Международный музыкальный конкурс в формировании имиджа страны проведения (на примере Евровидения 2017)

Аннотация выпускной квалификационной работы Орлов Никита Сергеевич «МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЙ МУЗЫКАЛЬНЫЙ КОНКУРС В ФОРМИРОВАНИИ ИМИДЖА СТРАНЫ ПРОВЕДЕНИЯ (НА ПРИМЕРЕ ЕВРОВИДЕНИЯ-2017)» Н. рук. - Быкова Елена Владимировна, доктор филологических наук, доцент Кафедра связей с общественностью Очная форма обучения Актуальность: международный музыкальный конкурс Евровидение как самое масштабное регулярное высокотехнологичное телевизионное и медиа-событие, которое . Е ежегодно акцентирует внимание аудитории на национально-культурных особенностях страны-организатора конкурса, формирует значительные туристические потоки и тем самым способствует формированию имиджа территории. Более того, победа страны-участницы конкурса Евровидения зачастую отражает идеолого-политический вектор Европы и по сути дела выполняет функцию политического PR страны-победителя и страны-хозяйки мероприятия. Следовательно анализ используемых на мероприятии коммуникативных технологий является актуальным и востребованным для событийного и устроительного PR Объект исследования: коммуникационные активности международного музыкального конкурса (на примере Евровидения в Киеве в 2017 г.). Предмет исследования: функция статусного PR-мероприятия в формировании имиджа страны. Цель исследования: доказать, что международный музыкальный конкурс Евровидение способствует формированию имиджа страны проведения. Задачи исследования: разработать терминологический аппарат исследования на основе научной литературы по имиджмейкингу, брендингу и ивент-менеджменту; определить актуальные коммуникационные технологии, применяемые в рамках специальных событий для формирования имиджа страны; описать роль Европейского Вещательного Союза как организатора Евровидения в формировании имиджа страны проведения конкурса; оценить эффективность реализованных коммуникативных технологий формирования имиджа страны в рамках Евровидения; дать рекомендации по формированию имиджа страны с помощью Евровидения. Теоретическая база: научные труды Е. Быковой, Д. Гавры, А. Панкрухина, Б. Дженеса, Е. Кавериной, У. Хальцбаура, Дж. Голдблатта а также труды Д. Пассмана о музыкальном бизнесе, П. Джордана о продвижении имиджа стран с помощью Евровидения и др. Эмпирическая база: PR-документы, размещенные на сайте Евровидения и Европейского Вещательного Союза; более полутора миллиона статей об Украине в европейских СМИ, размещенные в базе проекта мониторинга международного имиджа Украины «Oko»; данные базы материалов СМИ и социальных медиа Factiva; данные Google.Analytics. Практическая значимость: исследование доказывает, что международный музыкальный конкурс Евровидение формирует имидж страны проведения независимо от успешности использования конкретных технологий формирования имиджа страны. Тезисы исследования были апробированы на международном научном форуме «Медиа в современном мире. 57-е Петербургские чтения», опубликованы в сборнике материалов статей форума и имеют статус научной статьи, размещенной в базе РИНЦ. Структура работы: Работа состоит из введения, 3 глав: «функция специального события в формировании имиджа страны», «Евровидение как специальное событие Европейского Вещательного Союза» и «коммуникационный потенциал Евровидения как площадки для формирования имиджа страны», заключения, списка использованной литературы из 67 позиций и 12 приложений. Общий объем 76 страниц.Abstract of graduating qualification thesis Mikita Arlou INTERNATIONAL MUSIC CONTEST IN HOST COUNTRY IMAGE FORMATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF EUROVISION 2017) Supervisor associate professor Elena Bykova, doctor of philology Department of PR in business full-time study Relevance: the international music contest Eurovision as the most wide scale regular high tech TV and Media event which annually emphasizes audience attention on national cultural features of the host country, forms tourist flows which have huge influence on territorial image formation. Besides the win of a participating in the Eurovision country often shows the ideological and political European vector and in fact serves as political PR of the winning or host country. Consequently the analysis of applied communication technologies is relevant and in-demand for event PR. Research object: communication activities of international music contest (on the example of Eurovision in Kyiv in 2017). Research subject: function of status PR event in country image formation. The aim of research: to prove that international music contest Eurovision contributes host country image formation. The tasks of research: to develop research terminology based on scientific literature on image making, branding and event management; to define actual communication technologies applied in special PR events on country image formation; to describe European Broadcasting Union role in host country image formation; to appreciate effectiveness of applied communication technologies on host country image formation in Eurovision; to give recommendations for host country image formation with the help of Eurovision. Theoretical base: scientific works written by E. Bykova, D. Gavra, A. Pankrukhin, B. Jenes, E. Kaverina, U. Halcbaur, J. Goldblatt and D. Passman´s works on music business and P. Jordan on county image building with the help of Eurovision, etc. The empirical base: PR documents from official Eurovision and European Broadcasting Union websites; more than 1.5 million articles on Ukraine in European media stored in the base of international Ukrainian image monitoring project Oko; content of the mass media and social media base Factiva; Google.Analytics data. Practical significance: the research proves that international music contest Eurovision is relevant for the host country image formation independently of the success level of applied country image formation communication technologies. Approbation: General positions of current thesis were aprobated on international scientific forum Media in modern world and were published at the collection of articles of the forum and have the status of a scientific article posted in the RINC database. Thesis structure: Research consists of introduction, 3 chapters: Special event function in country image formation, Eurovision as EBU special event and communication potential of Eurovision as a platform for image formation; conclusion, literature list from 67 positions and 12 attachments. The total volume is 76 pages

Dynamic Dossier in the Cloud: A Sociotechnical Architecture for a Real-Time and Metrics-Based Data Tracking System with Gene and Cell Therapies as a Case Study

Background Data sharing among stakeholders in the development, access, and use of drug therapies is critical but the cur-rent system and process are inefficient. Methods We take a Systems Engineering approach with a realistic use case to propose a scalable design for multi-stakeholder data sharing. Results We make three major contributions to the drug development and healthcare communities: first, a methodology for developing a multi-stakeholder data sharing system, with its focus on high-level requirements that influence the design of the system architecture and technology choice; second, the development of a realistic use case for long-term patient and therapy data tracking and sharing in the use of potentially curative and durable gene and cell therapies. Further, a bridge for the ‘awareness gap’ was found between the payer (Payer is organization which takes care of financial and operational aspects (which include insurance plans, provider network) of providing health care to US citizens. Or refer to health care insurers.) and the regulator communities by illustrating the common data tracking needs, which highlights the need for coordinated data activities; and third, a proposed system architecture for scalable, multi-stakeholder data sharing. Next steps are briefly discussed. Conclusion We present a system design for multiple stakeholders such as the payer, the regulator, the developer (drug manu-facturer), and the healthcare provider to share data for their decision-making. The stakeholder community would benefit from collaboratively moving the system development proposal forward for efficient and cost-effective data sharing

Dynamic Dossier in the Cloud: A Sociotechnical Architecture for a Real-Time and Metrics-Based Data Tracking System with Gene and Cell Therapies as a Case Study

Abstract Background Data sharing among stakeholders in the development, access, and use of drug therapies is critical but the current system and process are inefficient. Methods We take a Systems Engineering approach with a realistic use case to propose a scalable design for multi-stakeholder data sharing. Results We make three major contributions to the drug development and healthcare communities: first, a methodology for developing a multi-stakeholder data sharing system, with its focus on high-level requirements that influence the design of the system architecture and technology choice; second, the development of a realistic use case for long-term patient and therapy data tracking and sharing in the use of potentially curative and durable gene and cell therapies. Further, a bridge for the ‘awareness gap’ was found between the payer (Payer is organization which takes care of financial and operational aspects (which include insurance plans, provider network) of providing health care to US citizens. Or refer to health care insurers.) and the regulator communities by illustrating the common data tracking needs, which highlights the need for coordinated data activities; and third, a proposed system architecture for scalable, multi-stakeholder data sharing. Next steps are briefly discussed. Conclusion We present a system design for multiple stakeholders such as the payer, the regulator, the developer (drug manufacturer), and the healthcare provider to share data for their decision-making. The stakeholder community would benefit from collaboratively moving the system development proposal forward for efficient and cost-effective data sharing

Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices: part 2

Evidence-based health care decision making requires comparison of all relevant competing interventions. In the absence of randomized controlled trials involving a direct comparison of all treatments of interest, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis provide useful evidence for judiciously selecting the best treatment(s). Mixed treatment comparisons, a special case of network meta-analysis, combine direct evidence and indirect evidence for particular pairwise comparisons, thereby synthesizing a greater share of the available evidence than traditional meta-analysis. This report from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices Task Force provides guidance on technical aspects of conducting network meta-analyses (our use of this term includes most methods that involve meta-analysis in the context of a network of evidence). We start with a discussion of strategies for developing networks of evidence. Next we briefly review assumptions of network meta-analysis. Then we focus on the statistical analysis of the data: objectives, models (fixed-effects and random-effects), frequentist versus Bayesian approaches, and model validation. A checklist highlights key components of network meta-analysis, and substantial examples illustrate indirect treatment comparisons (both frequentist and Bayesian approaches) and network meta-analysis. A further section discusses eight key areas for future research

Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices: part 2.

