Global University Rankings (GURs) intend to measure the performance of universities worldwide. Other rankings have recently appeared that evaluate the creation of environmental policies in universities, e.g., the Universitas Indonesia (UI) GreenMetric. This work aims to analyze the interaction between the Top 500 of such rankings by considering the geographical location of universities and their typologies. A descriptive analysis and a statistical logistical regression analysis were carried out. The former demonstrated that European and North American universities predominated the Top 500 of GURs, while Asian universities did so in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking, followed by European universities. Older universities predominated the Top 500 of GURs, while younger ones did so in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking. The second analysis demonstrated that although Latin American universities were barely present in the Top 500 of GURs, the probability of them appearing in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking was 5-fold. We conclude that a low association exists between universities’ academic performance and their commitment to the natural environment in the heart of their institutions. It would be advisable for GURs to include environmental indicators to promote sustainability at universities and to contribute to climate change.

Increased life expectancy in Western societies does not necessarily mean better quality of life. To improve resources management, management systems have been set up in health systems to stratify patients according to morbidity, such as Clinical Risk Groups (CRG). The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of multimorbidity on health-related quality of life (HRQL) in primary care. An observational cross-sectional study, based on a representative random sample (n = 306) of adults from a health district (N = 32,667) in east Spain (Valencian Community), was conducted in 2013. Multimorbidity was measured by stratifying the population with the CRG system into nine mean health statuses (MHS). HRQL was assessed by EQ-5D dimensions and the EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS). The effect of the CRG system, age and gender on the utility value and VAS was analysed by multiple linear regression. A predictive analysis was run by binary logistic regression with all the sample groups classified according to the CRG system into the five HRQL dimensions by taking the “healthy” group as a reference. Multivariate logistic regression studied the joint influence of the nine CRG system MHS, age and gender on the five EQ-5D dimensions. Of the 306 subjects, 165 were female (mean age of 53). The most affected dimension was pain/discomfort (53%), followed by anxiety/depression (42%). The EQ-5D utility value and EQ VAS progressively lowered for the MHS with higher morbidity, except for MHS 6, more affected in the five dimensions, save self-care, which exceeded MHS 7 patients who were older, and MHS 8 and 9 patients, whose condition was more serious. The CRG system alone was the variable that best explained health problems in HRQL with 17%, which rose to 21% when associated with female gender. Age explained only 4%. This work demonstrates that the multimorbidity groups obtained by the CRG classification system can be used as an overall indicator of HRQL. These utility values can be employed for health policy decisions based on cost-effectiveness to estimate incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALY) with routinely e-health data. Patients under 65 years with multimorbidity perceived worse HRQL than older patients or disease severity. Knowledge of multimorbidity with a stronger impact can help primary healthcare doctors to pay attention to these population groups.

Nowadays, companies have more freedom on how they can report their corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions and outcomes, despite them being increasingly important for how investors and shareholders can obtain knowledge about companies’ non-financial aspects. This is why more importance is being attached to sustainability rankings as an additional tool to seek excellence and distinguish between companies. The main objective of the present research was to analyze the degree of similarity in sustainability valuations among the most important open-access sustainability rankings that have appeared in the last decade (Green Ranking, RepTrack, Global 100 most sustainable corporations, and Finance Yahoo Sustainability). The secondary objective was to study whether these rankings incorporated the most de facto prestigious brands, and the third objective was to learn of the influence of the level of controversy in Finance Yahoo Sustainability scores in technological companies. Our results reveal wide variability among open-access CSR rankings. Not all the most valued brands appear in the sustainability rankings, which indicates the differences between the rankings of brands and CSR rankings. Finally, the level of controversy was found to be an important aspect in companies’ CSR scores.