RM analysis Kati Iso-Markku: Difference between revisions

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
==Group 1==
==Group 1==


'''Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
'''Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
*Relevance:
*Relevance:
*Pertinence:
*Pertinence:
Line 25: Line 25:
==Group 2==
==Group 2==


'''Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
'''Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
*Relevance:
*Relevance:
*Pertinence:
*Pertinence:
Line 41: Line 41:
==Group 3==
==Group 3==


'''Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
'''Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
*Relevance:
*Relevance:
*Pertinence:
*Pertinence:
Line 57: Line 57:
==Group 4==
==Group 4==


'''Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
'''Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs'''
*Relevance:
*Relevance:
*Pertinence:
*Pertinence:

Revision as of 12:56, 9 April 2011

Main Points


Group 1

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Group 2

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Group 3

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Group 4

Perspective of the Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability:


Overall Statements

Ministry of Social and Health Affairs

Journalist

Evaluation of the swine flu/narcolepsy model

  • Relevance:
  • Pertinence:
  • Usability:
  • Acceptability: