Background Physical activity after bariatric surgery is associated with sustained weight loss and improved quality of life. Some bariatric patients engage insufficiently in physical activity. The aim of this study was to examine whether and to what extent both physical activity and exercise cognitions have changed at one and two years post-surgery, and whether exercise cognitions predict physical activity. Methods Forty-two bariatric patients (38 women, 4 men; mean age 38 ± 8 years, mean body mass index prior to surgery 47 ± 6 kg/m²), filled out self-report instruments to examine physical activity and exercise cognitions pre- and post surgery. Results Moderate to large healthy changes in physical activity and exercise cognitions were observed after surgery. Perceiving less exercise benefits and having less confidence in exercising before surgery predicted less physical activity two years after surgery. High fear of injury one year after surgery predicted less physical activity two years after surgery. Conclusion After bariatric surgery, favorable changes in physical activity and exercise cognitions are observed. Our results suggest that targeting exercise cognitions before and after surgery might be relevant to improve physical activity.
MULTIFILE
Background: Physical activity is an important intervention for improving disease-related symptoms and systemic manifestations in rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease (RMDs). However, studies suggest that RMD patients report that the lack of individualized and consistent information about physical activity from managing doctors and healthcare professionals, acts as a barrier for engagement. On the other hand, managing doctors and healthcare professionals report lack of knowledge in this area and thus lack of confidence to educate and advise RMD patients about the beneficial effects of physical activity. The aim of the present study therefore, is to develop two e-Learning courses for RMD doctors and health professionals: a) the first one to provide consistent information about the collective benefits of physical activity in RMDs and b) the second on how to implement physical activity advice in routine clinical practice. Methods: An international collaboration of seven countries, consisting of one academic institution and one patient organization from each country, will co-develop the two e-Learning courses. The final e-Learning courses will primarily target to improve – through physical activity advice – RMD symptoms which are important for patients. Discussion: The main result of this study will be to co-develop two e-Learning courses that can be used by managing RMD doctors and healthcare professionals to be made aware of the overall benefits of physical activity in RMDs as well as how to implement physical activity advise within their practice.
MULTIFILE
It has become a topic at Dutch educational institutes to feel not only responsible for improvement of theoretical and practical skills, but also of 'competences' in a broader sense. The curriculum of the Electrical and Electronic (E&E) Department has been changed enormously in the past decade. Fewer lessons and many more projects were introduced. We have choosen to let the students work on competences especially in the projects they are in. With the introduction of competences and the aid of a student portfolio we have given the tools to the students to improve their competences in a broader way. At the E &E department we introduced two different ways of working on competences. In the first years of their study students choose different roles in our projects every time. We have described all the roles and the related tasks for each specific role. While working on a role, the students indirectly work on different competences. This way of working inforces a broader educational level (a student shouldn t work on things he already knows or is able to handle) and the hitch hiking behaviour is banned out. Students now do take responsibility while contributing to the project teams. Inquiries amongst the students confirm these results. The second way is working on the specific competences in their traineeship and thesis work in the last part of their study. This will be introduced in autumn 2004 in the E&E department. In this paper we will show you how we are implementing the integration of competences, like the E&E department did, for IPD projects as well. This implementation is planned to start in autumn 2004.
DOCUMENT
Horse riding falls under the “Sport for Life” disciplines, where a long-term equestrian development can provide a clear pathway of developmental stages to help individuals, inclusive of those with a disability, to pursue their goals in sport and physical activity, providing long-term health benefits. However, the biomechanical interaction between horse and (disabled) rider is not wholly understood, leaving challenges and opportunities for the horse riding sport. Therefore, the purpose of this KIEM project is to start an interdisciplinary collaboration between parties interested in integrating existing knowledge on horse and (disabled) rider interaction with any novel insights to be gained from analysing recently collected sensor data using the EquiMoves™ system. EquiMoves is based on the state-of-the-art inertial- and orientational-sensor system ProMove-mini from Inertia Technology B.V., a partner in this proposal. On the basis of analysing previously collected data, machine learning algorithms will be selected for implementation in existing or modified EquiMoves sensor hardware and software solutions. Target applications and follow-ups include: - Improving horse and (disabled) rider interaction for riders of all skill levels; - Objective evidence-based classification system for competitive grading of disabled riders in Para Dressage events; - Identifying biomechanical irregularities for detecting and/or preventing injuries of horses. Topic-wise, the project is connected to “Smart Technologies and Materials”, “High Tech Systems & Materials” and “Digital key technologies”. The core consortium of Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Rosmark Consultancy and Inertia Technology will receive feedback to project progress and outcomes from a panel of international experts (Utrecht University, Sport Horse Health Plan, University of Central Lancashire, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences), combining a strong mix of expertise on horse and rider biomechanics, veterinary medicine, sensor hardware, data analysis and AI/machine learning algorithm development and implementation, all together presenting a solid collaborative base for derived RAAK-mkb, -publiek and/or -PRO follow-up projects.
