Search results

This case study delves into the evolving landscape of equity, inclusion and diversity (EID) initiatives within the health-care sector, with a specific focus on the “EverybodyIN” program implemented at the Mayo Clinic, a large academic Medical Center in the USA. Against the backdrop of growing awareness catalyzed by societal events, this case study aims to explore the multifaceted aspects of workplace conversations aimed at addressing racial disparities and fostering a more inclusive environment.

The case study relies on the application of critical race theory and a social constructionist approach to investigate the impact of a subset of voluntary educational conversations that were centered on the Black/African-American experience, on staff members’ racial understanding and allyship within the health-care organization. Through thematic analysis of postevent surveys and participant sentiments, three overarching themes emerged: appreciation, education and validation.

Through thematic analysis of postevent surveys and participant sentiments, three overarching themes emerged: appreciation, education and validation. The findings underscore the pivotal role of leadership buy-in, evidence-based practices, health equity and an ongoing commitment to “the journey” in successful EID efforts. The results highlight the significance of integrating EID into health-care organizations as a continuous endeavor that aligns with organizational values and mission.

The findings underscore the pivotal role that theory and practice play through a newly described framework that includes leadership buy-in, evidence-based practices, health equity and an ongoing commitment to “the journey” for successful EID efforts.

The results highlight the significance of integrating EID into health-care organizations as a continuous endeavor that aligns with organizational values and mission.

By fostering a safe and informed space for dialogue, organizations can empower staff to engage authentically and acquire cultural competence that may contribute to advancing health equity.

In line with the growing trend of companies focusing on achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs), this research paper aims to propose a classification of values of socially responsible companies aligned with the SDGs that these companies could fulfill.

The authors’ carried out a qualitative semiotic analysis of four companies as part of the corporate environmental communication initiative to focus on the corporate values conveyed in the messages. Using thematic analysis, the authors’ identified the SDGs achieved by their actions. By coding the values and the SDGs, the authors’ performed a top-down hierarchical classification, linking the value system to the SDGs.

This research unveils various relationships between corporate communication values and the practical implementation of specific SDGs. This paper sheds light on the central role of utilitarian values in achieving SDGs 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 and highlights the importance of existential values in reaching SDGs 8, 9, 10, 12, 11 and 17. Conversely, no utilitarian values contribute to the realization of SDGs 7, 8, 11, 13 and 17, while no existential values enable the achievement of SDGs 7, 12, 13 and 17.

This research makes a valuable contribution to the achievement of the SDGs by adopting a streamlined approach that aligns with specific company values. The classification of values by SDG provides an in-depth understanding of commitments toward these goals and promotes more coherent integration into corporate culture and business practices. This approach ensures that sustainable progress is aligned with the values communicated in their long-term strategy, enabling businesses to effectively address crises.

The purpose of this study is to examine the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in transforming the healthcare sector, with a focus on how AI contributes to entrepreneurship and value creation. This study also aims to explore the potential of combining AI with other technologies, such as cloud computing, blockchain, IoMT, additive manufacturing and 5G, in the healthcare industry.

Exploratory qualitative methodology was chosen to analyze 22 case studies from the USA, EU, Asia and South America. The data source was public and specialized podcast platforms.

The findings show that combining technologies can create a competitive advantage for technology entrepreneurs and bring about transitions from simple consumer devices to actionable healthcare applications. The results of this research identified three main entrepreneurship areas: 1. Analytics, including staff reduction, patient prediction and decision support; 2. Security, including protection against cyberattacks and detection of atypical cases; 3. Performance optimization, which, in addition to reducing the time and costs of medical procedures, includes staff training, reducing capital costs and working with new markets.

This study demonstrates how AI can be used with other technologies to cocreate value in the healthcare industry. This study provides a conceptual framework, “AI facilitators – AI achievers,” based on the findings and offer several theoretical contributions to academic literature in technology entrepreneurship and technology management and industry recommendations for practical implication.

