English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background The high variability in the types and number of measures adopted to evaluate childcare across European countries makes it necessary to investigate country practices to identify trends in setting national priorities in the assessment of child well-being. Objective This paper intends to investigate country practices under the lens of variability to explore possible trends in setting national priority in the evaluation of childcare. In particular, it analyses variability considering to what extent this depends on the tendency of adopting a broad vision (i.e. selecting measures for a larger variety of aspects) or whether this is influenced by the choice of adopting an in-depth approach (i.e. using more measures to analyse a specific aspect) Methods An ad hoc questionnaire was administered to a national expert in each country and yielded 352 measures. To analyse variability, the breadth in the number of aspects considered was explored using a convergence index, while the depth in the distribution of measures in each aspect was investigated by computing a coefficient of variation. Countries were grouped by adopting a hierarchical clustering approach. Results There is a high variability across countries in the selection of measures that cover different aspects of childcare. Preferences in the distribution of measures are significant even at the domain level and in countries that use a limited number of measures and become more evident at the category and sub-category levels. The statistical analysis clusters countries in four main groups and two outliers. The in-depth distribution of measures focused on a specific aspect shows a homogeneous pattern, with the identification of two main groups of countries. Conclusions A limited set of measures are shared across countries hampering a robust comparison of paediatric models. The selection of measures shows that the evaluation is closely related to national priorities as resulting from the number and types of measures adopted. Moreover, a range of a reasonable number of measures can be hypothesized to address the quality of childcare under a multi-dimensional perspective.

Variability in the assessment of children’s primary healthcare in 30 European countries