Understanding success and failure in innovative Australian resource processing projects

This thesis in concerned with the understanding of success and failure of innovation in resource processing, a sector that is central to the Australian economy. Decline in ore grade, complexity of available ore resources, increases in labour and capital cost, and increased market demand have driven innovation and larger resource processing projects. The outcomes from innovation investment have been disappointing, and not well understood. This thesis aims to understand why so many large resource processing projects fail, and what factors have been critical in other projects that succeed. It proposes a new model for innovation investment, based on public domain data and an outsider view. Five criteria are used in this thesis to classify success and failure of large resource processing projects; that (1) the project and firm made a profit, in failure the project made a loss, (2) the production in the first 36 months of operation is 90% or more of nameplate capacity, while a failure is less than 70%, (3) return on investment is below 105 months, failure above 105 months, average for successful projects is found to be 53 months,. (4) failure sees project and or firm fail, with the plant selling for less than 20% of cost, success sees the project continue to produce at close to capacity, and if sold was value at close to investment, and (5) the successful process is reproduced; in the case of failure it is not. The thesis examines a sample of 67 resource processing projects in Australia initially valued at over $100 million each, over an 18 year interval between 1993 and 2010. The projects totalled$45.3 billion in value with 73% of classified as successful, while 15 projects failed. Four hypotheses are proposed and tested, each respectively relating to one of the following four factors; (1) Firm competence, (2) new process innovation, (3) government involvement in value adding, and (4) information asymmetry and strategic misrepresentation

Acceptability of the internet-based Chlamydia screening implementation in the Netherlands and insights into nonresponse.

BACKGROUND: The study assessed the acceptability of internet-based Chlamydia screening using home-testing kits among 16- to 29-year-old participants and nonparticipants in the first year of a Chlamydia Screening Implementation program in the Netherlands. METHODS: Questionnaire surveys were administered to randomly selected participants (acceptability survey) and nonparticipants (nonresponse survey) in 3 regions of the Netherlands where screening was offered. Participants received email invitations to an online survey; nonparticipants received postal questionnaires. Both surveys enquired into opinions on the screening design, reasons for (non-) participation and future willingness to be tested. RESULTS: The response rate was 63% (3499/5569) in the acceptability survey and 15% (2053/13,724) in the nonresponse survey. Primary motivation for participating in the screening was "for my health" (63%). The main reason for nonresponse given by sexually active nonparticipants was "no perceived risk of infection" (40%). Only 2% reported nonparticipation due to no internet access. Participants found the internet (93%) and home-testing (97%) advantages of the program, regardless of test results. Two-thirds of participants would test again, 92% via the screening program. Half of nonparticipants were appreciative of the program design, while about 1 in 5 did not like internet usage, home-testing, or posting samples. CONCLUSIONS: The screening method was highly acceptable to participants. Nonparticipants in this survey were generally appreciative of the program design. Both groups made informed choices about participation and surveyed low-risk nonparticipants accurately perceived their low-risk status. Although many nonparticipants were not reached by the nonresponse survey, current insights on acceptability and nonresponse are undoubtedly valuable for evaluation of the current program

Evaluation design of a systematic, selective, internet-based, Chlamydia screening implementation in the Netherlands, 2008-2010: implications of first results for the analysis

A selective, systematic, Internet-based, Chlamydia Screening Implementation for 16 to 29-year-old residents started in three regions in the Netherlands in April 2008: in the cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam and a more rural region, South Limburg. This paper describes the evaluation design and discusses the implications of the findings from the first screening round for the analysis. The evaluation aims to determine the effects of screening on the population prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis after multiple screening rounds. A phased implementation or 'stepped wedge design' was applied by grouping neighbourhoods (hereafter: clusters) into three random, risk-stratified blocks (A, B and C) to allow for impact analyses over time and comparison of prevalences before and after one or two screening rounds. Repeated simulation of pre- and postscreening Chlamydia prevalences was used to predict the minimum detectable decline in prevalence. Real participation and positivity rates per region, block, and risk stratum (high, medium, and low community risk) from the 1st year of screening were used to substantiate predictions. The results of the 1st year show an overall participation rate of 16% of 261,025 invitees and a positivity rate of 4.2%, with significant differences between regions and blocks. Prediction by simulation methods adjusted with the first-round results indicate that the effect of screening (minimal detectable difference in prevalence) may reach significance levels only if at least a 15% decrease in the Chlamydia positivity rate in the cities and a 25% decrease in the rural region after screening can be reached, and pre- and postscreening differences between blocks need to be larger. With the current participation rates, the minimal detectable decline of Chlamydia prevalence may reach our defined significance levels at the regional level after the second screening round, but will probably not be significant between blocks of the stepped wedge design. Evaluation will also include other aspects and prediction models to obtain rational advice about future Chlamydia screening in the Netherland