This chapter reviews the evidence on the role of physicians in shaping inequalities in access to and utilisation of healthcare. The authors examine three types of physician decisions that can influence inequalities in access and utilisation: location decisions, decisions to work in the public and/or private sector, and decisions or behaviours in the doctor–patient encounter. For each, the authors summarise the issues and empirical evidence on possible policies to help reduce inequalities in access. Future research to reduce inequalities should focus on changes to health systems that influence physician decisions, such as health insurance expansions, the public–private mix and financial incentives, as well as physician training and policies for a more diverse physician workforce.

In this viewpoint article, the authors recognize the increased focus in health systems on co-design for innovation and change. This article explores the role of leaders and mangers in developing and enhancing a culture of trust in their organizations to enable co-design, with the potential to drive innovation and change in healthcare.

Using social science analyses, the authors argue that current co-design literature has limited focus on interactions between senior leaders and managers, and healthcare staff and service users in supporting co-designed innovation and change. The authors draw on social and health science studies of trust to highlight how the value-based co-design process needs to be supported and enhanced. We outline what co-design innovation and change involve in a health system, conceptualize trust and reflect on its importance within the health system, and finally note the role of senior leaders and managers in supporting trust and responsiveness for co-designed innovation and change.

Healthcare needs leaders and managers to embrace co-design that drives innovation now and in the future through people – leading to better healthcare for society at large. As authors we argue that it is now the time to shift our focus on the role of senior managers and leaders to embed co-design into health and social care structures, through creating and nurturing a culture of trust.

Building public trust in the health system and interpersonal trust within the health system is an ongoing process that relies upon personal behavior of managers and senior leaders, organizational practices within the system, as well as political processes that underpin these practices. By implementing managerial, leadership and individual practices on all levels, senior managers and leaders provide a mechanism to increase both trust and responsiveness for co-design that supports innovation and change in the health system.

The United Nation’s treaty from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) speaks to the assurance of rights and access to justice. To assure the rights addressed in the treaty, disability scholars have argued for a collaborative approach between police officers, mental health, Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, professionals, and disability rights organisations. Internationally, we have witnessed that rights are being trampled at the intersection of race/ethnicity, gender identity, disability, and sexual orientation. Interactions with the police and the various systems are sometimes experienced as sources of trauma, racism, disrespect, pain, and abuse by individuals living with disabilities. Allyship and organising with the community, particularly with BIPOC and other ‘minoritised’ communities, is essential for policy and other systemic change. Community conversations were done to learn how Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and allies experience and address policing and disability and act at these intersections. The advocacy and activism of Surviving Race: The Intersection of Injustice, Disability, and Human Rights served as the impetus for this study. Surviving Race was created to unite psychiatric survivors, BIPOC impacted by the mental health and disability systems, White allies, and members of the LGBQTIA+ community to stand in solidarity with activists who were demanding systemic change after the deaths of far too many. This chapter explores intersectional and cross-disability allyship, allyship to BIPOC disability, and psychiatric survivor communities. It examines how people with disabilities and allies can more effectively work at the intersection of race, rights, equity, and justice.

Perceived discrimination in medical setting is associated to adverse healthcare outcomes. Yet, few tools exist for assessing such discrimination among patients in Portugal. This study aimed to validate the Discrimination in Medical Settings (DMS) scale for the Portuguese Roma population, explore their experiences of healthcare discrimination and analyze the association between perceived discrimination, health perception and healthcare trust.

In this cross-sectional study, 84 Roma adults (60,7% women) completed the DMS, along with microaggression assessments, health perception and healthcare trust evaluations.

The seven-item DMS scale yielded a one-factor structure that explained 71.80% of variance, with strong reliability (a = 0.89). The average DMS-measured perceived discrimination was 2.46. Discrimination correlated inversely with health perception and was strongly negatively associated to trust in healthcare.

The DMS scale exhibited reliability, single-dimensionality and validity among the Roma. High perceived discrimination in medical settings among Portuguese Roma was notably associated with individual health perception and healthcare trust.

This paper aims to highlight the factors influencing the conceptualisation of return on investment (ROI) from healthcare quality improvement (QI) programmes.

