Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine how health scientists’ attitudinal, social, and resource factors affect their data reuse behaviors.

A survey method was utilized to investigate to what extent attitudinal, social, and resource factors influence health scientists’ data reuse behaviors. The health scientists’ data reuse research model was validated by using partial least squares (PLS) based structural equation modeling technique with a total of 161 health scientists in the USA.

The analysis results showed that health scientists’ data reuse intentions are driven by attitude toward data reuse, community norm of data reuse, disciplinary research climate, and organizational support factors. This research also found that both perceived usefulness of data reuse and perceived concern involved in data reuse have significant influences on health scientists’ attitude toward data reuse.

This research evaluated its newly proposed research model based on the theory of planned behavior using a sample from the community of scientists’ scholar database. This research showed an overall picture of how attitudinal, social, and resource factors influence health scientists’ data reuse behaviors. This research is limited due to its sample size and low response rate, so this study is considered as an exploratory study rather than a confirmatory study.

This research suggested for health science research communities, academic institutions, and libraries that diverse strategies need to be utilized to promote health scientists’ data reuse behaviors.

This research is one of initial studies in scientific data reuse which provided a holistic map about health scientists’ data sharing behaviors. The findings of this study provide the groundwork for strategies to facilitate data reuse practice in health science areas.

This study examines the management rostering systems that inform the ways medical scientists are allocated their work in the public healthcare sector in Australia. Promoting the contributions of medical scientists should be a priority given the important roles they are performing in relation to COVID-19 and the demand for medical testing doubling their workloads (COVID-19 National Incident Room Surveillance Team, 2020). This study examines the impact of work on medical scientists and rostering in a context of uncertain work conditions, budget restraints and technological change that ultimately affect the quality of patient care. This study utilises the Job-Demands-Resources theoretical framework (JD-R) to examine the various job demands on medical scientists and the resources available to them.

Using a qualitative methodological approach, this study conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with managers and trade union officials and 9 focus groups with 53 medical scientists, making a total 76 participants from four large public hospitals.

Due to increasing demands for pathology services, this study demonstrates that a lack of job resources, staff shortages, poor rostering practices such as increased workloads that lead to absenteeism, often illegible handwritten changes to rosters and ineffectual management lead to detrimental consequences for medical scientists’ job stress and well-being. Moreover, medical science work is hidden and not fully understood and often not respected by other clinicians, hospital management or the public. These factors have contributed to medical scientists’ lack of control over their work and causes job stress and burnout. Despite this, medical scientists use their personal resources to buffer the effects of excessive workloads and deliver high quality of patient care.

Findings suggest that developing mechanisms to promote sustainable employment practices for medical scientists are critical for the escalating demands in pathology.

One Health is defined as an approach of integrating animal, human, and environmental health to mitigate diseases. One Health promotes public health by studying all factors, such as agriculture, food, and water security, mechanisms of toxicity and pathogenesis of acute and chronic diseases, sociology, economics, and ecosystem health (to name a few). Such an approach is essential because human, animal, and ecosystem health are inextricably linked; therefore, with this One Health approach, we are called to work together to promote, improve, and defend the health and well-being of all by enhancing cooperation and collaboration between physicians, veterinarians social scientists, economists, psychologists, legal professionals, philosophers, and other scientific health and environmental professionals. As such, the One Health movement and approach is a growing vision in global health and is gaining increasing recognition by national and international institutions, organizations, stakeholders, NGOs, and health policymakers. Likewise, the role of world-class universities is pivotal in discovering One Health scientific knowledge and translating them to policy and evidence-based practices. Universities have responsibilities to train future professionals capable of solving global health issues through interdisciplinary scientific knowledge, integrative approaches to teaching, research collaboration, community linkages, and leadership. This chapter discusses the importance of One Health and the role of higher education institutions’ One Health partnerships to improve global health.

Successful commercialization is crucial to innovative firms, but further investigation is needed on how diverse stakeholders can contribute to the commercialization of a radical innovation that requires particular market creation support. This paper aims to, therefore, analyze the key stakeholders and their contributive activities in commercialization and market creation, particularly in the case of radical innovations.

