<p dir="ltr">So Stefan,</p>
<p dir="ltr">The panel arrangement is up to you. It would have been nice to have a clear common denominator in the title, yet not necessary. The common denominator can be population modeling. </p>
<p dir="ltr">This changes the original plan a bit, yet it is still ok if you are all comfortable with it and want to present as part of the panel. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I would still ask for panelists to review each others work to be familiar with details and make a more cohesive panel. </p>
<p dir="ltr">It will be nice to bring out commonalities and differences between works. </p>
<p dir="ltr"> Jacob </p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mar 4, 2016 4:13 AM, "Stefan Scholz" <<a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de">stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
could we agree on a mixture of the topics, like "data sources,
parameter estimation and calibration"? My topic would be on "Social
(media) network data in models in the absence of survey data: An
example of the German MSM-population". It would take some creativity
to fit that into "model calibration" ;-)<br>
<br>
I hope this comes not to late!<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Stefan<br>
<br>
<div>Am 16.02.2016 um 17:44 schrieb Dammann,
Olaf:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">All:
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I
like “model calibration” quite a bit.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">My
paper would be on “Model calibration: Four levels of
calibration – A critical appraisal”
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Olaf<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
Jacob Barhak [<a href="mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 16, 2016 5:36 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Jeljer Hoekstra<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Stefan Scholz; <a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org" target="_blank">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a>;
Mélanie Prague; Dammann, Olaf<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Population Modeling] Discussing the
Population Modeling panel in SummerSim<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Melanie, Hi Jeljer, Hi Stefan, Hi
Olaf,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Since the 14-March deadline for paper
submission is coming closer, and since we were discussing
a panel, I would appreciate it if you can decide on a
common prefix for the panel.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So far we had a discussion revolving
around estimation, validation, calibration. Please choose
a common denominator title to fit all your work that will
form a base for the panel and submit it to the list.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So far, here are the titles you
suggested as I extracted them from your posts:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Melanie: 'simulation vs. estimation’ <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Olaf: "data sources, constraints,
validation issues"<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Stefan & Jeljer: "model
calibration" - <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The last topic of "Model
Calibration" seems to be a common denominator so far, yet
still possible for debate - after all you had some nice
discussions and may have a better idea.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yet if the last topic prefix is
comfortable to you all, then I ask that you will submit
your paper title to the mailing list to set the
expectations from the panel and leave you all sufficient
time to write the short paper.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I look forward to see your paper
titles.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Jacob<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Jeljer
Hoekstra <<a href="mailto:jeljer.hoekstra@rivm.nl" target="_blank">jeljer.hoekstra@rivm.nl</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Dear
Jacob, Stefan and others,</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">I
agree with Jacob that estimation and calibration
generate parameter values based on observed data. I
never explicitly thought about in those terms but that
is what it is.</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">I
have always used the terms in combination; calibrate a
model and estimate a parameter. I don't consider the one
an automated search and the other a manual human search
per se . Usually if you estimate a parameter the focus
is on one parameter and a lot of statistical theory and
software exist to do that automatically. Whereas if you
calibrate a model the focus is often on all or a group
of parameters in the model, which is perhaps somewhat
messier and needs more human interference. I am not sure
though.</span> <br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">I
am interessted in the topic Stefan raised. What if you
find parameters in the literature or you have estimated
them yourself with some dataset and then you test and
adjust those variables (calibrate?) so your model
replicates some other dataset better. How much change
in those parameters do you accept, keeping in mind that
the parameter may be interpreted slightly different in
the calibrated model.</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Furthermore,
if you calibrate your model you need some goodness of
fit criterium. I wonder if people have experience with
weighing output variables including a mixture of
categorical variables (e.g. dead/alive, smoking) and
continous variables( e.g. BMI, cholesterol levels).</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Validation
is a related subject. I consider a model validated if it
can mimic, to some degree a dataset that was not used to
calibrate/estimate it. Obviously also here you will need
some goodness of fit criterium to see if the model is
validated or not. In my experience we do not often have
the luxury of a complete extra dataset for validation.