Evidence-based health care decision making requires comparison of all relevant competing interventions. In the absence of randomized controlled trials involving a direct comparison of all treatments of interest, indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis provide useful evidence for judiciously selecting the best treatment(s). Mixed treatment comparisons, a special case of network meta-analysis, combine direct evidence and indirect evidence for particular pairwise comparisons, thereby synthesizing a greater share of the available evidence than traditional meta-analysis. This report from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices Task Force provides guidance on technical aspects of conducting network meta-analyses (our use of this term includes most methods that involve meta-analysis in the context of a network of evidence). We start with a discussion of strategies for developing networks of evidence. Next we briefly review assumptions of network meta-analysis. Then we focus on the statistical analysis of the data: objectives, models (fixed-effects and random-effects), frequentist versus Bayesian approaches, and model validation. A checklist highlights key components of network meta-analysis, and substantial examples illustrate indirect treatment comparisons (both frequentist and Bayesian approaches) and network meta-analysis. A further section discusses eight key areas for future research

A Useful and Sustainable Role for N-of-1 Trials in the Healthcare Ecosystem.

Clinicians and patients often try a treatment for an initial period to inform longer-term therapeutic decisions. A more rigorous approach involves N-of-1 trials. In these single-patient crossover trials, typically conducted in patients with chronic conditions, individual patients are given candidate treatments in a double-blinded, random sequence of alternating periods to determine the most effective treatment for that patient. However, to date, these trials are rarely done outside of research settings and have not been integrated into general care where they could offer substantial benefit. Designating this classical, N-of-1 trial design as type 1, there also are new and evolving uses of N-of-1 trials that we designate as type 2. In these, rather than focusing on optimizing treatment for chronic diseases when multiple approved choices are available, as is typical of type 1, a type 2 N-of-1 trial tests treatments designed specifically for a patient with a rare disease, to facilitate personalized medicine. While the aims differ, both types face the challenge of collecting individual-patient evidence using standard, trusted, widely accepted methods. To fulfill their potential for producing both clinical and research benefits, and to be available for wide use, N-of-1 trials will have to fit into the current healthcare ecosystem. This will require generalizable and accepted processes, platforms, methods, and standards. This also will require sustainable value-based arrangements among key stakeholders. In this article, we review opportunities, stakeholders, issues, and possible approaches that could support general use of N-of-1 trials and deliver benefit to patients and the healthcare enterprise. To assess and expand the benefits of N-of-1 trials, we propose multistakeholder meetings, workshops, and the generation of methods, standards, and platforms that would support wider availability and the value of N-of-1 trials

A Useful and Sustainable Role for N‐of‐1 Trials in the Healthcare Ecosystem

Clinicians and patients often try a treatment for an initial period to inform longer-term therapeutic decisions. A more rigorous approach involves N-of-1 trials. In these single-patient crossover trials, typically conducted in patients with chronic conditions, individual patients are given candidate treatments in a double-blinded, random sequence of alternating periods to determine the most effective treatment for that patient. However, to date, these trials are rarely done outside of research settings and have not been integrated into general care where they could offer substantial benefit. Designating this classical, N-of-1 trial design as type 1, there also are new and evolving uses of N-of-1 trials that we designate as type 2. In these, rather than focusing on optimizing treatment for chronic diseases when multiple approved choices are available, as is typical of type 1, a type 2 N-of-1 trial tests treatments designed specifically for a patient with a rare disease, to facilitate personalized medicine. While the aims differ, both types face the challenge of collecting individual-patient evidence using standard, trusted, widely accepted methods. To fulfill their potential for producing both clinical and research benefits, and to be available for wide use, N-of-1 trials will have to fit into the current healthcare ecosystem. This will require generalizable and accepted processes, platforms, methods, and standards. This also will require sustainable value-based arrangements among key stakeholders. In this article, we review opportunities, stakeholders, issues, and possible approaches that could support general use of N-of-1 trials and deliver benefit to patients and the healthcare enterprise. To assess and expand the benefits of N-of-1 trials, we propose multistakeholder meetings, workshops, and the generation of methods, standards, and platforms that would support wider availability and the value of N-of-1 trials