In their previous work, the authors found that the concept of ROI from QI is broad and includes numerous internal and external benefits for organisations. In this paper, the authors developed a framework outlining the factors that influence this conceptualisation of QI-ROI from an institutional theory perspective. The framework is based on the synthesis of their serial studies on the determinants of the concept of ROI from QI. The research was performed from 2020–2023 and involved a global multidisciplinary systematic literature review (N = 68), qualitative interviews (N = 16) and a Delphi study (N = 23). The qualitative and Delphi studies were based on the publicly-funded mental healthcare in UK. Participants included board members, clinical and service directors, as well as QI leaders.

The authors outline a framework of internal and external institutional forces that influence the conceptualisation of ROI from QI programmes in mental healthcare and similar organisations. Based on these factors, the authors state several conjectures. In doing this, the authors highlight the ambiguities and uncertainties surrounding QI-ROI conceptualisation. These challenge leaders to balance various monetary and non-monetary benefits for organisations and health systems. This explains the broadness of the QI-ROI concept.

The authors developed a framework highlighting the forces underpinning the broad, ambiguous and sometimes uncertain nature of the QI-ROI concept. They raise awareness about dilemmas to be confronted in developing or applying any tool to evaluate the value for money of QI programmes. Specifically, the work highlights the limitations of the ROI methodology as a primary tool in the QI context and the need for a more comprehensive tool.

This study aims to evaluate the association between ethnic minority membership and their knowledge about their human health rights in Peru.

A secondary analysis of the National Health User Satisfaction Survey 2015–2016 was conducted using an analytical cross-sectional design. Participants who spoke Quechua, Aymara, Awajun, Bora or a language other than Spanish aged 15 year were considered as a racial minority. The question “Do you know that by law you have health rights?” was applied to incorporate knowledge on health rights. Generalized linear models of the Poisson distribution were used to calculate crude prevalence ratio and adjusted prevalence ratio. A total of 3,721 responses were included in the analysis.

The average age was 38.3 year, and 26.6% were males. The prevalence of belonging to an ethnic minority was 7.7%, and 27.6% of the participants did not know about their health rights. An association was found in the adjusted regression analysis between belonging to an ethnic minority and a greater probability of not knowing human health rights.

The value of the works lies in one in four participants who did not know he had health rights by law. Belonging to an ethnic minority was associated with not knowing about having human health rights.

This study examined how people assess health information from AI and improve their diagnostic ability to identify health misinformation. The proposed model was designed to test a cognitive heuristic theory in misinformation discernment.

We proposed the heuristic-systematic model to assess health misinformation processing in the algorithmic context. Using the Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) 26 software, we tested fairness/transparency/accountability (FAccT) as constructs that influence the heuristic evaluation and systematic discernment of misinformation by users. To test moderating and mediating effects, PROCESS Macro Model 4 was used.

The effect of AI-generated misinformation on people’s perceptions of the veracity of health information may differ according to whether they process misinformation heuristically or systematically. Heuristic processing is significantly associated with the diagnosticity of misinformation. There is a greater chance that misinformation will be correctly diagnosed and checked, if misinformation aligns with users’ heuristics or is validated by the diagnosticity they perceive.

When exposed to misinformation through algorithmic recommendations, users’ perceived diagnosticity of misinformation can be predicted accurately from their understanding of normative values. This perceived diagnosticity would then positively influence the accuracy and credibility of the misinformation.

Perceived diagnosticity exerts a key role in fostering misinformation literacy, implying that improving people’s perceptions of misinformation and AI features is an efficient way to change their misinformation behavior.

Although there is broad agreement on the need to control and combat health misinformation, the magnitude of this problem remains unknown. It is essential to understand both users’ cognitive processes when it comes to identifying health misinformation and the diffusion mechanism from which such misinformation is framed and subsequently spread.

The mechanisms through which users process and spread misinformation have remained open-ended questions. This study provides theoretical insights and relevant recommendations that can make users and firms/institutions alike more resilient in protecting themselves from the detrimental impact of misinformation.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0167