Building bridges between industry and academia: what is the profile of an industrial doctorate student?

info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersio

Cooperation between Russian research organizations and industrial companies: factors and problems

The study is focused on the cooperation of Russian companies with research organizations in implementing R&D projects during technological innovation. Taking into account behavioral changes, authors carry out a micro-level analysis based on empirical data of executive survey of over 600 Russian industrial firms (2011—2012) and about 350 research organizations and universities (2012). The authors emphasize the key factors of firms’ demand for outsourcing R&D reveal the main barriers to the development of university-industry cooperation and their particularities for different cooperation actors. The analysis shows that there is a positive relation between the size of a company and R&D outsourcing. As for the factor of age, the highest cooperation activity of Russian firms is observed among enterprises founded over 20 years ago. As far as concernes cooperation activity of research organizations, large ones are significantly more likely to cooperate with business. A common prerequisite for research organizations' R&D cooperation with business is sufficient academic ranking. Business and science evaluate differently various obstacles to effective cooperation. For firms, the main problems are the inflated costs of national R&Ds, insufficient research organizations’ orientation at company needs, and low quality of developments. As for representatives of research organizations, they mention as barriers primarily the lack of companies' receptivity to innovation and inadequate information about promising developments. Businesses are more optimistic about cooperation with science if they already have a relevant experience of interaction. In the case of research organizations we observe a different pattern: most problems seem more significant to organizations conducting R&D in business interests

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

Minding the gap in doctoral supervision for a contemporary world: a case from Italy

Doctoral supervision has attracted significant attention from higher education bodies over the last 15 years, stimulated by shifts in educational and socio-political contexts including what supports the knowledge economy and the stakeholdership of students. This paper conceptualises work worlds through Heideggerian discourse and presents exploratory findings from interviews with workplace supervisors analysed within the framework of the SuperProfDoc research project. It then draws on these findings and the mentoring and coaching literature to contribute to integrating supervision practices between the academy and the workplace