How does a company’s existing knowledge base result in radical innovation? An empirical study of Dutch companies in the life sciences and health-industry

The main objective of this thesis is to test how a company’s existing knowledge base results in radical innovation, proposing four behavioural process as mediators. Companies with broad knowledge seem to lack sufficient coordination to successfully complete an innovative process. This study proposes that combination and socialization are behavioural processes that could create new combinations of existing knowledge to detect new, unseen patterns to achieve radical innovation. Vice versa, the depth of knowledge could hinder a company, as it could mean that they lack the experience to tackle potential problems in the implementation phase. Furthermore, the depth of knowledge often leads to observational slowness. Therefore, externalization and internalization are proposed behavioural processes that serve as mediators to overcome these challenges and achieve radical innovation consequently. The conceptual model can be found below. These relationships are tested empirically on a sample of Dutch companies in the Life Sciences and Health Industry. The results and conclusions drawn from this study makes valuable contributions to both literature and practice. No significant mediating effect of internalization was found between a company’s deep knowledge base and radical innovation, nor the mediating effect of socialization between a company’s broad knowledge base and radical innovation. Nevertheless, significant results show that externalization partially mediates the relationship between a company’s deep knowledge base and radical innovation and combination mediates the relationship between company’s broad knowledge base and radical innovation. In conclusion, this study provides concrete behavioural processes to facilitate the relationship between a company’s knowledge base and the realization of radical innovation and offers a better understanding in this complex relationship

A Review of Studies Examining Stated Preferences for Cancer Screening

INTRODUCTION: Stated preference studies for cancer screening programs are used to understand how the programs can be improved to maximize usage. Our objectives were to conduct a systematic review of stated preference studies for cancer screening, identify gaps in the literature, and determine which types of research should be conducted in the future. METHODS: We considered all studies in the PubMed database through May 2005 that measured utility-based stated preferences for cancer screening using contingent valuation or conjoint analysis. We abstracted data on 1) study characteristics and 2) study results and policy implications. RESULTS: We found eight (of 84 identified) preference studies for cancer screening. The most commonly studied cancer was breast cancer, and the most commonly used method was contingent valuation. We found no studies for prostate cancer or physician preferences. Studies demonstrated that although individuals are able to state their preferences for cancer screening, they do not weigh test benefits and harms, and a significant percentage would choose to have no screening at all. Several studies found that test accuracy and reduction in mortality risk were important for determining preferences. CONCLUSION: Few studies of cancer screening preferences exist. The available studies examine only a few types of cancer and do not explore practice and policy implications in depth. The results of this review will be useful in identifying the focus of future research, identifying which screening methods may be more preferred to increase use of the programs, and developing interventions and policies that could facilitate informed and shared decision making for screening

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe

A review of studies examining stated preferences for cancer screening.

IntroductionStated preference studies for cancer screening programs are used to understand how the programs can be improved to maximize usage. Our objectives were to conduct a systematic review of stated preference studies for cancer screening, identify gaps in the literature, and determine which types of research should be conducted in the future.MethodsWe considered all studies in the PubMed database through May 2005 that measured utility-based stated preferences for cancer screening using contingent valuation or conjoint analysis. We abstracted data on 1) study characteristics and 2) study results and policy implications.ResultsWe found eight (of 84 identified) preference studies for cancer screening. The most commonly studied cancer was breast cancer, and the most commonly used method was contingent valuation. We found no studies for prostate cancer or physician preferences. Studies demonstrated that although individuals are able to state their preferences for cancer screening, they do not weigh test benefits and harms, and a significant percentage would choose to have no screening at all. Several studies found that test accuracy and reduction in mortality risk were important for determining preferences.ConclusionFew studies of cancer screening preferences exist. The available studies examine only a few types of cancer and do not explore practice and policy implications in depth. The results of this review will be useful in identifying the focus of future research, identifying which screening methods may be more preferred to increase use of the programs, and developing interventions and policies that could facilitate informed and shared decision making for screening

Patients optimizing epilepsy management via an online community: the POEM Study.

ObjectiveThe study objective was to test whether engaging in an online patient community improves self-management and self-efficacy in veterans with epilepsy.MethodsThe study primary outcomes were validated questionnaires for self-management (Epilepsy Self-Management Scale [ESMS]) and self-efficacy (Epilepsy Self-Efficacy Scale [ESES]). Results were based on within-subject comparisons of pre- and postintervention survey responses of veterans with epilepsy engaging with the PatientsLikeMe platform for a period of at least 6 weeks. Analyses were based on both completer and intention-to-treat scenarios.ResultsOf 249 eligible participants enrolled, 92 individuals completed both surveys. Over 6 weeks, completers improved their epilepsy self-management (ESMS total score from 139.7 to 142.7, p = 0.02) and epilepsy self-efficacy (ESES total score from 244.2 to 254.4, p = 0.02) scores, with greatest impact on an information management subscale (ESMS-information management total score from 20.3 to 22.4, p < 0.001). Results were similar in intention-to-treat analyses. Median number of logins, postings to forums, leaving profile comments, and sending private messages were more common in completers than noncompleters.ConclusionsAn internet-based psychosocial intervention was feasible to implement in the US veteran population and increased epilepsy self-management and self-efficacy scores. The greatest improvement was noted for information management behaviors. Patients with chronic conditions are increasingly encouraged to self-manage their condition, and digital communities have potential advantages, such as convenience, scalability to large populations, and building a community support network.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with epilepsy, engaging in an online patient community improves self-management and self-efficacy

Patients optimizing epilepsy management via an online community: the POEM Study.

ObjectiveThe study objective was to test whether engaging in an online patient community improves self-management and self-efficacy in veterans with epilepsy.MethodsThe study primary outcomes were validated questionnaires for self-management (Epilepsy Self-Management Scale [ESMS]) and self-efficacy (Epilepsy Self-Efficacy Scale [ESES]). Results were based on within-subject comparisons of pre- and postintervention survey responses of veterans with epilepsy engaging with the PatientsLikeMe platform for a period of at least 6 weeks. Analyses were based on both completer and intention-to-treat scenarios.ResultsOf 249 eligible participants enrolled, 92 individuals completed both surveys. Over 6 weeks, completers improved their epilepsy self-management (ESMS total score from 139.7 to 142.7, p = 0.02) and epilepsy self-efficacy (ESES total score from 244.2 to 254.4, p = 0.02) scores, with greatest impact on an information management subscale (ESMS-information management total score from 20.3 to 22.4, p < 0.001). Results were similar in intention-to-treat analyses. Median number of logins, postings to forums, leaving profile comments, and sending private messages were more common in completers than noncompleters.ConclusionsAn internet-based psychosocial intervention was feasible to implement in the US veteran population and increased epilepsy self-management and self-efficacy scores. The greatest improvement was noted for information management behaviors. Patients with chronic conditions are increasingly encouraged to self-manage their condition, and digital communities have potential advantages, such as convenience, scalability to large populations, and building a community support network.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with epilepsy, engaging in an online patient community improves self-management and self-efficacy

Health Technology Assessment and Private Payers' Coverage of Personalized Medicine

A study of major US private payers showed an important role and considerable shortcomings of external health technology assessment in coverage decisions on personalized medicine