Operations expert community

Several detailed performance measures were collected, comprising extensive information about the various phases of the scenario corresponding to the defined HFEs. However, for the present paper, audio/video recordings coupled with simulator log data, constituted the fundamental sources for writing partial communication extracts and narratives of crew performance of the HFEs, and for allowing detailed understanding of what the crews did, when they did it, and why. Interdisciplinary teams of operational experts and human factor specialists performed all analyses these constitute the source material for the analysis presented in this paper. Quantitative and qualitative results about the crew performance of the HFEs, the drivers of performance and the observed difficulties will be reported in a Halden Work Report (HWR) and later in a NUREG report, as part of the International Empirical HRA study. 

Along with the capability for the operator to evaluate and trend, information can be communicated to a host computer. Additionally, archived data may be sent by modem to a remote location for use in planning, reporting, or expert evaluation by support personnel. 

Discussions and interviews with the task experts can be supplemented with observations of their actual performance, for example, taking notes on certain aspects of the task or taking video or audio recordings. Observational techniques can reveal information that may be difficult to acquire in any other way. Detailed physical task performance data can be recorded, and major environmental influences (e.g., noise, light, interruptions) can all be faithfully represented. Observations can also provide an insight into the way that the team members communicate, allocate job responsibilities, and make use of operating procedures and other resources. 

To make the process practical for community hospitals, this technology must be inexpensive and easily operated in the ED. Transmission of CT images to experienced radiologists for formal and final interpretation is essential for quality control and feedback. As a result, systems that permit remote decision-making by expert physicians reduce the manpower needed to provide acute stroke team coverage in ED without around-the-clock access to in-house stroke neurology. 

The keystone of managing chemical reactivity hazards is line responsibility. The "line" referred to here is the chain of command and authority that extends from the operator to the chief executive officer of the company. When all the advice and consultation is gathered relative to an issue, such as from relevant area experts and safety personnel, it is the business responsibility to provide leadership. It does so by communicating values, setting policy, making appropriate decisions, allocating the necessary resources, and following up to ensure implementation. 

Facilities and Equipment The technical experts who have an understanding of pharmaceutical science, risk factors, and manufacturing processes related to the product are responsible for defining specific facility and equipment requirements. The equipment must be qualified, calibrated, cleaned, and maintained to prevent contamination and product mix-ups. It is important to remember that the GMPs place as much emphasis on process equipment as on testing equipment while most quality systems focus only on testing equipment. Control Outsourced Operations Quality systems call for contracts with outside suppliers that clearly describe the materials or service, quality specification responsibilities, and communication mechanisms. 

Drawing up the blueprint also sets a common language and communicates the shared vision for the level of operational excellence required across the production network. It provides a clear idea of the company s future operating system. Company executives also benefit, as it sets their individual activities in an overarching context. Finally, a blueprint can be codified and expert groups can be established to help roll it out globally. However, caution must be exercised so that this does not lead to yet another corporate standard that is not appropriate for the local sites, and therefore is never realized. 

You too can help distribute this Expert Report. In the first phase of this operation, I myself will send copies to 1,000 leading Germans. Among them will be leaders of the military, business, scientific, and university communities, in particular members of chemistry and history faculties. I shall send a copy to every representative in parliament as well as media personalities. 

The Federal Rules of Evidence (ERE) were adopted in 1975. Subsequently most states (at least 37) have adopted their own codified rules of evidence modeled closely on the FRE. For scientific evidence, the most relevant of the Rules are found in Article VII of the FRE in a section known as Opinions and Expert Testimony. Prior to 1993, some federal appellate courts had applied Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence to medical and scientific experts. (Rule 702 authorizes scientific testimony whenever it will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.) In 1993, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 US 579, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an important interpretation of Rule 702. Seven of the nine justices ruled that judges must serve as evidentiary gatekeepers who determine whether proffered evidence is scientifically valid and relevant. The Court suggested several factors for judges to consider in determining whether to admit a particular theory or technique Is the theory or hypothesis testable Has it been tested Has the theory or technique been subjected to peer review and publication For a particular scientific technique or methodology, what is the known or potential rate of error What (if any) are the standards that control the technique s operation To what extent is the theory or technique generally accepted in the scientific community ... 

The 3D simulation expert, who also plays the manager role for this small subprocess, starts the task for 3D simulation. The corresponding state change is propagated immediately via the communication server. Thus, the client keeps informed about the operations performed by the contractor (and vice versa). Subsequently, the 3D simulation expert refines the simulation task into a sequence of subtasks for analyzing the results of ID simulation, generating... 

The experts, five men and four women, were between the ages of 23 and 34 and studied or graduated in computer science, civil engineering and mechanical engineering. All of them worked at the computer daily and used the communication tools mentioned above. The experts had worked with Windows and Unix operating systems for 7.5 years on average. 

---