PubMed · 16524028
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Eileen Brown. 2005. Making an informed voting choice.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16524028/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
This article outlines the struggle between the power of the health care professional and the rights of the individual to choose freely a modality of treatment. Nurses are instrumental in assisting patients in making the best decision for a therapy they will have to assume for the rest of their lives. In guiding patients' decision, nurses must take into account these unavoidable contingencies: changes in lifestyle, nutritional restrictions, level of acceptance, compliance issues, ease of training and availability of support/facilities. Ensuring that the patient makes an informed decision is therefore an ongoing challenge for nurses as they are taking part in a delicate balancing act between not directly influencing the patient's decision while making sure the patient is accurately informed.
Environmental policies and guidelines often specify standards for environmental indicators. The first part of this paper argues that, where compliance with these standards is assessed with the help of statistical inference, an inference employing a three-alternatives decision rule can provide more sensible feedback to environmental managers for precautionary decision-making. The second part of the paper shows how a three-alternatives statistical inference about compliance with a percentile standard might be applied to a small number of observations using a non-parametric binomial interval. This interval expression of uncertainty results in the sample size requirements for various percentile ranks becoming explicit.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.