RM analysis Kati Iso-Markku

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Main Points


Group 1

Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Group 2

Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Group 3

Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Group 4

Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Perspective of a journalist

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:


Overall Statements

Perspective of the ministry of Social and Health Affairs

Perspective of a journalist

Evaluation of the swine flu/narcolepsy model

  1. Relevance:
  2. Pertinence:
  3. Usability:
  4. Acceptability:
Retrieved from "https://en.opasnet.org/index.php?title=RM_analysis_Kati_Iso-Markku&oldid=20242"