Search

One of the tasks required of most statistics researchers and academic faculty is to publish their innovative ideas in the peer‐reviewed literature. In this paper, we provide guidance about the different stages of the process as experienced authors and offer advice from those who hold the decision about the success or failure of these papers, namely the editors of applied statistics journals. The paper is organized into four sections focusing on the different stages of publishing: (1) Planning what to write about, where to submit and how to organize the paper; (2) The process of writing the paper; (3) Interpreting and responding to peer‐reviews from the journal editors and referees to prepare for resubmission; and (4) General comments about the publication process, including collaboration and mentoring. Each section starts with fundamentals provided by the moderators (C.A.C. and L.L.) on key aspects to consider on each topic and then is followed with discussion from some current and past editors of impactful journals in the field of applied statistics. Our hope is that this collection of insights may help accelerate learning about the process for young researchers and help all researchers to understand some of the important often‐unspoken aspects of the process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The complexity of industrial challenges is emerging together with the exponentially developing information and communication technologies (ICT) that provide several implementation approaches for systems engineering. It is difficult for a single company to follow technological development and remain a pioneer in every topic. Still, the industrial challenges require experts in each technology. Therefore, collaboration among technology providers is an opportunity to gather all resources and competences needed for full delivery. A joint offering (JO) is a solution, that is, co‐created in collaboration between two or more actors that usually have complementary technological skills or value‐creation logics. A JO has several doubts relating to the use case (UC) in hand, the feasibility of the joint solution to be co‐created, the resources and skills needed to deliver the joint solution, the partners, the business value creation, the elements of the contract and the ownership of the outcome, just to mention a few. The Joint Offering Evaluation Framework (JOEF) uncovers these issues and supports decision‐making before the development of a JO starts. The JOEF comprises the Joint Offering Playbook and the Business Value Toolset (BVT). The Playbook offers seven viewpoints with checklists and tools for IT solution providers considering collaboration and co‐creation for a solution that they cannot deliver or sell alone. The BVT evaluates and illustrates the business value of a JO from the viewpoints of both creation and delivery, together with value capture and assessment. The JOEF was piloted with a digital twin (DT) UC from the pulp and paper industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Objective Design Findings Discussion Conclusions Disparities in the health of Indigenous people and in the health of rural populations are well described. University Departments of Rural Health (UDRHs) in Australia are federally funded under a program to address ongoing challenges with health workforce distribution for rural and remote areas. They have a significant role in research in regional, rural and remote areas, including research related to Indigenous health. However, a comprehensive analysis of their contributions to original Indigenous health related to Indigenous health is lacking.This study examines the contributions of UDRHs to Indigenous issues through analysis of publications of UDRHs focused on Indigenous health during the period 2010–2021.This paper examines a database of UDRH Indigenous‐related publications from 2010 to 2021.A total of 493 publications to which UDRHs contributed were analysed, including 354 original research articles. Health services research was the most common category, followed by epidemiology and papers exploring Indigenous culture and health. While health services research substantially increased over the period, the numbers of original research papers specifically focused on Indigenous workforce issues, whether related to Indigenous people, students or existing workforce was relatively small.This broad overview shows the nature and trends in Indigenous health research by UDRHs and makes evident a substantial contribution to Indigenous health research, reflecting their commitment to improving the health and well‐being of Indigenous communities.The analysis can help direct future efforts, and future analyses should delve deeper into the impact of this research and further engage Indigenous researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creating effective teamwork between humans and robots involves not only addressing their performance as a team but also sustaining the quality and sense of unity among teammates, also known as cohesion. This paper explores the research problem of: how can we endow robotic teammates with social capabilities to improve the cohesive alliance with humans? By defining the concept of a human–robot cohesive alliance in the light of the multidimensional construct of cohesion from the social sciences, we propose to address this problem through the idea of multifaceted human–robot cohesion. We present our preliminary effort from previous works to examine each of the five dimensions of cohesion: social, collective, emotional, structural, and task. We finish the paper with a discussion on how human–robot cohesion contributes to the key questions and ongoing challenges of creating robotic teammates. Overall, cohesion in human–robot teams might be a key factor to propel team performance and it should be considered in the design, development, and evaluation of robotic teammates. This paper defines the concept of a human–robot