Explore the vast range of titles available.

Clinical supervision requires that supervisors make decisions about how much independence to allow their trainees for patient care tasks. The simultaneous goals of ensuring quality patient care and affording trainees appropriate and progressively greater responsibility require that the supervising physician trusts the trainee. Trust allows the trainee to experience increasing levels of participation and responsibility in the workplace in a way that builds competence for future practice. The factors influencing a supervisor’s trust in a trainee are related to the supervisor, trainee, the supervisor–trainee relationship, task, and context. This literature-based overview of these five factors informs design principles for clinical education that support the granting of entrustment. Entrustable professional activities offer promise as an example of a novel supervision and assessment strategy based on trust. Informed by the design principles offered here, entrustment can support supervisors’ accountability for the outcomes of training by maintaining focus on future patient care outcomes.

Background Students enter the medical study with internally generated motives like genuine interest (intrinsic motivation) and/or externally generated motives like parental pressure or desire for status or prestige (controlled motivation). According to Self-determination theory (SDT), students could differ in their study effort, academic performance and adjustment to the study depending on the endorsement of intrinsic motivation versus controlled motivation. The objectives of this study were to generate motivational profiles of medical students using combinations of high or low intrinsic and controlled motivation and test whether different motivational profiles are associated with different study outcomes. Methods Participating students (N = 844) from University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, were classified to different subgroups through K-means cluster analysis using intrinsic and controlled motivation scores. Cluster membership was used as an independent variable to assess differences in study strategies, self-study hours, academic performance and exhaustion from study. Results Four clusters were obtained: High Intrinsic High Controlled (HIHC), Low Intrinsic High Controlled (LIHC), High Intrinsic Low Controlled (HILC), and Low Intrinsic Low Controlled (LILC). HIHC profile, including the students who are interest + status motivated, constituted 25.2% of the population (N = 213). HILC profile, including interest-motivated students, constituted 26.1% of the population (N = 220). LIHC profile, including status-motivated students, constituted 31.8% of the population (N = 268). LILC profile, including students who have a low-motivation and are neither interest nor status motivated, constituted 16.9% of the population (N = 143). Interest-motivated students (HILC) had significantly more deep study strategy (p < 0.001) and self-study hours (p < 0.05), higher GPAs (p < 0.001) and lower exhaustion (p < 0.001) than status-motivated (LIHC) and low-motivation (LILC) students. Conclusions The interest-motivated profile of medical students (HILC) is associated with good study hours, deep study strategy, good academic performance and low exhaustion from study. The interest + status motivated profile (HIHC) was also found to be associated with a good learning profile, except that students with this profile showed higher surface strategy. Low-motivation (LILC) and status-motivated profiles (LIHC) were associated with the least desirable learning behaviours.

The increasing variety of contingent work raises the question of how employers choose between various types of contractual arrangements. The authors review relevant Employment Relations and Strategic HRM literature and distinguish four types of contingent contracts along the dimensions of costs and control. They argue that employers are making choices based on cost and control constraints but are able to reshape these constraints through “institutional toying.” Their case study of a German manufacturing plant and R&D center illustrates the mechanisms of institutional toying, which are consistent with the literature on institutional loopholes and exit options. The article develops propositions that explain the diversity of contingent work arrangements and show how toying strategies enlarge the range of options available to employers.

Background Virtual dissection tables (VDTs) have emerged as innovative tools in anatomy education, offering interactive, three-dimensional visualization of anatomical structures. However, their performance in conjunction with traditional teaching methods needs to be further analyzed and synthesized. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, student satisfaction and perceived utility of VDTs compared to cadaveric dissection, lectures, and textbook-based learning. Methods A systematic search of literature identified 22 eligible studies involving students in medicine and related healthcare professions. Studies were analyzed in terms of design, cohort characteristics, educational outcomes, and anatomical content coverage. VDTs evaluated included commercial platforms such as Anatomage, Spectra, VH Dissector, and institutional in-house systems. Results VDT use was associated with improved academic performance in 86% of studies, with score increases ranging from 8 to 31% over traditional teaching methods. The greatest improvements were observed in musculoskeletal And neuroanatomy modules. Student satisfaction ranged from 64 to 95%, with the majority citing improved spatial understanding, engagement, And repeatability. However, preference for VDT-exclusive learning remained low, reported by only 2.4–30.2% of students. Most participants favored a hybrid approach combining VDTs with cadaver-based instruction. Despite these benefits, limitations included high implementation costs (up to $200,000 USD), limited access due to device scarcity, lack of tactile feedback, and significant variation in assessment methods and anatomical content. Additionally, no study conducted a direct comparison between various VDT platforms, nor between commercial and in-house systems. Conclusion VDTs represent a valuable complement to traditional anatomy education, enhancing learning outcomes and student engagement across a range of healthcare disciplines. However, their full potential is best realized when used as part of a multimodal curriculum that retains cadaveric dissection. Further research is needed to assess long-term outcomes, clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness, and to compare different VDT systems.