So we end up in the discussion Stefan mentioned, if the
model is calibrated how far do we accept parameters to
be different from those estimated elsewhere.</span> <br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">@stefan,
thanks for poining out GAMLSS we will have a look.</span>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">best
wishes</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Jeljer</span>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5f5f5f">From:
</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Jacob
Barhak <<a href="mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com" target="_blank">jacob.barhak@gmail.com</a>></span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5f5f5f">To:
</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Stefan
Scholz <<a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</a>>,
</span><br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5f5f5f">Cc:
</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">"<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org" target="_blank"><a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org" target="_blank">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a></a>"
<<a href="mailto:popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org" target="_blank">popmodwkgrpimag-news@simtk.org</a>>,
Mélanie Prague <<a href="mailto:melanie.prague@isped.u-bordeaux2.fr" target="_blank">melanie.prague@isped.u-bordeaux2.fr</a>>,
Jeljer Hoekstra <<a href="mailto:jeljer.hoekstra@rivm.nl" target="_blank">jeljer.hoekstra@rivm.nl</a>>,
"Dammann, Olaf" <<a href="mailto:Olaf.Dammann@tufts.edu" target="_blank">Olaf.Dammann@tufts.edu</a>></span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5f5f5f">Date:
</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">05/02/2016
00:50</span>
<br>
<span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#5f5f5f">Subject:
</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"">Re:
[Population Modeling] Discussing the Population Modeling
panel in SummerSim</span>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center">
<hr style="color:#a0a0a0" align="center" noshade size="3" width="100%">
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
So Stefan, <br>
<br>
Since this is part of the discussion on your panel
topic, you will have to choose the topic and I will
try not to intervene much. Yet do allow me to add a
note regarding calibration and estimation.
<br>
<br>
Both calibration and estimation generate model
parameters as outputs from observed known data.
<br>
<br>
Will you agree with me that the term calibration would
be more appropriate to human manipulated
parameters while estimation is perhaps more general
term that includes automated machine algorithm
methods?
<br>
<br>
I have seen the term estimation used for parameter
estimation using Delphi style human voting, so I think
"estimation" would include "calibration" as a sub
category.
<br>
<br>
Even though there is always some sort of human input
to the modeling process, it seems things are becoming
more automated these days. What term would you use for
heavily machine dependent estimation algorithms as
opposed to human tightly controlled calibration? Is
there a term for those methods anyone in the list
prefers using? <br>
<br>
Hopefully this will contribute to the panel
discussion. <br>
<br>
Jacob <br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Stefan Scholz <<a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank"><a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</a></a>>
wrote:
<br>
Dear all, <br>
<br>
I just want to add the issue of "model calibration"
which seems to me as being related to estimation and
validation. Just to give a short example what I mean
by calibration: We use some information of a data set
to estimate our model parameters, run the model based
on those parameters and see that the results are not
externally valid. We the iteratively change some of
the input parameters until the model results are
externally valid. I would find it very interesting to
discuss if calibration should be performed and if so,
how far from the originally estimated parameters you
would accept your calibrated values to be. [I hope I
am not stating the obvious or missed some guidance on
this topic already available ;-) ]<br>
<br>
@ Jelster: If you use R, maybe the GAMLSS-package
developed by Prof. Mikis Stasinopoulos is helpful to
you. As far as I understand it, the package was
developed from the need of parameter estimation in
agent-based modeling. You can estimate all parameters
of large list of probability distributions. So let's
say you want to estimate the probability of getting
diabetes conditional on age, sex, education, etc. You
can estimate a general linear model using a
beta-distribution and include the resulting
coefficients to include them in your model. So, every
person in your model can calculate the parameters of
the beta-distribution based on their age, sex,
education, etc. and you can draw random numbers from
that distribution to determine whether a person gets
diabetes or not.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Stefan <br>
<br>
<br>
Am 03.02.2016 um 01:45 schrieb Jacob Barhak: <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Melanie, Hi Jeljer, Hi Olaf, Hi
Stefan, <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It seems the panel is forming
nicely. I will try to summarize what we had so far
and help figure the rest.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1. The topic seems to revolve
around "estimation and validation in population
modeling" with some variations. If you are all ok with
this general topic, I suggest we stick with it as a
base.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2. It seems there is agreement on
separate papers with the same title prefix. So please
allocate time on writing a short 3 page paper. Since
panelists are not closely affiliated, each will review
the papers of another panelist which will contribute
to panel cohesion since the panelists will influence
each others final paper. Note that the review process
is public and non-blind.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">3. Presentations followed by a
period of questions to all panelists seems to be the
choice. I assume there will be 20-30 minutes per
panelist, yet we will have to set timing once we know
number of presentations.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Olaf asked about other presenters.