Cross-Re-Tour supports European tourism SME while implementing digital and circular economy innovations. The three year project promotes uptake and replication by tourism SMEs of tools and solutions developed in other sectors, to mainstream green and circular tourism business operations.At the start of the project existing knowledge-gaps of tourism SMEs will be researched through online dialogues. This will be followed by a market scan, an overview of existing state of the art solutions to digital and green constraints in other economic sectors, which may be applied to tourism SME business operations: water, energy, food, plastic, transport and furniture /equipment. The scan identifies best practices from other sectors related to nudging of clients towards sustainable behaviour and nudging of staff on how to best engage with new tourism market segments.The next stage of the project relates to two design processes: an online diagnostic tool that allows for measuring and assessing (160) SME’s potential to adapt existing solutions in digital and green challenges, developed in other economic sectors. Next to this, a knowledge hub, addresses knowledge constraints and proposes solutions, business advisory services, training activities to SMEs participating. The hub acts as a matchmaker, bringing together 160 tourism SMEs searching for solutions, with suppliers of existing solutions developed in other sectors. The next key activity is a cross-domain open innovation programme, that will provide 80 tourism SMEs with financial support (up to EUR 30K). Examples of partnerships could be: a hotel and a supplier of refurbished matrasses for hospitals; a restaurant and a supplier of food rejected by supermarkets, a dance event organiser and a supplier of refurbished water bottles operating in the cruise industry, etc.The 80 cross-domain partnerships will be supported through the knowledge hub and their business innovation advisors. The goal is to develop a variety of innovative partnerships to assure that examples in all operational levels of tourism SMEs.The innovation projects shall be presented during a show-and-share event, combined with an investors’ pitch. The diagnostic tool, market scan, knowledge hub, as well as the show and share offer excellent opportunities to communicate results and possible impact of open innovation processes to a wider international audience of destination stakeholders and non-tourism partners. Societal issueSupporting the implementation of digital and circular economy solutions in tourism SMEs is key for its transition towards sustainable low-impact industry and society. Benefit for societySolutions are already developed in other sectors but the cross-over towards tourism is not happening. The project bridges this gap.
De afgelopen twee decennia is er veel meer aandacht ontstaan bij onderzoekers en beleidsmakers voor het begrip co-creatie. Bijna altijd wordt de rol van co-creatie als positief en essentieel gezien in een proces waarin maatschappelijke of publieke uitdagingen worden onderzocht en opgelost (zogenaamde sociale innovatie). Het meeste onderzoek naar deze twee begrippen is kwalitatief van aard en gebaseerd op ‘case studies’.In zijn promotieonderzoek kijkt Peter Broekema naar de rol van co-creatie binnen sociale innovatie in Europese samenwerkingsprojecten. In zijn eerste artikel heeft hij de begrippen co-creatie en sociale innovatie tussen 1995 en 2018 binnen de EU geanalyseerd en geconcludeerd dat beide begrippen steeds breder gebruikt worden en samen met het begrip impact zijn getransformeerd tot een beleidsparadigma.In het tweede artikel keek Peter Broekema hoe beide begrippen doorwerken in specifieke subsidieoproepen en hoe consortia deze begrippen toepassen en samenwerken. Hierbij bleek dat er weliswaar verschillende typen consortia bestaan, maar dat zij geen specifieke co-creatiestrategie hadden.In zijn laatste twee artikelen zal hij gedetailleerd kijken naar een aantal EU projecten en vaststellen hoe de samenwerking is verlopen en hoe tevreden de verschillende partners zijn met het resultaat. Peter Broekema maakt hiervoor gebruik van projecten waarin hij zelf participeert (ACCOMPLISSH, INEDIT en SHIINE).EU beleidsparadigma van sociale innovatie in combinatie met co-creatie en impact. Co-creatie vindt vaak binnen eigen type stakehodlers plaatsAbstractSocial innovation and co-creation are both relatively new concepts, that have been studied by scholars for roughly twenty years and are still heavily contested. The former emerged as a response to the more technologically focused concept of innovation and the latter originally solely described the collaboration of end-users in the development of new products, processes or services. Between 2010-2015, both concepts have been adapted and started to be used more widely by for example EU policymakers in their effort to tackle so called ‘grand societal challenges’. Within this narrative – which could be called co-creation for social innovation, it is almost a prerequisite that partners – especially citizens - from different backgrounds and sectors actively work together towards specific societal challenges. Relevance and aimHowever, the exact contribution of co-creation to social innovation projects is still unclear. Most research on co-creation has been focussing on the involvement of end-users in the development of products, processes and services. In general, scholars conclude that the involvement of end-users is effective and leads to a higher level of customer satisfaction. Only recently, research into the involvement of citizens in social innovation projects has started to emerge. However, the majority of research on co-creation for social innovation has been focusing on collaborations between two types of partners in the quadruple helix (citizens, governments, enterprises and universities). Because of this, it is still unclear what