Rationale, design, and results of the first screening round of a comprehensive, register-based, Chlamydia screening implementation programme in the Netherlands

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Implementing <it>Chlamydia trachomatis </it>screening in the Netherlands has been a point of debate for several years. The National Health Council advised against implementing nationwide screening until additional data collected from a pilot project in 2003 suggested that screening by risk profiles could be effective. A continuous increase in infections recorded in the national surveillance database affirmed the need for a more active approach. Here, we describe the rationale, design, and implementation of a <it>Chlamydia </it>screening demonstration programme.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic, selective, internet-based <it>Chlamydia </it>screening programme started in April 2008. Letters are sent annually to all 16 to 29-year-old residents of Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and selected municipalities of South Limburg. The letters invite sexually active persons to login to <url>http://www.chlamydiatest.nl</url> with a personal code and to request a test kit. In the lower prevalence area of South Limburg, test kits can only be requested if the internet-based risk assessment exceeds a predefined value.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We sent invitations to 261,025 people in the first round. One-fifth of the invitees requested a test kit, of whom 80% sent in a sample for testing. The overall positivity rate was 4.2%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This programme advances <it>Chlamydia </it>control activities in the Netherlands. Insight into the feasibility, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and impact of this large-scale screening programme will determine whether the programme will be implemented nationally.</p

Keeping participants on board: increasing uptake by automated respondent reminders in an Internet-based Chlamydia Screening in the Netherlands

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Effectiveness of Chlamydia screening programs is determined by an adequate level of participation and the capturing of high-risk groups. This study aimed to evaluate the contribution of automated reminders by letter, email and short message service (SMS) on package request and sample return in an Internet-based Chlamydia screening among people aged 16 to 29 years in the Netherlands.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Individuals not responding to the invitation letter received a reminder letter after 1 month. Email- and SMS-reminders were sent to persons who did not return their sample. It was examined to what extent reminders enhanced the response rate (% of package requests) and participation rate (% of sample return). Sociodemographic and behavioural correlates of providing a cell phone number and participation after the reminder(s) were studied by logistic regression models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of all respondents (screening round 1: 52,628, round 2: 41,729), 99% provided an email address and 72% a cell phone number. Forty-two percent of all package requests were made after the reminder letter. The proportion of invitees returning a sample increased significantly from 10% to 14% after email/SMS reminders (round 2: from 7% to 10%). Determinants of providing a cell-phone number were younger age (OR in 25-29 year olds versus 16-19 year olds = 0.8, 95%CI 0.8-0.9), non-Dutch (OR in Surinam/Antillean versus Dutch = 1.3, 95%CI 1.2-1.4, Turkish/Moroccan: 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.2, Sub Sahara African: 1.5, 95%CI 1.3-1.8, non-Western other 1.1, 95%CI 1.1-1.2), lower educational level (OR in high educational level versus low level = 0.8, 95%CI 0.7-0.9), no condom use during the last contact with a casual partner (OR no condom use versus condom use 1.2, 95%CI 1.1-1.3), younger age at first sexual contact (OR 19 years or older versus younger than 16: 0.7, 95%CI 0.6-0.8). Determinants for requesting a test-package after the reminder letter were male gender (OR female versus male 0.9 95%CI 0.8-0.9), non-Dutch (OR in Surinam/Antillean versus Dutch 1.3, 95%CI 1.2-1.4, Turkish/Moroccan: 1.4, 95%CI 1.3-1.5, Sub Sahara African: 1.4, 95%CI 1.2-1.5, non-Western other: 1.2, 95%CI 1.1-1.2), having a long-term steady partnership (long-term versus short-term.1.2 95%CI 1.1-1.3). Email/SMS reminders seem to have resulted in more men and people aged 25-29 years returning a sample.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Nearly all respondents (99.5%) were reachable by modern communication media. Response and participation rates increased significantly after the reminders. The reminder letters also seemed to result in reaching more people at risk. Incorporation of automated reminders in Internet-based (<b>C</b>hlamydia) screening programs is strongly recommended.</p

