Co-creation with Companies: A Means to Enhance Societal Impact of University Researchers?

In this chapter, we explore co-creation as a form of societal interaction of science. We approach co-creation as a goal-oriented form of dynamic interaction aiming at mutual benefit of all parties. As such, we exclude technology transfer and other linear societal interaction forms that follow a closed-model innovation format. We argue that focusing solely on tapping the needs of researchers and ‘pure’ science would lead to ignoring the broader context in which researchers work. An excessive focus on meeting the needs of external stakeholders could jeopardize the preconditions of science. Hence, this chapter explores how researcher-company co-creation can be nurtured in a heavily institutionalized setting, where established rules govern the process of knowledge production and protect research integrity. The co-creation process is analyzed by combining Nonaka’s SECI model and Strober’s interdisciplinary interaction model for knowledge creation. We find that the core of this process lies facilitated dialogue, which is seen as open knowledge sharing between equal participants

Use of complementary and alternative medicine in Europe : Health-related and sociodemographic determinants

Aims: The aim of this research was to study health-related and sociodemographic determinants of the use of different complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments in Europe and differences in CAM use in various European countries. Methods: The study was based on a design-based logistic regression analysis of the European Social Survey (ESS), Round 7. We distinguished four CAM modalities: manual therapies, alternative medicinal systems, traditional Asian medical systems and mind-body therapies. Results: In total, 25.9% of the general population had used CAM during the last 12 months. Typically, only one CAM treatment had been used, and it was used more often as complementary rather than alternative treatment. The use of CAM varied greatly by country, from 10% in Hungary to almost 40% in Germany. Compared to those in good health, the use of CAM was two to fourfold greater among those with health problems. The health profiles of users of different CAM modalities varied. For example, back or neck pain was associated with all types of CAM, whereas depression was associated only with the use of mind-body therapies. Individuals with difficult to diagnose health conditions were more inclined to utilize CAM, and CAM use was more common among women and those with a higher education. Lower income was associated with the use of mind-body therapies, whereas the other three CAM modalities were associated with higher income. Conclusions: Help-seeking differed according to the health problem, something that should be acknowledged by clinical professionals to ensure safe care. The findings also point towards possible socioeconomic inequalities in health service use.Peer reviewe

Recruiting a hard-to-reach, hidden and vulnerable population: the methodological and practical pitfalls of researching vaccine-hesitant parents

While recruitment is an essential aspect of any research project, its challenges are rarely acknowledged. We intend to address this gap by discussing the challenges to the participation of vaccine-hesitant parents defined here as a hard-to-reach, hidden and vulnerable population drawing on extensive empirical qualitative evidence from seven European countries. The difficulties in reaching vaccine-hesitant parents were very much related to issues concerning trust, as there appears to be a growing distrust in experts which is extended to the work developed by researchers and their funding bodies. These difficulties have been accentuated by the public debate around Covid-19 vaccination, as it seems to have increased parents’ hesitancy to participate. Findings from recruiting 167 vaccine-hesitant parents in seven European countries suggest that reflexive and sensible recruitment approaches should be developed