Chevron Left
返回到 Population Health: Governance

學生對 莱顿大学 提供的 Population Health: Governance 的評價和反饋

22 個評分
7 條評論


How can we organise care in such a way that we optimize experience, quality and costs? What type of governance is needed? And how should healthcare organisations collaborate? These are central questions in this course. In answering them, we depart from a recognition of the impact of three crucial global shifts in health care governance: 1) the change in focus from cure to population health, 2) the increased attention to social determinants of health, and 3) the stronger involvement of non-governmental healthcare organisations in service delivery networks. The course is unique in combining the Population Health perspective with theories of healthcare system governance. It takes a ‘multi-level’ perspective: the participant will look at healthcare governance from different angles in the healthcare system as a whole: from the global and national level, to networks of organisations, to individual care organisations, and finally to the healthcare professional. All these actors should function well to optimize accessible, affordable and high quality of care. To attain these goals, specific managerial network and leadership skills are required....

1 - Population Health: Governance 的 7 個評論(共 7 個)

創建者 Hosam M G A


The course is extremely valuable, requires reading and interaction and assessment is new for me in this course, different than other course I have studied. The course is also based on critical thinking practical quizzes.

創建者 Héctor S


Great review of the general aspects of Health Governance principles

創建者 Marc R


It's a very good structured course.

創建者 Dr. K Y J


great lecturer, easy to understand.

創建者 Tom R M M


Thanks so much! I am so happy.

創建者 Marta K


Personally, I enjoyed the last week the most. I wish there were more case studies and interviews. Otherwise overall, a good intro to the matter.

創建者 李德君



I am unable to guess any more after 6 ttrries: what do you want to hear???

All of these stakeholders are wrong:

Q5: hospital, cardiacInsight, share holders, management, research, marketing, competitors, politics

Q6: doctors, administration, economics, patients, doctors, reimbursement, insurance, competitors

Is there something wrong with the evaluation?