Yes, there will be other presentations by non
panelists. In fact any one of you can choose to detach
from the panel and submit a paper on their own. I will
send a CFP to the list following this message.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The difference for panelists would
be: <br>
1. Panelists will have some discount that SCS promised
- I have no exact details yet. This makes sense since
they will have more involvement.
<br>
2. Panelists will gain extra exposure which you are
already getting with these communications.
<br>
3. If time is available, panelists will get more time
for discussion beyond other presenters. I will
communicate with organizers to see what is possible
beyond that. Yet for now, assume the panel is part of
the BMPM track.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Note that SummerSim is a
Multi-conference, so having a panel may attract more
people. From the past, you should expect about 10-20
in the room for the presentation if last years are
indicative. I suspect a panel can attract more.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">So for panelists still interested,
please: <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1. Confirm that you are ok with the
topic and format by sending an email to this list. Or
continue discussing the topic until consensus is
reached. And you can split into two panels with
separate topics, or announce you are interested in a
paper outside the panel. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2. Start writing a short 3 page
paper to submit to the SCS web site. Recall that the
title prefix should be the same for all papers if you
are in the panel.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">3. Allocate time to review a paper
or two by another panelist. This review will be
public.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hopefully this explains the next
steps and I hope more panelists would express interest
in the topic forming.
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Jacob<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Dear All, <br>
I agree with Stefan re 1 and 2. <br>
<br>
1. I like the idea of talking about input-output stuff
- data sources, constraints, validation issues.
<br>
<br>
2. Fully agree with Stefan. <br>
<br>
3. If we have slides, this should be flash talks, not
longish formal presentations. I am still unclear
whether we have presentations from conference
participants who are NOT panelists?
<br>
<br>
My 2 cents <br>
Olaf <br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Olaf Dammann, MD <br>
Professor of Public Health & Community Medicine <br>
Tufts University School of Medicine <br>
Boston, MA 02111 <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Jan 21, 2016, at 4:00 AM, Stefan Scholz <<a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank"><a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</a></a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
thanks for all your efforts! Here are my thoughts on
the three points:<br>
<br>
1. Topic: I am not quite sure whether the topics
really do mean the same thing. I would understand
Melanies suggestion as "what are the differences in
the results/<b>outputs</b> from estimation vs.
simulation" whereas I would understand the topic
"estimation in population modeling" more as estimation
of model <b>input </b>parameters. (Please tell me,
if I got that wrong!) I think both are interesting
topics and maybe we could bring them both together
under the general topic of validity (external and
internal). (i.e. how do we estimate model input to get
externally valid results and how do we assess the
latter)<br>
<br>
2. I would vote for separate papers under the same
topic, sharing the same prefix.<br>
<br>
3. I would go for option B). Option A) is fine as
well, but we should make clear if there are some
contrary opinions on this topic. If panelists agree on
almost every topic, this might get boring. Also, I
would see the number of people in the audience a
critical factor for a panel. If we are a small group,
sharing the methods used for estimation and discussing
it in the group might be more beneficial to all
attendees.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Stefan<br>
<br>
Am 19.01.2016 um 19:42 schrieb Jacob Barhak: <br>
Hi Melanie, Hi Olaf, Hi Stefan, Hi Carl, <br>
<br>
You all expressed interest in appearing in a
population modeling panel in SummerSim.
<br>
<br>
Melanie also suggested a topic: <br>
"differences and extrapolation concerns around
'simulation vs. estimation’ in bio-medical area"
<br>
<br>
At this point, I wish interested parties to discuss
the following: <br>
<br>
1. The topic - feel free to suggest alternative
topics/titles and we can see how having the panel will
contribute to the topic. Note that if we end up with
different topics, it is also ok since others may join
to support the topic you suggested. Hopefully there
will be synergy, yet complementary topics or even
different opinions are possible. This discussion
itself is valuable.