co-creation in social innovation projects with more different type of partners entails exactly. More importantly however, is that most research has been based on national case studies in which partners from different sectors collaborate in a familiar ‘national’ setting. Normally institutional and/or cultural contexts influence co-creation (for example the ‘poldermodel’in the Netherlands or the more confrontational model in France), so by looking at projects in a central EU and different local contexts it becomes clear how context effects co-creation for social innovation.Therefore this project will analyse a number of international co-creation projects that aim for social innovation with different types of stakeholders in a European and multi-stakeholder setting.With this research we will find out what people in different contexts believe is co-creation and social innovation, how this process works in different contexts and how co-creation contributes to social innovation.Research question and - sub questionsThe project will answer the following question: “What is the added value of co-creation in European funded collaboration projects that aim for social innovation?” To answer the main question, the research has been subdivided into four sub questions:1) What is the assumed added value of co-creation for social innovation?2) How is the added value of co-creation for social innovation being expressed ex ante and ex post in EU projects that aim specifically for social innovation by co-creation?3) How do partners and stakeholders envision the co-creation process beforehand and continuously shape this process in EU projects to maximise social innovation?4) How do partners and stakeholders regard the added value of co-creation for social innovation in EU projects that that aim for social innovation?Key conceptsThe research will focus on the interplay between the two main concepts a) co-creation and b) social innovation. For now, we are using the following working definitions:a) co-creation is a non-linear process that involves multiple actors and stakeholders in the ideation, implementation and assessment of products, services, policies and systems with the aim of improving their efficiency and effectiveness, and the satisfaction of those who take part in the process.b) social innovation is the invention, development and implementation of new ideas with the purpose to (immediately) relieve and (eventually) solve social problems, which are in the long run directed at the social inclusion of individuals, groups or communities.It is clear that both definitions are quite opaque, but also distinguish roughly the same phases (ideation/invention, development, implementation and assessment) and also distinguish different levels (products/services, policies and systems). Both concepts will be studied within the policy framework of the EU, in which a specific value to both concepts has been attributed, mostly because policymakers regard co-creation with universities and end-users almost as a prerequisite for social innovation. Based on preliminary research, EU policies seem to define social innovation in close reation with ‘societal impact’, which could defined as: “the long lasting effect of an activity on society, because it is aimed at solving social problems”, and therefore in this specific context social innovation seems to encompasses societal impact. For now, I will use this working definition of social innovation and will closely look at the entanglement with impact in the first outlined paper.MethodologyIn general, I will use a qualitative mixed method approach and grounded theory to answer the main research question (mRQ). In order to better understand the added value of co-creation for social innovation in an EU policy setting, the research will:SubRQ1) start with an analysis of academic literature on co-creation and social impact. This analysis will be followed by and confronted with an analysis of EU policy documents. SubRQ2) use a qualitative data analysis at nineteen EU funded projects to understand how co-creation is envisoned within social innovation projects by using the quintuple helix approach (knowledge flows between partners and stakeholders in an EU setting) and the proposed social innovation journey model. By contrasting the findings from the QDA phase of the project with other research on social innovation we will be able to find arachetypes of social innovation in relation with the (perceived) added value of co-creation within social innovation. SubRQ3) These archetypes will be used to understand the process of co-creation for social innovation by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.SubRQ4) The archetypes will also be used to understand the perceived added value by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.ImpactThe project will contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between co-creation and social innovation on different levels:a) Theoretical: the research will analyse the concepts of co-creation and social innovation in relation to each other by looking at the origins of the concepts, the adaptation in different fields and the uptake within EU policies;b) Methodological: a model will be developed to study and understand the non-lineair process of co-creation within social innovation, by focusing on social innovation pathways and social innovation strategies within a quintuple helix setting (i) academia, ii) enterprises and iii) governments that work together to improve iv) society in an v) EU setting);c) Empirical: the project will (for the first time) collect data on behavioural interactions and the satisfaction levels of these interactions between stakeholders and partners in an EU project.d) Societal: the results of the research could be used to optimize the support for social innovation projects and also for the development of specific funding calls.