This study relies on qualitative research design including interviews with key stakeholders, such as regulators, scientists, experts, licensing partners, core company representatives and extensive secondary data. This single-case study concerns a functional food product, which is a radical innovation requiring the development of a novel product category positioned between the food and medicine categories in global market settings. Since its market launch in 1995, the involvement of multiple stakeholders was needed for its successful commercialization in over 30 countries.

Results uncover the contributions of diverse stakeholders to commercialization and market creation, particularly of radical innovation. Stakeholders performed market creation activities such as regulating the marketing and labeling of food products, conducting safety assessments, revealing and validating the positive health effects of the novelty and raising awareness of healthy living and cardiovascular health. The commercialization activities included distributing the products overseas, applying the ingredient to different food products and making the products available for users.

This single-case study provides an overview of the positive stakeholder activities with contributions to market creation and commercialization of functional food innovations. Although the user perspective was not included in the empirical part of this study because of our focus on B2B actors, users of the innovation can contribute to R&D activities to a great extent.

The developed framework of stakeholders’ contributive activities in radical innovation commercialization and market creation contributes to literature discussing market creation as well as commercialization within the marketing and innovation management research fields. This work also generates practical advice for managers who commercialize (radical) innovations.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how attitudinal, normative and control beliefs influence scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate.

A survey method was employed to examine a research model of scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate. A total of 264 survey responses from biological scientists in the USA were used to evaluate the research model by using partial least square based structural equation modeling.

The results showed that scientists’ attitudinal beliefs (i.e. perceived relationship, reputation and risk), normative beliefs (i.e. subjective norm, perceived academic culture and community norm of article sharing) and control belief (i.e. perceived ease of use) all significantly affect their attitudes toward article sharing and article sharing intentions through ResearchGate.

The theory of planned behavior (TPB) was used to develop the research model, and the specific research constructs from prior literature were incorporated in the model. The TPB and related research constructs nicely explained biological scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate.

This study suggests that academic libraries can better promote their scientists’ article sharing through digital platforms such as institutional repositories as well as scholarly social media. This can be achieved by emphasizing its benefits, including potential relationships or collaborations, positive academic reputation and community norms of article sharing, and by decreasing scientists’ concerns about copyright infringements and effort expectancy involved in article sharing.

As one of the initial studies in scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate, this study provides a holistic picture of how attitudinal, normative and control beliefs all affect scientists’ article sharing through ResearchGate.

This paper is a brief reflection on teaching bioethics to students and practitioners in science and other applied disciplines. After identifying relevant key questions and acknowledging that a variety of approaches to the teaching of applied ethics can be successful, the authors outline why interdisciplinary collaboration between philosophers and discipline experts is our preferred way to teach (and practice) bioethics (and applied ethics). The authors suggest that the reason for the effectiveness of sensible collaborations can be explained by reference to a virtue ethics ‘philosophy of place’ influenced ‘distinct ethics’ approach to understanding the nuanced nature of applied ethics and its relationship to moral philosophy.

Purpose – The authors examine framing and narrativization in news coverage of health threats to assess variations in news discourse for known, emerging and novel health risks. Methodology/Approach – Using the analytical categories of known, emerging, and novel risks the authors discuss media analyses of anti-vaccination, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and Covid-19. Findings – Known risks are framed within a biomedical discourse in which scientific evidence underpins public health guidelines, and following these directives prevent risk exposure while non-compliance is characterized as immoral and risky. News coverage of emerging risks highlights public health guidelines but fails to convey their importance as the risks seem too distant or abstract. Media coverage of novel risks is characterized by the ubiquity of uncertainty, which emerges as a “master frame” under which all incidents and events are subsumed. Stories about novel risks highlight the fluid and changing nature of scientific knowledge, which has the unintended effect of fueling uncertainty as studies and experts contradict each other. Originality/Value – This chapter introduces a new analytical framework for examining how media stories represent public health risks, along with previously unpublished analysis of media coverage about AMR and Covid-19. This chapter provides insight about the nature of risk discourses involving media, public health officials, activists, and citizens.

The development and introduction of novel hypoallergenic foods represents a potential approach to reducing the negative health impacts of food allergy. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether novel hypoallergenic foods will be accepted by food chain actors and consumers.