Scholars have enumerated unique challenges to collaborative interdisciplinary research, many of which evade prescriptive solutions. Some of these challenges can be understood as \"essential tensions,\" necessary and persistent contradictory imperatives in the scientific process. Drawing from interviews with internationally renowned interdisciplinary environment-society research center leaders primarily located in United States academic institutions, we identified three hierarchical tensions in collaborative interdisciplinary research: (1) an epistemic tension between knowledge generation processes that blend multiple approaches into one unified intellectual perspective versus pluralistic processes that maintain multiple, discrete intellectual perspectives, (2) a structural tension between organizations that provide stability to persist and build unified knowledge, while maintaining the flexibility to experiment with novel organizational arrangements that foster innovation, and (3) \"affective\" tensions for individual researchers between the security of working within cohesive research communities versus attraction to the creative challenges in new intellectual communities. Our results indicate that these tensions are interdependent, similar to previous observations that disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge productions are linked. Rather than attempt to resolve tensions between dueling directives, leaders of interdisciplinary research centers can manage essential tensions with purpose through process-oriented and self-reflective management of the unique epistemic culture of the research centers they lead.

Charting significant growth in science production over the 20th century in four European Union member states, this neo-institutional analysis describes the development and current state of universities and research institutes that bolster Europe's position as a key region in global science. On-going internationalization and Europeanization of higher education and science has been accompanied by increasing competition as well as collaboration. Despite the policy goals to foster innovation and further expand research capacity, in cross-national and historical comparison neither the level of R&D investments nor country size accounts completely for the differential growth of scientific productivity. Based on a comprehensive historical database from 1900 to 2010, this analysis uncovers both stable and dynamic patterns of production and productivity in Germany, France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Measured in peer-reviewed research articles collected in Thomson Reuters' Science Citation Index Expanded, which includes journals in the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health, we show the varying contributions of different organizational forms, especially research universities and research institutes. Comparing the institutionalization pathways that created the conditions necessary for continuous and strong growth in scientific productivity in the European center of global science emphasizes that the research university is the key organizational form across countries. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

Due to investments in interdisciplinary research endeavors, the number and variety of interdisciplinary research centers have grown exponentially during the past decades. While interdisciplinary research centers rely on varied organizational arrangements, we know little about the conditions and processes that mediate collaborative arrangements and interdisciplinary research outcomes. This study examines how different collaborative arrangements shape scholars' experiences of interdisciplinary research and understandings of interdisciplinary knowledge culminations in the context of university-based research centers. We conducted three in-depth qualitative case studies on different centers, which recruited researchers from natural sciences, medicine, and social sciences. We refer to them as the Biotech Center, the Environmental Center, and the Premature Birth Center. Our analysis of 53 interviews with interdisciplinary scholars across the three centers demonstrates that the scholars perceive particular features of the centers' collaborative arrangements as meaningful for interdisciplinary collaboration. Specifically, the center's mission, physical architecture, and leadership and task structure were seen as affecting scholars' motivation, interaction, and inclusion in the centers, which then shaped the interdisciplinary knowledge culminations. At the Biotech Center, knowledge was translated towards concrete products, at the Environmental Center knowledge was pooled together from varied fields to create new problem framings, and at the Premature Birth Center, interdisciplinary collaboration was crafted through top-down knowledge brokerage. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).

The creation of a strategy for disaster research alone is not enough. The research must get to the people who need it most: disaster survivors and emergency managers in the field. However relevant the research, if studies remain sequestered in journals or if their recommendations and conclusions are uninterpretable by responders in the field, their influence will be limited. Insights from individual studies, and cross-analysis of those studies, must be clearly communicated to emergency managers and other responders, as well as to citizens living in harm's way. Thus, whatever agency is overseeing the coordination of the research must be poised to communicate new information and insights in a way that responders, managers, and the public can proactively use.

Kirshenbaum's first morning as a scientist-turned-Senate-staffer began with a misunderstanding that would become a metaphor for her impending immersion into the complex world of policymaking. When her new colleagues mentioned \"R&D,\" she naively assumed they were discussing critical topics related to research and development. After 10 or so confused minutes, she realized they were referring to Republicans and Democrats--her first lesson in the distinctive language and unique dynamics of congressional work. The \"R&D,\"at the center of their world was vastly different than that of mine. In the 20 years since, she moved between academic science positions and working on science policy in the Senate, under both Republican and Democratic majorities. Her goal during these two decades has remained the same--to promote evidence-based policymaking that advances science and serves the public, regardless of the political landscape. But the transition from scientist to staffer has transformed my understanding of why so many efforts by scientists to influence policy falter. Despite generations of scholarly research to understand how information informs political decisions, scientists and other academics consistently overlook a crucial part of the process: the role of congressional staffers.

[...]I want to emphasize the important role GUIRR plays in advancing innovation and the national science and technology agenda. In my former position as chief research administrator at the University of Tennessee, I was deeply involved in that regional innovation ecosystem, along with other participants at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and in the automotive industry, allowing me to experience firsthand just how impactful these ingredients can be when combined and maximized. NSF Engines have already unlocked another $350 million in matching commitments from state and local governments, other federal agencies, philanthropy, and private industry, enabling them to catalyze breakthrough technologies in areas as diverse as semiconductors, biotechnology, and advanced manufacturing while stimulating regional job growth and economic development.