Much of the literature and the academic discussion about the impact of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC) in institutional strategic planning has been centred on the US context. However, data shows that although the US are responsible for the largest MOOC platforms and the most successful course provision, it is the European region which accounts for the highest percentage of global MOOC participation. Differently from the US Higher Education system framework, however, in Europe public policy and in particular the European Commission is now driving MOOC institutional uptake. Given the very different institutional, political and cultural contexts, it is interesting to analyse how in these two different regions Higher Education institutions are responding to the challenges of the MOOC phenomena and are integrating it in their own strategic planning. The current research presents the first attempt to conduct a benchmarking study of institutional MOOC strategies in Europe and the US. It's based on a survey launched by the EU-funded project HOME and compares results with a similar survey launched in the US. Results show that are significant differences in how US and European institutions understand the impact of massive forms of open education and also how they perceive the efficiency of digital education and online learning.
LINK
Even though citizen and patient engagement in health research has a long tradition, citizen science in health has only recently gained attention and recognition. However, at present, there is no clear overview of the specifics and challenges of citizen science initiatives in the health domain. Such an overview could contribute to highlighting and articulating the different needs of stakeholders engaged in any form of citizen science in the health domain. It may also encourage the input of citizens and patients alike in health research and innovation, policy, and practice. This paper reports on a survey developed by the European Citizen Science Association (ECSA)’s Working Group “Citizen Science for Health,” to highlight the perceived characteristics and enabling factors of citizen science in the health domain, and to formulate a direction for future work and research. The survey was available in six languages and was open between January and August 2022. The majority of the 254 respondents were from European countries, and the largest stakeholder respondent group was researchers. Respondents were asked about their perspectives on the particular characteristics of citizen science performed in health and biomedical research, as well as the challenges and opportunities it affords. Ethics, the complexity of the health domain, and the overlap in roles whereby the researcher is sometimes also the subject of research, were the main issues suggested as being specific to citizen science in health. The top two areas that respondents identified as in need of development were “balanced return on investment” and “ethics.” This publication discusses these and other conditions with references to current literature.
MULTIFILE
Aim To provide insight into the basic characteristics of decision making in the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (SSAS) in Dutch heart centres with specific emphasis on the evaluation of frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (instrumental) activities of daily living [(I)ADL]. Methods A questionnaire was used that is based on the European and American guidelines for SSAS treatment. The survey was administered to physicians and non-physicians in Dutch heart centres involved in the decision-making pathway for SSAS treatment. Results All 16 Dutch heart centres participated. Before a patient case is discussed by the heart team, heart centres rarely request data from the referring hospital regarding patients’ functionality (n = 5), frailty scores (n = 0) and geriatric consultation (n = 1) as a standard procedure. Most heart centres ‘often to always’ do their own screening for frailty (n = 10), cognition/mood (n = 9), nutritional status (n = 10) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). During heart team meetings data are ‘sometimes to regularly’ available regarding frailty (n = 5), cognition/mood (n = 11), nutritional status (n = 8) and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL (n = 10). After assessment in the outpatient clinic patient cases are re-discussed ‘sometimes to regularly’ in heart team meetings (n = 10). Conclusions Dutch heart centres make an effort to evaluate frailty, cognition, nutritional status and physical functioning/functionality in (I)ADL for decision making regarding SSAS treatment. However, these patient data are not routinely requested from the referring hospital and are not always available for heart team meetings. Incorporation of these important data in a structured manner early in the decision-making process may provide additional useful information for decision making in the heart team meeting.
LINK
Background:Many business intelligence surveys demonstrate that Digital Realities (Virtual reality and Augmented Reality) are becoming a huge market trend in many sectors, and North America is taking the lead in this emerging domain. Tourism is no exception and the sector in Europe must innovate to get ahead of the curve of this technological revolution, but this innovation needs public support.Project partnership:In order to provide labs, startups and SMEs willing to take this unique opportunity with the most appropriate support policies, 9 partner organizations from 8 countries (FR, IT, HU, UK, NO, ES, PL, NL) decided to work together: regional and local authorities, development agencies, private non-profit association and universities.Objective of the project:Thanks to their complementary experiences and know-how, they intend to improve policies of the partner regions (structural funds and regional policies), in order to foster a tourist channeled innovation in the Digital Realities sector.Approach:All partners will work together on policy analysis tasks before exchanging their best initiatives and transferring them from one country to another. This strong cooperation will allow them to build the best conditions to foster innovation thanks to more effective structural funds policies and regional policies.Main activities & outputs:8 policy instruments are addressed, among which 7 relate to structural funds programmes. Basis for exchange of experience: Reciprocal improvement analysis and 8 study trips with peer-review of each partner’s practices. Video reportages for an effective dissemination towards other territories in Europe.Main expected results:At least 16 good practices identified. 8 targeted policy instruments improved. At least 27 staff members will transfer new capacities in their intervention fields. At least 8 involved stakeholders with increased skills and knowledge from exchange of experience. Expected 17 appearances in press and media, including at European level.