<br>
<br>
2. Writing Format. The conference includes a paper.
Part of the discussion should be how do you prefer to
be published. Do you want a joint paper? Or would you
like each to submit a short paper with similar topics?
This would probably be tied to the topic you suggest.
Yet note that whatever paper format chosen, it will
undergo public non-blind review.
<br>
<br>
3. Presentation format: How would you like the talk to
be? Possibilities include: A) Totally informal
discussion where panelists converge amongst
themselves, possibly with moderation and questions
from he audience. B) Presentations with a projector of
each panelist and then a period of questions. C) A
combination of both, for example very short
introductions with a projector and then a discussion.
Assume half an hour per panelist, yet this may change.
<br>
<br>
As a default starting point for discussion, allow me
to suggest the following: <br>
<br>
1. Topic Estimation in population modeling - its
generalization for what Melanie suggested - feel free
to reshape it any way comfortable to you.
<br>
<br>
2. Writing format: Very short separate papers using
the topic as a title prefix. to have a common prefix
fro all panelists. Here is an example: Estimation in
population Modeling - application in Disease Models.
<br>
<br>
3. Presentation format: Short digital introductions of
about 15 minutes each - with only a few slides and a
discussion that will start with expanding prepared
topics encountered during discussions and review and
then answering questions from the audience.
<br>
<br>
This default can be changed during discussion. <br>
<br>
Please feel free to join this discussion if you are
interested in appearing in a population modeling panel
in SummerSim - even if you are not personally
addressed. This post is initially directed to those
who expressed interest on this list, yet we can
certainly expand the scope to include more panelists,
and I know of interest by others at this point.
<br>
<br>
I look forward to your opinions. <br>
<br>
Jacob <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>_______________________________________________</tt><span style="font-family:"Courier New""><br>
<tt>PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list</tt><br>
</span><a href="mailto:PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org" target="_blank"><tt>PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org</tt></a><span style="font-family:"Courier New""><br>
</span><a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" target="_blank"><tt>https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</tt></a><span style="font-family:"Courier New""><br>
</span><br>
<br>
<tt>-- </tt><span><br>
<tt>Stefan Scholz</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>University of Bielefeld</tt><br>
<tt>Faculty of Public Health</tt><br>
<tt>Department of Health Economics and Health
Management</tt><br>
<tt>P.O. Box 10 01 31</tt><br>
<tt>D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Phone: +49 0521 | 106-2648</tt><br>
<tt>Mail: </tt></span><a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank"><tt>stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</tt></a>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list<u><span style="color:blue"><br>
</span></u><a href="mailto:PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org" target="_blank">PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org</a><u><span style="color:blue"><br>
</span></u><a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" target="_blank">https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</a>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list<u><span style="color:blue"><br>
</span></u><a href="mailto:PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org" target="_blank">PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org</a><u><span style="color:blue"><br>
</span></u><a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" target="_blank">https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<tt>-- </tt><span><br>
<tt>Stefan Scholz</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>University of Bielefeld</tt><br>
<tt>Faculty of Public Health</tt><br>
<tt>Department of Health Economics and Health
Management</tt><br>
<tt>P.O. Box 10 01 31</tt><br>
<tt>D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany</tt><br>
<br>
<tt>Phone: +49 0521 | 106-2648</tt><br>
<tt>Mail: </tt></span><a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank"><tt>stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</tt></a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.rivm.nl/Proclaimer" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><br>
Proclaimer RIVM http://www.rivm.nl/Proclaimer</span></a>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Stefan Scholz
University of Bielefeld
Faculty of Public Health
Department of Health Economics and Health Management
P.O. Box 10 01 31
D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany
Phone: +49 0521 | 106-2648
Mail: <a href="mailto:stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de" target="_blank">stefan.scholz@uni-bielefeld.de</a></pre>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
PopModWkGrpIMAG-news mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org">PopModWkGrpIMAG-news@simtk.org</a><br>
<a href="https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/popmodwkgrpimag-news</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>