.

A comparative analysis of health care systems in 2010, by The Commonwealth Fund, a left-leaning US health charity, put the NHS second in a study of seven rich countries. The report put the United Kingdom health systems above those of Germany, Canada and the United States; the NHS was deemed the most efficient among those health systems studied.

A 2018 study by the King's Fund, Health Foundation, Nuffield Trust, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies to mark the NHS 70th anniversary concluded that the main weakness of the NHS was healthcare outcomes. Mortality for cancer, heart attacks and stroke, was higher than average among comparable countries. The NHS was doing well at protecting people from heavy financial costs when ill. Waiting times were about the same, and the management of longterm illness was better than in other comparable countries. Efficiency was good, with low administrative costs and high use of cheaper generic medicines. Twenty-nine hospital trusts and boards out of 157 had not met any waiting-time target in the year 2017–2018. The Office for National Statistics reported in January 2019 that productivity in the English NHS had been growing at 3%, considerably faster than across the rest of the UK economy.

In 2019, The Times, commenting on a study in the British Medical Journal, reported that "Britain spent the least on health, £3,000 per person, compared with an average of £4,400, and had the highest number of deaths that might have been prevented with prompt treatment". The BMJ study compared "the healthcare systems of other developed countries in spending, staff numbers and avoidable deaths".

Over 130,000 deaths since 2012 in the UK could have been prevented if progress in public health policy had not stopped due to austerity, analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research found. Dean Hochlaf of the IPPR said: "We have seen progress in reducing preventable disease flatline since 2012."". The key NHS performance indicators (18 weeks (RTT), 4 hours (A&E) and cancer (2 week wait) have not been achieved since February 2016, July 2015 and December 2015 respectively.

A ranking of individual hospitals around the world, published by Newsweek in March 2022, no NHS hospital was listed within the top 40. St Thomas' Hospital was ranked at 41, followed by University College Hospital at 54, and Addenbrooke's Hospital at 79.

Overall satisfaction with the NHS in 2021 fell, more sharply in Scotland than in England, 17 points to 36% – the lowest level since 1997 according to the British Social Attitudes Survey. Dissatisfaction with hospital and GP waiting times were the biggest cause of the fall.

The NHS Confederation polled 182 health leaders and 9 in 10 warned that inadequate capital funding harmed their "ability to meet safety requirements for patients" in health settings including hospitals, ambulance, community and mental health services and GP practices.

Public perception of the NHS

In 2016 it was reported that there appeared to be support for higher taxation to pay for extra spending on the NHS as an opinion poll in 2016 showed that 70% of people were willing to pay an extra penny in the pound in income tax if the money were ringfenced and guaranteed for the NHS. Two thirds of respondents to a King's Fund poll, reported in September 2017, favoured increased taxation to help finance the NHS.

A YouGov poll reported in May 2018 showed that 74% of the UK public believed there were too few nurses.

The trade union, Unite, said in March 2019 that the NHS had been under pressure as a result of economic austerity.

A 2018 public survey reported that public satisfaction with the NHS had fallen from 70% in 2010 to 53% in 2018. The NHS is consistently ranked as the institution that makes people proudest to be British, beating the royal family, Armed Forces and the BBC. One 2019 survey ranked nurses and doctors – not necessarily NHS staff – amongst the most trustworthy professions in the UK.

In November 2022 a survey by Ipsos and the Health Foundation found just a third of respondents agreed the NHS gave a good service nationally, and 82% thought the NHS needed more funding. 62% expected care standards to fall during the following 12 months. Sorting out pressure and workload on staff and increasing staff numbers were the chief priorities the poll found. Improving A&E waiting times and routine services were also concerns. Just 10% of UK respondents felt their government had the correct plans for the NHS. The Health Foundation stated in spite of these concerns, the public is committed to the founding principles of the NHS and 90% of respondents believe the NHS should be free, 89% believe NHS should provide a comprehensive service for everyone, and 84% believe the NHS should be funded mainly through taxation.

Role in combating coronavirus pandemic

In 2020, the NHS issued medical advice in combating COVID-19 and partnered with tech companies to create computer dashboards to help combat the nation's coronavirus pandemic. During the pandemic, the NHS also established integrated COVID into its 1-1-1 service line as well. Following his discharge from the St. Thomas' Hospital in London on 13 April 2020 after being diagnosed with COVID-19, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson described NHS medical care as "astonishing" and said that the "NHS saved my life. No question." In this time, the NHS underwent major re-organisation to prepare for the COVID-19 pandemic.

On 5 July 2021, Queen Elizabeth II awarded the NHS the George Cross. The George Cross, the highest award for gallantry available to civilians and is slightly lower in stature to the Victoria Cross, is bestowed for acts of the greatest heroism or most conspicuous courage. In a handwritten note the Queen said the award was being made to all NHS staff past and present for their "courage, compassion and dedication" throughout the pandemic.

Hospital beds

In 2015, the UK had 2.6 hospital beds per 1,000 people. In September 2017, the King's Fund documented the number of NHS hospital beds in England as 142,000, describing this as less than 50% of the number 30 years previously. In 2019 one tenth of the beds in the UK were occupied by a patient who was alcohol-dependent.

NHS music releases

The NHS have released various charity singles including:

CICE (sea ice model)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CICE_(sea_ice_model) CICE ( / s aɪ s ...