cohesive alliance in light of the multidimensional construct of cohesion from the social sciences, i.e. social, collective, emotional, structural and task. It proposes a new framework to design, develop and evaluate robotic teammates with social capabilities to improve the cohesive alliance with humans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY In childhood intervention, parent–therapist collaboration is central to the family‐centred approach. Despite long‐standing discussion in occupational therapy literature, the field faces challenges, including inconsistent terminology and difficulties in translating theory into practice. This paper represents the first part of a comprehensive scoping review study aimed at developing foundational concepts for collaborative practices with parents in occupational therapy for children. Therefore, this paper focusses on mapping existing practices, types, and approaches articulated in the literature.We searched English‐language sources published worldwide from 1998 to 2022 discussing collaborative practices with parents in occupational therapy for children aged 0–10 with any diagnosis, including multidisciplinary practices. Seven databases were searched. Data from peer‐reviewed indexed literature, theses and dissertations, and book chapters were extracted and analysed through basic numerical and descriptive analyses before being synthesised into similar categories. The Joanna Briggs Institute Manual and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analysis—extension for Scoping Reviews were used.The scoping review yielded 299 papers. Parent–therapist collaboration was prominent in clinics, family homes, schools, and hospitals, particularly during therapy implementation, goal setting, and planning. Most reported practice types included ‘interventions with parent engagement’, ‘parent‐directed interventions’, and ‘parent education’. ‘Family‐centred’, ‘occupational‐focussed’, and ‘client–therapist collaborative’ approaches were frequently mentioned. There were inconsistencies in the terms used to describe collaborative practice characteristics.Over the past 24 years, the collaborative practice literature has expanded and evolved, with parent–therapist collaboration observed across various occupational therapy settings. Inconsistencies in this collaboration across different therapeutic stages were revealed, which could impact intervention success and sustainability. Further research is needed to explore parent–therapist collaboration mechanisms within and across stages. This scoping review also underscores the need for a common framework to guide practice and research.This literature review explores how occupational therapists and parents work together in childhood intervention. Collaboration is essential for understanding and meeting children's needs within their family and community settings. However, occupational therapists and parents face challenges in applying family‐centred practices and using a common language to bridge theory with practice. To address these challenges, we examined 299 papers published between 1998 and 2022 to understand how collaborative practices with parents have been described in the literature. Our review revealed that therapists and parents collaborate across various settings, such as clinics, schools, homes, and hospitals, mainly during therapy sessions, goal setting, and planning interventions. Collaborative practices take different forms. For instance, therapists often encourage parents to actively engage and take the lead in therapy, requiring therapists to recognise and respect parents' priorities and learning preferences. They often develop strategies together to support the child within family routines. While we found several studies on therapist–parent collaboration, the review outlined inconsistencies in how this practice was described and applied, which could affect its success. Therefore, more research is needed to understand the best ways in which collaboration can occur at each stage of therapy. The need for a core guideline for collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy was also observed. While therapist–parent collaboration is used in occupational therapy for children, there is a clear need to minimise inconsistencies and gaps found in the literature, as well as to ensure a common language to promote intervention quality and success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Informal care features high on the policy agenda of many countries to deal with workforce shortages. As a consequence, care provision increasingly takes place in the care triad of care recipients, informal caregivers and care professionals. How collaboration between care partners takes shape depends on how the different partners perceive this collaboration. This paper aims to investigate the relative importance of the different aspects of collaboration from the perspectives of care recipients, informal caregivers and care professionals in the context of the care for older persons in The Netherlands. Methods: Using Q‐methodology, 32 participants ranked 28 statements that reflect different aspects of collaboration in the care triad and explained their ranking during a follow‐up interview. Participants comprised 9 older persons, 10 informal caregivers and 13 care professionals. Data were analysed using by‐person factor analysis to identify common patterns in the rankings of the statements. Emerging patterns were interpreted and described as views on collaboration using aggregated rankings and qualitative data from the interviews. Results: Five distinct views on collaboration were found: (1) Emphasizing warm collaboration, (2) trusting care professional's expertise, (3) open and compassionate care professionals, (4) responsive decision‐making by autonomous care professionals and (5) prioritizing care recipient's and informal caregiver's interests. Care recipients and/or informal caregivers were associated with