Stakeholder opinions (collated using semi‐structured interviews (n=16)) regarding the acceptability of novel hypoallergenic foods were assessed. Three focus groups were applied to understand the opinions of food allergic consumers.

Food allergic consumers expressed a preference for a “cure” for food allergy. However, they acknowledged that hypoallergenic foods had the potential to improve the quality of lives of food allergy sufferers through increasing dietary variation and reducing restrictions on product selection. Stakeholders supported the introduction of novel foods (although this support was not universal), assuming that the products were acceptable to food allergic consumers, consumers in general and regulators.

The paper is likely to be useful for the potential developers of hypoallergenic foods, allergen food products (food industry and scientists) and policy makers regarding the commercialisation of novel hypoallergenic foods and their regulation.

Innovation management in the healthcare sector has undergone significant evolutions over the last decades. These evolutions have been investigated from a variety of perspectives: clusters, ecosystems of innovation, digital ecosystems and regional ecosystems, but the dynamics of networks have seldom been analyzed under the lenses of entrepreneurial ecosystems (EEs). As identified by Cao and Shi (2020), the literature is silent about the organization of resource allocation systems for network orchestration in EEs. This article investigates these elements in the healthcare sector. It discusses the strategic role played by entrepreneurial support organizations (ESOs) in resource allocation and elaborates on the distinction between sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs in EEs. ESOs are active in network orchestration. The literature explains that ESOs lift organizational, institutional and cultural barriers, and support entrepreneurs' access to cognitive and technological resources. However, allocation models are not yet discussed. Therefore, our research questions are as follows: What is the resource allocation model in healthcare-related EEs? What is the role played by sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs as regards resource allocation to support the emergence and development of EEs in the healthcare sector?

The article offers an explanatory, exploratory, and theory-building investigation. The research design offers an abductive research protocol and multi-level analysis of seven (sponsored and nonsponsored) ESOs active in French healthcare ecosystems. Field research elaborates on semi-structured interviews collected between 2016 and 2022.

This article shows explicit complementarities between top-down and bottom-up resource allocation approaches supported by ESOs in the healthcare sector. Despite explicit originalities in each approach, no network orchestration model prevails. Multi-polar coordination is the rule. Entrepreneurs' access to critical technological and cognitive resources is based on resource allocation modalities that differ for sponsored versus nonsponsored ESOs. Emerging from field research, this research also shows that sponsored and nonsponsored ESOs manage their roles in different ways because they confront original issues about organizational legitimacy.

Beyond the results listed above, the main originalities of the paper relate to the instantiation of multi-level analysis operated during field research and to the confrontation between sponsored versus nonsponsored ESOs in the domain of healthcare-related innovation management. This research shows that ESOs have practical relevance because they build original routes for resource allocation and network orchestration in EEs. Each ESO category (sponsored versus nonsponsored) provides original support for resource allocation. The ESO's legitimacy is inferred either from the sponsor or the services delivered to end-users. This research leads to propositions for future research and recommendations for practitioners: ESO managers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of chronic illness on a couple’s life experiences over a period of 40 years. It critically examines the assumptions of the public health discourse in the light of this couple’s attempts to balance love and health care within their relationship.

The couple, the first two authors, put themselves under the magnifying glass. They arranged for a dialogic encounter and built a co-constructed auto-ethnography. This study consists of a “raw” narrative and a reflection. This reflexive part was added by the third author, interpreting the couple’s experiences applying in a sociocultural way theories of ethical care. This sheds light on ethical care aspects encountered in the couple’s balancing of love and health care.

This study shows that the couple copes with adversity rather than being in control of it. Nonetheless their love relationship appears to be flourishing, thanks to their acknowledgement of the importance of mutual caring.

The current public health discourse puts the couple’s private love relationship under pressure. It turns a blind eye towards the difficulties they experience with the contemporary “self-management” paradigm. The couple feels that the government is an interloper intruding into their private relationship. This creates tension, friction, anxiety, as well as increasing the burden of the illness and makes them feel insecure and unsafe.

The novel method used in this study offers a rare and deep insight.