An intervention to reassure patients about test results in rapid access chest pain clinic: a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Most people referred to rapid access chest pain clinics have non-cardiac chest pain, and in those diagnosed with stable coronary heart disease, guidance recommends that first-line treatment is usually medication rather than revascularisation. Consequently, many patients are not reassured they have the correct diagnosis or treatment. A previous trial reported that, in people with non-cardiac chest pain, a brief discussion with a health psychologist before the tests about the meaning of potential results led to people being significantly more reassured. The aim of this pilot was to test study procedures and inform sample size for a future multi-centre trial and to gain initial estimates of effectiveness of the discussion intervention. METHODS: This was a two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial in outpatient rapid access chest pain clinic in 120 people undergoing investigation for new onset, non-urgent chest pain. Eligible participants were randomised to receive either: a discussion about the meaning and implication of test results, delivered by a nurse before tests in clinic, plus a pre-test pamphlet covering the same information (Discussion arm) or the pre-test pamphlet alone (Pamphlet arm). Main outcome measures were recruitment rate and feasibility for a future multi-centre trial, with an estimate of reassurance in the groups at month 1 and 6 using a 5-item patient-reported scale. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy people attended rapid access chest pain clinic during recruitment and 120/270 participants (44%) were randomised, 60 to each arm. There was no evidence of a difference between the Discussion and Pamphlet arms in the mean reassurance score at month 1 (34.2 vs 33.7) or at month 6 (35.3 vs 35.9). Patient-reported chest pain and use of heart medications were also similar between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: A larger trial of the discussion intervention in the UK would not be warranted. Patients reported high levels of reassurance which were similar in patients receiving the discussion with a nurse and in those receiving a pamphlet alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60618114 (assigned 27.05.2011). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2261-14-138) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Embodiment and body awareness in meditators