views 1, 3 and, 5, whereas care professionals were associated with all five views. Conclusions: Our study highlights the importance of recognizing the potential diversity of views between and within different partner groups in care triads. Governmental and organizational policy makers, as well as healthcare professionals who aim to increase or support the involvement of informal caregivers, should take this heterogeneity into consideration. Patient or Public Contribution: An advisory board of older persons (care recipients and informal caregivers) was involved in the recruitment of the participants, the formulation of the statements and the reflection on the findings of the study and potential implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Objectives Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Stakeholders working on the COVID‐19 pandemic response needed access to evidence, requiring a systematic approach to identify and disseminate relevant research.Outline the stages of development of a COVID‐19 Literature Digest; demonstrate the impact the Digest had on decision‐making and knowledge gain; identify the lessons learned.A standardised process was developed to identify and select papers. The main sources for content were PubMed, bioRxiv and medRxiv. A shared EndNote library was used to deduplicate and organise papers. Three user surveys obtained feedback from subscribers to determine if the Digest remained valuable, and explore the benefits to individuals.40–60 papers were summarised each week. 211 Digests were produced from March 2020 to March 2022, with around 10,000 papers included altogether. Survey results suggest benefits of the Digest were gaining new knowledge, saving time and contributing to evidence‐based decision making.Digest procedures constantly evolved and were adapted in response to survey feedback. Lessons identified: learn from failure, communication is key, measure your impact, work collaboratively, reflect and be flexible.The Digest was successfully produced within the limits of available resource. The learning from this Digest will inform evidence monitoring, selection and dissemination for future health crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we explore a concept of exercise design within emergency management competence development. The paper presents recommendations for exercise design aspects that may be suitable for gaining collaboration skills and knowledge that responders need in unknown events of high complexity. This study explores the practice of tabletop exercises with complex scenarios that engage participants to discover organizational roles and responsibility division in collaborative action. Empirically, we base our analysis on maritime search and rescue nuclear preparedness exercises in the Arctic seas. We focus on elements that are essential for learners to increase their knowledge of operational complexity and collaborative performance, including understanding one's own and others' roles and responsibilities, formation of interagency teams, their boundaries and interaction between authorities and levels, mutual recognition of risks and learning about resource capacities and their limitations. The study draws conclusions on aspects that are critical for designing emergency management tabletop exercises, in particularly discussions in mixed groups for interpretative learning; own practice reflection for integrative learning; formulating general collaborative competence objectives, and complexity and realism of scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This special section, titled "From the Field to the Screen: Reflexivity and collaboration in Visual and Multimodal Contemporary Practices," presents a collection of papers that explore the challenges, opportunities, and ethical considerations inherent in reflexive and collaborative practices within ethnographic visual and multimodal research. Drawing from diverse methodologies and approaches, the papers delve into topics such as autobiographical storytelling, virtual reality, sensory experiences, and archival‐based filmmaking. Through critical reflections and case studies, the section aims to provoke dialogue and reflection on the complex intersections of reflexivity and collaboration in visual anthropology. It addresses the challenges and pitfalls of producing visual and multimodal ethnographic data beyond film through a multilayered analysis that conveys ethical, aesthetic, and methodological implications. Each paper invites readers to engage with innovative methods and perspectives that complicate research processes—from design to dissemination—contributing to contemporary debates in visual and multimodal anthropology with implications for audiences beyond the discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Collaboration between therapists and parents of children with developmental disabilities is a key element of family‐centred care. In practice, collaboration appears to be challenging for both parents and therapists. This systematic review aims to make explicit how therapists can optimise their collaboration with parents of young children with developmental disabilities, according to the perspectives of parents and therapists. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the following databases: Medline (PubMed), CINAHL (OVID) and PsychINFO (OVID). Those papers were selected, which focused on collaboration using a two‐way interaction between therapists and parents, exploring the perspectives of therapists and/or parents of children between 2 and 6 years. Papers needed to be published in English or Dutch between 1998 and July 2021. Included papers were synthesised using a qualitative analysis approach by two researchers independently. Results sections were analysed line‐by‐line, and codes were formulated and discussed by all authors. Codes were aggregated, resulting in a synthesis of specific collaboration strategies in combined strategy clusters. Results: The search generated 3439 records. In total, 24 papers were selected. Data synthesis resulted in an overview of specific strategies organised into five clusters: (1) continuously invest time in your collaboration with parents, (2) be aware of your important role in the collaboration with parents, (3) tailor your approach, (4) get to know the family and (5) empower parents to become a collaborative partner. Conclusions: This systematic review resulted in an overview of concrete strategies for therapists to use in their collaboration with parents of children with developmental disabilities. The strategies formulated enable therapists to consciously decide how to optimise their collaboration with each individual parent. Making these strategies explicit facilitates change of practice from therapist‐led and child‐centred towards family‐centred care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the challenges posed to third sector organizations by major external crises that from time to time beset national and global communities. In so doing, it unpacks the multiple characteristics and complexities of concepts and related issues involved in organizational crisis management and resilience. This reveals the importance of shared sensemaking, issue identification, response types and implementation, organizational coping and adaptation, exploiting strategic opportunities, and conditioners of organizational resilience. Related insights are drawn from selected empirical studies involving non‐profit organizational crisis responses to a range of major crisis events. Accountability and management control implications are induced, and a relevant ongoing agenda for accounting research is presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion In occupational therapy for children, collaborative practice with parents is crucial for meaningful family‐centred interventions, yet it remains undefined and inconsistently addressed. This study aimed to establish foundational concepts for collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy for children in progressing the field with a universal description.This paper encompasses the second dataset of a larger scoping review and a preliminary validation of findings by an advisory panel. Data were gathered from indexed sources on collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy for children (ages 0–10) using MedLine, PsychInfo, ERIC, Embase, OTSeeker, Scopus, and ProQuest Central. Data were extracted, charted, and descriptively analysed by paired independent reviewers. The Joanna Briggs Institute Manual and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis—extension for Scoping Reviews were used. A draft definition of collaborative practices, developed based on preliminary review findings and an operational definition, was validated by an advisory panel of 13 experienced Australian occupational therapists, whose input was integrated into a final, comprehensive description of collaborative practice.The scoping review encompassed 299 sources, revealing three major components of collaborative practice: ‘collaborative practice aims’, ‘parent–therapist partnership’, and ‘strategies for collaboration’. The advisory panel endorsed the draft definition, confirmed its professional relevance, and suggested some modifications.The major outcome of this study is an evidence‐based and discipline‐specific preliminary description of collaborative practice with parents in occupational therapy for children. This description provides a common language and foundational concepts for the future development of a collaborative practice framework to guide practice and research. Future studies can explore specific components, exploring their mechanisms and significance. Further expanded validation is required, incorporating the perspectives of a wider community of occupational therapists and families to enhance the description's applicability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaborative biostatistics units within universities and academic medical centres operate under a wide range of different funding models; common to many of these models is the challenge of allocating time to activities that are not linked to a specific research project, such as professional development, mentorship and administrative tasks. The purpose of this paper is to describe a proposed model for 'flexible funding', that is, funding that is not linked to a specific research project, within a collaborative biostatistics unit and to detail the benefits and challenges associated with the proposed model. We present results from a qualitative study representing the perspectives of collaborative biostatisticians working under the proposed flexible funding model. In addition to providing examples of activities undertaken as part of time allocated to flexible funding, the qualitative results reveal several benefits of flexible funding both for a collaborative biostatistician (e.g., job satisfaction and professional development) and for the collaborative biostatistics unit as a whole (e.g., retention, process improvement, and leadership). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children's testimonial learning often occurs in epistemic collaborations with others. In this paper, we will discuss ways in which cultural learning emerges in social and interpersonal contexts, and is intrinsically supported and guided by children's collaborative capacities. Much work in cultural learning has focused on children's examination of speaker and model characteristics, but more recent research has investigated the interactive aspects of testimonial exchanges. We will review evidence that children (1) participate in the interpersonal commitments that are shared in testimonial transactions by way of direct address and epistemic buck passing, (2) participate in social groups that affect their selective learning in nuanced ways, and (3) may detect epistemic harms by listeners who refuse to believe sincere and accurate speakers. Implications for conceptualizing children's testimonial learning as an interactive mechanism of collaboration will be discussed. Children's testimonial learning often occurs in epistemic collaborations with others, which enable distinct forms of trust to operate that grant them access to information about the world. By examining children's conversational practices, their group‐based biases and assumptions, and their sensitivity to epistemic harms, we suggest that children evaluate speakers in terms of their epistemic credentials and social characteristics while at the same time holding them interpersonally responsible for their claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we interrogate and justify the design of a local project that used collaborative design research in a secondary school in England. As authors, we represent teachers and teacher educators engaged in design research, whereby we acknowledge the difficulties implicit to university and school collaborations within a performative culture. Our analysis recognises the struggle for research‐informed professional judgement in the decision‐making and actions of educators that are situated in schools. A professional learning project is analysed to position teachers and teacher educators as practitioner researchers. In this respect, Stenhouse's work provides an analytical framework that is both a lens through which to interpret the nature of collaborations, as well as a methodology that allows us to understand the way in which we navigate the gap between educators' aspirations and the curriculum design and teaching within the project. The collaborative design research project was stimulated by an aspiration to make trigonometry accessible to low prior attaining pupils in a secondary mathematics classroom. This provides a stimulus for understanding the conditions that enable collaborative lesson inquiry and to question whether it can provoke raised aspirations for young people in inclusive classrooms. This allows us to understand the work of teachers as researchers and research users in an increasingly messy teacher education context. We interrogate the potentially problematic connection between research and practice within collaborative inquiry, as we understand how we enable research that is “held accountable for its relevance to practice” because “that relevance can only be validated by practitioners” (Stenhouse, 1988, p. 49). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contaminated source water for cities contributes to negative human health impacts and rising water treatment costs. Nutrient pollution is the primary source of surface water quality impairment in the United States and agriculture is the largest source of nutrient pollution (specifically nitrogen or nitrate) entering waterways. Solutions to source water contamination have historically centered on nutrient removal at the drinking water plant, which often requires additional investment. Pollution prevention through watershed management may be more cost-effective in some contexts and has greater co-benefits, and some drinking water managers and agricultural stakeholders have collaborated to create successful prevention programs. However, drinking water managers must balance several service requirements and regulatory standards, and may lack the resources or capacity needed to effectively engage in or initiate regional collaborations. This paper serves as an introduction to nutrient contamination of source waters and protection measures in the United States and provides a discussion of watershed-scale collaboration, particularly the engagement of municipal drinking water managers. This article is categorized under: Human Water > Water Governance Water and Life > Conservation, Management, and Awareness Science of Water > Water Quality [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implementing the circular economy (CE) requires novel forms of stakeholder collaboration. While the contemporary literature on stakeholder theory is commonly characterized as "pro‐business‐oriented," it remains ambiguous on how precisely stakeholder collaborations may pave the way for a systemic CE transition. By applying a qualitative‐empirical research approach utilizing semi‐structured interviews, this paper identifies three types of stakeholder governance for CE collaborations—(i) company‐centric governance, (ii) industry‐oriented governance, and (iii) cross‐industry‐oriented governance. Our contribution to stakeholder theory lies in examining how a systemic CE transition may bridge "the stakeholder‐system divide." We emphasize the unique role of innovative governance in ensuring the success of stakeholder relationships while highlighting how systemic changes of the business environment may give an impetus to stakeholder collaborations. We contribute to the CE literature by gaining the following insights into stakeholder collaborations in the European chemicals and plastics industry: (a) successful collaborations typically feature a variety of different stakeholders maintaining close mutual interactions; (b) a systemic CE transition calls for managerial strategies that are collectively governance‐oriented rather than company‐centric. This article thus sheds light on the criticality of stakeholder collaborations and collective‐oriented governance strategies in fostering CE practices within the European chemicals and plastics industry highlighting that stakeholder collaborations for a CE need to be extended beyond immediate industrial and sectoral boundaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Collaborative practice between therapists and parents is a key element of family‐centred care and is essential if we want to address family priorities and needs in interventions. However, collaborative practice is challenging for speech and language therapists (SLTs) and parents. To facilitate collaboration, collaborative practices need to be implemented into speech and language therapy for young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) and their families. Actual change and implementation of collaboration in practice will be successful only when it corresponds with patients' needs, in our case the needs of parents of young children with DLD. Aims: To explore parents' needs in their collaboration with SLTs during therapy for their young child with DLD. Methods & Procedures: Parents of children with (a risk of) DLD in the age of 2–6 years were eligible for participation. We recruited parents via SLTs. Twelve parents of children with DLD participated in semi‐structured interviews about their needs in collaboration with SLTs. We used a phenomenological approach focusing on parents' lived experiences. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. All interviews were read/listened to and discussed by our parent panel, multiple researchers and the interviewer. Two researchers independently analysed the data using the reflective thematic analysis of Braun and Clarke. Outcomes & Results: The analysis of the interviews resulted in six themes: (1) knowing what to expect, (2) knowing how to contribute, (3) feeling capable of supporting the child, (4) trusting the therapist, (5) alignment with parents and children's needs, preferences and priorities and (6) time and space for asking questions and sharing information. Conclusions & Implications: Parents want SLTs to invest time in collaborating with them. Parents need SLTs to empower them to become a collaborative partner and enable them to support their child in daily life. Parents need knowledge about the therapy process and diagnosis and skills in how to support their child's language development. Also, they need emotional support to feel secure enough to support their child, to ask questions to therapists and to bring up their own thoughts and opinions in therapy. Parents' needs are in line with collaborative working as described in literature, which underlines the importance of implementing collaborative working in speech and language therapy for young children with DLD. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Several reviews have explored parents' perspectives on speech and language therapy. Results reveal parents' experiences with speech and language therapy in general, and parents' perspectives on specific topics such as shared decision‐making and parents/therapists roles in therapy. What this study adds: This study adds insights into parents' needs to ensure collaboration with speech and language therapists (SLTs). Parents of young children with developmental language disorders (DLD) need SLTs to invest time to create optimal collaboration. It is important for parents to have enough knowledge about DLD and the SLT process, skills and confidence in how to support their child and opportunities to share thoughts and questions with SLTs. Our results underline the importance of parents being empowered by SLTs to become a collaborative partner. What are the clinical implications of this work?: When children are referred to speech and language therapy, parents often venture into an unknown journey. They need support from SLTs to become a collaborative partner in speech and language therapy. Parents need SLTs to invest time in sharing knowledge, skills and power and align therapy to parents' and child's needs, preferences, priorities and expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaborative research papers are widely acknowledged to be more impactful than single‐authored studies in higher education amidst subject area known to alter citation counts. While preceding studies have mostly recognised these two as the antecedents of research impact separately, it needs to be clarified whether the interaction of research area and type of collaboration causes any moderation. Comprehensive knowledge of differences in impact caused by a certain combination of type and area is important because, if citation impact is associated only with a particular combination, the impact‐based research stimulation programs without regard to combination consequences may be cost‐ineffective if not self‐destructing. This study investigates how research collaborations in academia impact the productivity and impact of university faculty. The focus is on the impact variation due to the type of academic collaboration (internal, domestic, international) and the research area. For the empirical test of this study, publicly open data from 1368 faculty in one of the leading Russian higher education institutions—HSE University. Results have two‐fold nature. STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) researchers are more likely to collaborate with domestic co‐authors. This result accentuates the specifics of the academic traditions in the research areas highly recognised for having a long and successful history and worldwide impact on science. The collaborations built on international coauthorship are associated with higher publication visibility rates for researchers from emerging fields in Russia, like those in social sciences and humanities, whereas institutional collaborations are found to be positively related to the share of cited documents. This article sheds light on the differences in academic collaboration mechanisms influencing research productivity and impact in two distinct research areas. It invites revisiting policies stimulating collaborative activities in universities, demonstrating their potentially discrepant consequences. The study's substantial contribution also refers to the use of panel data on personal attributes, research productivity and impact, which is a rare case for research collaboration studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Collaboration has become a crucial element of effective healthcare delivery in the emergency department (ED). In high‐pressure environments, healthcare providers can prioritize patients