Operationalization guidance is needed to support health technology assessment (HTA) bodies considering implementing lifecycle HTA (LC-HTA) approaches. The 2022 Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Global Policy Forum (GPF) established a Task Force to develop a position paper on LC-HTA. In its first paper, the Task Force established a definition and framework for LC-HTA in order to tailor it to specific decision problems. This second paper focused on the provision of practical operational guidance to implement LC-HTA. Detailed descriptions of the three LC-HTA operational steps are provided (defining the decision problem, sequencing of HTA activities, and developing optimization criteria) and accompanied by worked examples and an operationalization checklist with 20 different questions for HTA bodies to consider when developing an LC-HTA approach. The questions were designed to be applicable across different types of HTA and scenarios, and require adaptation to local jurisdictions, remits, and context.

This article combines two things: it explores how one should undertake the project of defining ‘fundamentalism’ and, based on the ensuing desiderata, it actually provides such a definition. After a few preliminary comments on ‘fundamentalism’ and the value of defining it, five goals of definitions are distinguished and elucidated: accuracy, precision, fairness, clarity, and fecundity. After that, various kinds of definitions and their interrelations are spelled out. Finally, the author provides and defends a so-called explicative definition of ‘fundamentalism’ both in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions and in terms of stereotypical properties. On the basis of empirical literature and a scoping review, it is argued that a movement is fundamentalist if and only if it is (i) reactionary towards modern developments, (ii) itself modern, and (iii) based on a grand historical narrative. More specifically, a movement is fundamentalist if it exemplifies a large number of the following properties: (i) it is reactionary in its rejection of liberal ethics, science, or technological exploitation; (ii) it is modern in seeking certainty and control, embracing literalism and infallibility about particular scriptures, actively using media and technology, or making universal claims; and (iii) it presents a grand historical narrative in terms of paradise, fall, and redemption, or cosmic dualism.

Given the academic and media salience of democracy and its measurement, in this contribution we take a closer look at the various existing datasets. For this purpose, in the first two sections we look at democratic conceptualization and measurement, and then focus on the most used datasets on democracy and assess them against the conceptual criteria illustrated in the first section. The third section focuses on the notion of quality of democracy and how it has advanced the understanding of contemporary democracies. The subsequent section illustrates changes in democratic scoring in European countries over the past 15 years. Our results show that democracy has not become more robust in European countries: on the contrary, several countries witnessed significant democratic deterioration. Furthermore, we show that – with the exception of Polity – the indexes analysed are highly correlated and therefore could be equally useful for an ongoing analysis of European democracies.

This study proposes a novel and systematic theoretical framework to explain global welfare state policy differences. The existing scholarship examined ample welfare state variations, reforms, and transitions; however, it is typically limited to specific countries, regions, policies, or risks. In an endeavor to combine these theoretical and empirical insights, the global contemporary welfare state patterns remain vague. This study aims at bridging this gap in the literature by deploying an orderly and comprehensive three-step procedure. First, I formally design a three-stage global yet comparative conceptual framework that ensures consistency, inclusiveness, and compliance. Second, based on this framework, I assemble a unique comparative dataset for one-hundred-fifty countries, some of which appear for the first time in this literature. Third, I validate the framework using an advanced data reduction method named model-based cluster analysis. The results of this study demonstrate that global contemporary welfare states follow systematically divergent paths, revealing Proactive, Reactive, and Dual patterns.

Research on norms in International Relations (IR) includes various concepts related to how norms influence actions. These approaches focus on the decision-making process, and largely neglect the operationalization of norms. This omission leads to an analytical gap: a lack of attention to how the substance of abstract norms is transformed and constructed in the operationalization process. This article draws on the Foucauldian theme of governmentality to introduce a novel perspective on operationalizing norms. It focusses in particular on the role of techniques as understudied parts inherent to the reflexive processes of operationalization and meaning production. The article thereby contests the prevalence of fundamental norms in conventional IR theory. It demonstrates, instead, that global governance techniques do not simply translate rationalities into practice, but construct their very own normativities. These theoretical reflections are illustrated by analysing the operationalization of norms through indicators in the case of the European Union’s human rights policy.

Background: Over the last 20 years, a number of instruments developed for the assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in dementia have been introduced. The aim of this review is to synthesize evidence from published reviews on HRQL measures in dementia and any new literature in order to identify dementia specific HRQL instruments, the domains they measure, and their operationalization.

Methods: An electronic search of PsycINFO and PubMed was conducted, from inception to December 2011 using a combination of key words that included quality of life and dementia.

Results: Fifteen dementia-specific HRQL instruments were identified. Instruments varied depending on their country of development/validation, dementia severity, data collection method, operationalization of HRQL in dementia, psychometric properties, and the scoring. The most common domains assessed include mood, self-esteem, social interaction, and enjoyment of activities.

Conclusions: A number of HRQL instruments for dementia are available. The suitability of the scales for different contexts is discussed. Many studies do not specifically set out to measure dementia-specific HRQL but do include related items. Determining how best to operationalize the many HRQL domains will be helpful for mapping measures of HRQL in such studies maximizing the value of existing resources.