[EN] Mindfulness practice consists of focusing attention in an intentional way on the experience of the present moment, including bodily sensations, thoughts or feelings, and the environment, with an attitude of acceptance and without judging. The body and, especially, body awareness are key elements in mindfulness. Embodiment or the feeling of being located within one's physical body is a related concept, and it is composed of the sense of ownership, location, and agency of the body. The rubber hand illusion (RHI) is an experimental paradigm that has been used to understand the mechanisms of embodiment, and evidence shows that body awareness modulates this illusion. To our knowledge, no studies have analyzed embodiment processes in meditators. The aim of this study is to use the RHI to analyze the mechanisms of embodiment and its relationship with body awareness and mindfulness in meditators and non-meditators. The sample was composed of long-term meditators (n = 15) and non-meditators (n = 15). Objective and self-report measures for embodiment with the RHI and self-report questionnaires of body awareness and mindfulness were administered. One-way ANOVA revealed significant differences between groups in sense of agency in the rubber hand. Meditators experienced less sense of agency in the rubber hand than non-meditators. Pearson's correlations showed that this lower sense of agency in the rubber hand was associated with higher body awareness and mindfulness. Results highlight the role of body awareness and mindfulness in embodiment mechanisms. This study has clinical implications, especially in psychopathological disorders that can be influenced by disturbances in these processes.The authors would like to acknowledge the "BODYTA" project (Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, PSI2014-51928-R), "PROMOSAM" (Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, PSI2014-56303-REDT), and "Excellence Research Program PROMETEO II" (Generalitat Valenciana, Conselleria de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte, PROMETEOII/2013/003). CIBERobn is an initiate of the ISCIII. PROMOSAM Excellence in Research Program (PSI2014-56303-REDT), MINECO, Spain.Cebolla, A.; Miragall, M.; Palomo, P.; Llorens Rodríguez, R.; Soler, J.; Demarzo, M.; García Campayo, J.... (2016). Embodiment and body awareness in meditators. Mindfulness. 7(6):1297-1305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0569-xS1297130576Aguado, J., Luciano, J. V., Cebolla, A., Serrano-Blanco, A., Soler, J., & García-Campayo, J. (2015). Bifactor analysis and construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire (FFMQ) in non-clinical Spanish samples. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 404.Arzy, S., Thut, G., Mohr, C., Michel, C. M., & Blanke, O. (2006). Neural basis of embodiment: distinct contributions of temporoparietal junction and extrastriate body area. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(31), 8074–8081.Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45.Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., et al. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241.Bornemann, B., Herbert, B. M., Mehling, W. E., & Singer, T. (2015). Differential changes in self-reported aspects of interoceptive awareness through 3 months of contemplative training. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1504.Botvinick, M., & Cohen, J. (1998). Rubber hands “feel” touch that eyes see. Nature, 391(6669), 756–756.Calsius, J., Courtois, I., Stiers, J., & De Bie, J. (2015). How do fibromyalgia patients with alexithymia experience their body? A qualitative approach. SAGE Open, 5, 1–10.Cascio, C. J., Foss-Feig, J. H., Burnette, C. P., Heacock, J. L., & Cosby, A. A. (2012). The rubber hand illusion in children with autism spectrum disorders: delayed influence of combined tactile and visual input on proprioception. Autism, 16(4), 406–419.Cebolla, A., Garcia-Palacios, A., Soler, J., Guillen, V., Baños, R., & Botella, C. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Spanish validation of the Five Facets of Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). The European Journal of Psychiatry, 26(2), 118–126.Cebolla, A., Vara, M. D., Miragall, M., Palomo, P., & Baños, R. M. (2015). Embodied mindfulness: review of the body’s participation in the changes associated with the practice of mindfulness. Actas españolas de Psiquiatría, 43, 36–41.Cioffi, D. (1991). Sensory awareness versus sensory impression: affect and attention interact to produce somatic meaning. Cognition & Emotion, 5(4), 275–294.Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Craig, A. D. (2009). How do you feel—now? The anterior insula and human awareness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(1), 59–70.Dreeben, S. J., Mamberg, M. H., & Salmon, P. (2013). The MBSR body scan in clinical practice. Mindfulness, 4(4), 394–401.Dummer, T., Picot-Annand, A., Neal, T., & Moore, C. (2009). Movement and the rubber hand illusion. Perception, 38(2), 271.Dunn, B. D., Galton, H. C., Morgan, R., Evans, D., Oliver, C., Meyer, M., et al. (2010). Listening to your heart. How interoception shapes emotion experience and intuitive decision making. Psychological Science, 21(12), 1835–1844.Ehrsson, H. H., Spence, C., & Passingham, R. E. (2004). That’s my hand! Activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb. Science, 305(5685), 875–877.Eshkevari, E., Rieger, E., Longo, M. R., Haggard, P., & Treasure, J. (2012). Increased plasticity of the bodily self in eating disorders. Psychological Medicine, 42(04), 819–828.Farb, N., Daubenmier, J. J., Price, C. J., Gard, T., Kerr, C., Dunn, B., et al. (2015). Interoception, contemplative practice, and health. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 763.Fox, K. C., Zakarauskas, P., Dixon, M., Ellamil, M., Thompson, E., Christoff, K., et al. (2012). Meditation experience predicts introspective accuracy. PLoS ONE, 7(9), e45370.Grossman, P., Tiefenthaler-Gilmer, U., Raysz, A., & Kesper, U. (2007). Mindfulness training as an intervention for fibromyalgia: evidence of postintervention and 3-year follow-up benefits in well-being. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 76(4), 226–233.Holmes, N. P., Snijders, H. J., & Spence, C. (2006). Reaching with alien limbs: visual exposure to prosthetic hands in a mirror biases proprioception without accompanying illusions of ownership. Perception & Psychophysics, 68(4), 685–701.Hölzel, B. K., Ott, U., Gard, T., Hempel, H., Weygandt, M., Morgen, K., et al. (2008). Investigation of mindfulness meditation practitioners with voxel-based morphometry. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(1), 55–61.Hölzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., & Ott, U. (2011). How does mindfulness meditation work? Proposing mechanisms of action from a conceptual and neural perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(6), 537–559.Kalckert, A., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2012). Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: a dissociation of ownership and agency. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 40.Karnath, H. O., & Baier, B. (2010). Right insula for our sense of limb ownership and self-awareness of actions. Brain Structure and Function, 214(5-6), 411–417.Keizer, A., Smeets, M. A., Postma, A., van Elburg, A., & Dijkerman, H. C. (2014). Does the experience of ownership over a rubber hand change body size perception in anorexia nervosa patients? Neuropsychologia, 62, 26–37.Kerr, C. E., Sacchet, M. D., Lazar, S. W., Moore, C. I., & Jones, S. R. (2013). Mindfulness starts with the body: somatosensory attention and top-down modulation of cortical alpha rhythms in mindfulness meditation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 12.Lakhan, S. E., & Schofield, K. L. (2013). Mindfulness-based therapies in the treatment of somatization disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e71834.Lazar, S. W., Kerr, C. E., Wasserman, R. H., Gray, J. R., Greve, D. N., Treadway, M. T., et al. (2005). Meditation experience is associated with increased cortical thickness. Neuroreport, 16(17), 1893–1897.Longo, M. R., Schüür, F., Kammers, M. P., Tsakiris, M., & Haggard, P. (2008). What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition, 107(3), 978–998.McManus, F., Surawy, C., Muse, K., Vazquez-Montes, M., & Williams, J. M. G. (2012). A randomized clinical trial of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy versus unrestricted services for health anxiety (hypochondriasis). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80(5), 817–828.Mehling, W. E., Gopisetty, V., Daubenmier, J., Price, C. J., Hecht, F. M., & Stewart, A. (2009). Body awareness: construct and self-report measures. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5614.Mehling, W. E., Price, C., Daubenmier, J. J., Acree, M., Bartmess, E., & Stewart, A. (2012). The multidimensional assessment of interoceptive awareness (MAIA). PLoS ONE, 7(11), e48230.Mirams, L., Poliakoff, E., Brown, R. J., & Lloyd, D. M. (2013). Brief body-scan meditation practice improves somatosensory perceptual decision making. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(1), 348–359.Moseley, G. L., Olthof, N., Venema, A., Don, S., Wijers, M., Gallace, A., et al. (2008). Psychologically induced cooling of a specific body part caused by the illusory ownership of an artificial counterpart. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(35), 13169–13173.Mussap, A. J., & Salton, N. (2006). A ‘rubber-hand’ illusion reveals a relationship between perceptual body image and unhealthy body change. Journal of Health Psychology, 11(4), 627–639.Naranjo, J. R., & Schmidt, S. (2012). Is it me or not me? Modulation of perceptual-motor awareness and visuomotor performance by mindfulness meditation. BMC Neuroscience, 13(1), 88.Parkin, L., Morgan, R., Rosselli, A., Howard, M., Sheppard, A., Evans, D., et al. (2014). Exploring the relationship between mindfulness and cardiac perception. Mindfulness, 5(3), 298–313.Pollatos, O., Kurz, A. L., Albrecht, J., Schreder, T., Kleemann, A. M., Schöpf, V., et al. (2008). Reduced perception of bodily signals in anorexia nervosa. Eating Behaviors, 9(4), 381–388.Quezada-Berumen, L., González-Ramírez, M. T., Cebolla, A., Soler, J., & García-Campayo, J. (2014). Conciencia corporal y mindfulness: Validación de la versión española de la escala de conexión corporal (SBC). Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría, 42(2), 57–67.Rohde, M., Di Luca, M., & Ernst, M. O. (2011). The rubber hand illusion: feeling of ownership and proprioceptive drift do not go hand in hand. PLoS One, 6(6), e21659.Schauder, K. B., Mash, L. E., Bryant, L. K., & Cascio, C. J. (2015). Interoceptive ability and body awareness in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 131, 193–200.Sze, J. A., Gyurak, A., Yuan, J. W., & Levenson, R. W. (2010). Coherence between emotional experience and physiology: does body awareness training have an impact? Emotion, 10(6), 803–814.Teper, R., & Inzlicht, M. (2013). Meditation, mindfulness and executive control: the importance of emotional acceptance and brain-based performance monitoring. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8(1), 85–92.Thakkar, K. N., Nichols, H. S., McIntosh, L. G., & Park, S. (2011). Disturbances in body ownership in schizophrenia: evidence from the rubber hand illusion and case study of a spontaneous out-of-body experience. PLoS One, 6(10), e27089.Tran, U. S., Glück, T. M., & Nader, I. W. (2013). Investigating the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ): construction of a short form and evidence of a two‐factor higher order structure of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(9), 951–965.Tsakiris, M., & Haggard, P. (2005). The rubber hand illusion revisited: visuotactile integration and self-attribution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(1), 80.Tsakiris, M., Tajadura-Jiménez, A., & Costantini, M. (2011). Just a heartbeat away from one’s body: interoceptive sensitivity predicts malleability of body-representations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 278(1717), 2470–2476.Van Ravesteijn, H., Lucassen, P. L. B. J., Bor, H., Van Weel, C., & Speckens, A. (2013). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for patients with medically unexplained symptoms: a randomized controlled trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 82(5), 299–310