by consulting with other specialists to gain diverse perspectives and arrive at a shared understanding of the best course of action. It was conducted for the purpose of designing and evaluating the collaborative decision‐making application for patient care in the ED. Methods: The present applied research study was conducted between April 1, 2021 and May 31, 2023 at Imam Reza Hospital of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. The study was conducted in three phases: exploration, development, and evaluation, utilizing modern technologies such as Flutter and Node.js to design and program the application. The effectiveness of the system was evaluated using established measures, including the think‐aloud protocol, user experience questionnaire, and Likert‐scale questionnaires developed by Ghadri et al. Results: The average scale for attractiveness was 2.03, perspicuity was 2.90, efficiency was 2.40, dependability was 1.93, stimulation was 2.48, and novelty was 2.78. Additionally, 71% of physicians gave a very good rating to the accessibility of necessary information at any time, motivation to use the system for accessing information, usefulness of the system compared to the time spent using it throughout the day. Furthermore, 57% of physicians gave a very positive rating to sharing information and knowledge, ease of using the search function and accessing the system, user control and monitoring, free access to the system, and support from colleagues and system users. Conclusion: The study suggests that introducing Information and Communication Technology such as medical apps can improve healthcare delivery by streamlining patient care, promoting effective teamwork, and reducing medical errors and treatment delays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary reflects on the experiences of a cohort of human and physical geographers in enacting environmental collaborations during their doctoral studies. The authors identify three key structural barriers encountered whilst attempting a collaborative approach: (1) doctoral funding priorities, (2) doctoral resourcing and (3) assessing doctoral collaboration. The authors discuss how the negotiation of these encounters came to frame their understanding of collaborative approaches to environmental knowledge creation. Competitive application processes for doctoral studentships can encourage the overpromising of the impact of planned environmental collaboration, potentially co‐opting the voices of partners/communities to satisfy doctoral funding requirements. Given insufficient funding of collaborations, the authors argue that this overpromising of doctoral research's impact can later result in difficult trade‐offs between undertaking additional commitments at the expense of the career progression of the doctoral student, contributing to educational inequalities and scaling‐back the initial plans at the cost of collaborators encountering environmental crises. The trade‐off is further problematised by institutional assessment procedures that do not adequately recognise the more nuanced contributions of environmental collaborations and a prevailing culture promoting peer‐review publishing. Overall, the commentary argues that these barriers help to reproduce inequalities in the distribution of voice in environmental scholarship, undermining efforts to democratise environmental knowledge creation in doctoral research. The authors call for specific structural reforms of doctoral programmes to help address these challenges and support a broader resistance to the inadequate resourcing and evaluation of environmental collaborative research in UK higher education. This commentary reflects on the experiences of a cohort of human and physical geographers in enacting environmental collaborations during their doctoral programmes. We draw attention to the key structural barriers we encountered. Going forward, we call for specific structural reforms of doctoral programmes to help address these challenges and support wider environmental collaborative research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Macrostrat is a platform for deep‐time geoscientific research that integrates stratigraphic columns and geologic maps into a digital description of the crust. The database and supporting software track crustal evolution and provide location‐based geological information to geoscience end users. Macrostrat houses multiple scales of mapping and stratigraphic data, from continent‐ and basin level summaries to single quadrangles and measured sections. Currently, Macrostrat's primary data holdings consist of regional stratigraphic columns with a spatial footprint weighted heavily to North America. While the data are of sufficient scale and resolution to generate insights about Earth evolution, increasing resolution and expanding spatial coverage will allow a new generation of scientific and interpretive uses. The next phase of Macrostrat's development will increase the detail and complexity of Macrostrat's multiscale data holdings, largely by engaging a wider range of geoscientists in entering stratigraphic data. To support broad collaboration, we are building new web‐based software to assemble and visualize regional stratigraphic sequences, refine multiple working age models, and compose regional records from measured stratigraphic sections. These tools will allow Macrostrat to draw on the expertise of a wide range of geoscience workers and grow a dataset with global relevance and a variety of end uses. New capabilities will pave the way to processes for submission, review, coordination, and assimilation of community‐contributed stratigraphic datasets. Digital compilation of geological maps and columns requires substantial effort, and well‐designed systems for distributing this work in the geoscience community will allow Macrostrat to build more adaptable and scientifically relevant products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]