1 / 19

Quality assurance : state of progress

Quality assurance : state of progress. Sandrine Sleiman, Scientific Committee, Lisbon, 16 June 2009. 1. Quality assurance : latest developments. New guidelines for national reporting for 2009 New criteria for the assessment of the implementation of the 5 KI - Updated quality reports.

shaun
Download Presentation

Quality assurance : state of progress

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Quality assurance : state of progress Sandrine Sleiman, Scientific Committee, Lisbon, 16 June 2009

  2. 1. Quality assurance : latest developments • New guidelines for national reporting for 2009 • New criteria for the assessment of the implementation of the 5 KI - Updated quality reports

  3. 2. National reports : overview of Quality Reports • accessibility of data • timeliness • relevance of information • accuracy, coherence, comparability

  4. I) Accessibility of data : Punctuality

  5. N° 1051 I) Accessibility of data : Punctuality ST+SQ** Deadline By 30/09/2008 615 reports By 31/10/2008 913 reports **not counting: EDDRA, FAR, test country reports, draft reports (not submitted), deleted reports

  6. I) Accessibility of data NR 2008 : 3535 pages ** The shortest report was 58 pages in length and the longest 221 ** No report from EL and MT

  7. II) Timeliness (reporting year 2007-2008) • NR contains in general most recent data available at the FP, although few exceptions • Time lag between study is carried out and results published = constraint • When no new data available many countries mention when new figures will be published

  8. III) Relevance of information • Many interesting information reported • Level of details varying from sections and from countries to others • A few countries doing “cumulative” reporting : → difficult to find changes → risk to loose an important new information “hidden” in old text (e.g. one number only changed)

  9. IV) Accuracy • Methodologies of studies are usually well described BUT with some exceptions such as for DRD definitions, more details are needed, this is adressed in QR without much effect so far … • Few cases of information not reported in the NR although existing-available data (legal and institutional framework)

  10. IV) Coherence • Few discrepencies between figures in STs and NR • Data reported in ST not analysed in the NR and data reported in NR not reported in STs e.g. cohort studies in DRD, drug-related crime, ST 12 on prisons…→ complementarity of NR and other tools could be improved

  11. IV) Comparability • Reasonable level of adherence to guidelines • Overall trends by gender, over time and geographical areas are described • In some countries, it is still too early to have many information on trends

  12. Situation getting better ?

  13. More and more countries are taking into account EMCDDA recommendations content wise !

  14. After all, which changes ? • Comments included in the QR are more detailed • QR becoming more consistent • Criteria for qualitative sections were adapted • Became more interactive tool, more feedback on the feedback…

  15. Challenges • New structure, new guidelines → new QR • Increase complementarity with other QA tools, e.g. 5KI assessment • Better integration of Fonte feedbacks for more consistency • Further improvement of Fonte • QR as an opportunity for improvement, useful tool at national level

  16. 3. Capacity development 1- EU RTX Academies: participation of all the NFPs and interested experts on topics of EU interest. 4 Pillars: 2- National RTX Academies: national trainings and/or conferences for specific interest for the host NFP 3- Direct Financial contribution: upon request within the framework or developing the implementation of the 5 key Indicators. 4- Main tool for technical assistance for candidate and and potentail candidate countries

  17. 3. Capacity development EU RTX Academies: • 1st Academy of the year is always linked to the mandatory Selected Issue • To define the other topics: • input from the scientific units taking into account the EMCDDA 3 YWP • input from RTX unit after having analysed and drafted all the Quality reports • Input from the NFPs CONSTRAINT: BUDGET

  18. Please find all PP and related documents on the RTX Academy web page http://academy.emcdda.europa.eu Username: ReitoxAcademy Password: qwe123 xavier.poos@emcdda.europa.eu

  19. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

More Related