scholarly journals Collective health research assessment: Development of a tool to measure the impact of multi-stakeholder research initiatives

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Aurora Kork ◽  
Carla Antonini ◽  
Nicolás García-Torea ◽  
Mercedes Luque-Vílchez ◽  
Ericka Costa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
Research Initiatives ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Responsible Research

Abstract Background The need for measuring the impact of health research more collaboratively and from multi-dimensional perspectives has been acknowledged. As part of a Collective Research Impact Framework (CRIF), a scorecard was developed that will engage stakeholders in measuring the impacts of health research and innovation. The purpose of this study is to describe the developmental process of the MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard and how it can be used as a practical tool for assessing future responsible research and innovation actions collectively. Methods Based on an extensive review of the health research impact literature and multi-stakeholder initiatives, a total of 1,556 impact indicators were collected into a database. The Master Scorecard was then co-created by engaging key stakeholders and conducting semi-structured interviews with experts in the field. Results The MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard consists of five accountability dimensions: the excellence, efficacy, economic, social and patient-reported dimensions. The tool includes 126 potential indicators classified into 52 measurement aspects that are considered the most relevant topics applicable to multi-stakeholder research and innovation initiatives in assessing their impact based on their mission and stakeholders’ interests. The MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard allows the strategic management of multi-stakeholder research initiatives to demonstrate their research impact on people and society. The value of the tool is that it is comprehensive, customizable and easy to use. Conclusions The MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard is an example of how the views of society can be taken into account in assessing research impacts in a more sustainable and balanced way. The engagement of patients and other stakeholders is an integral part of the CRIF, facilitating collaborative decision-making in the design of policies and research agendas. In policy-making, the collective approach allows extending the evaluation perspective to the needs of society and toward responsible research and innovation. Multi-dimensionality fosters research and innovations to be more responsive to systemic challenges and developing more equitable and sustainable health services.

scholarly journals Reflections on the impact of (playful) deliberation processes in contexts of responsible research and innovation

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (03) ◽  
pp. C04 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjoleine G. van der Meij
Keyword(s):  
Science Communication ◽  
Relationship Development ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Communication Practices ◽  
Innovation Practices ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Responsible Research

This commentary shares a personal ‘learning curve’ of a science communication researcher about the impact of (playful) tools and processes for inclusive deliberation on emerging techno-scientific topics in the contemporary era of two-way science and technology communication practices; needed and desired in responsible research and innovation (RRI) contexts. From macro-level impacts that these processes are supposed to have on research and innovation practices and society, as encouraged by the RRI community, the author discovers more about ‘micro-level’ impacts; through conversations with peers of her department Athena (VU University, Amsterdam), as well as through experiencing the SiP 2015 conference in Bristol. Based on that, she defines several ‘impact-spheres’: a modular set of flexibly defined micro-level impacts that events in RRI contexts can have on both academic and non-academic participants, with respect and relationship development as focal assets to aim for; individual (micro-)changes that potentially build up towards an ‘RRI world’.

scholarly journals Boundaries Between Research Ethics and Ethical Research Use in Artificial Intelligence Health Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 155626462110027
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Samuel ◽  
Jenn Chubb ◽  
Gemma Derrick
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Past Half

The governance of ethically acceptable research in higher education institutions has been under scrutiny over the past half a century. Concomitantly, recently, decision makers have required researchers to acknowledge the societal impact of their research, as well as anticipate and respond to ethical dimensions of this societal impact through responsible research and innovation principles. Using artificial intelligence population health research in the United Kingdom and Canada as a case study, we combine a mapping study of journal publications with 18 interviews with researchers to explore how the ethical dimensions associated with this societal impact are incorporated into research agendas. Researchers separated the ethical responsibility of their research with its societal impact. We discuss the implications for both researchers and actors across the Ethics Ecosystem.

scholarly journals Contextualizing Security Innovation: Responsible Research and Innovation at the Smart Border?

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Klimburg-Witjes ◽  
Frederik C. Huettenrauch
Keyword(s):  
New Technologies ◽  
Border Security ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Socially Responsible ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
Security Technologies ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Societal Needs ◽  
Responsible Research

AbstractCurrent European innovation and security policies are increasingly channeled into efforts to address the assumed challenges that threaten European societies. A field in which this has become particularly salient is digitized EU border management. Here, the framework of responsible research and innovation (RRI) has recently been used to point to the alleged sensitivity of political actors towards the contingent dimensions of emerging security technologies. RRI, in general, is concerned with societal needs and the engagement and inclusion of various stakeholder groups in the research and innovation processes, aiming to anticipate undesired consequences of and identifying socially acceptable alternatives for emerging technologies. However, RRI has also been criticized as an industry-driven attempt to gain societal legitimacy for new technologies. In this article, we argue that while RRI evokes a space where different actors enter co-creative dialogues, it lays bare the specific challenges of governing security innovation in socially responsible ways. Empirically, we draw on the case study of BODEGA, the first EU funded research project to apply the RRI framework to the field of border security. We show how stakeholders involved in the project represent their work in relation to RRI and the resulting benefits and challenges they face. The paper argues that applying the framework to the field of (border) security lays bare its limitations, namely that RRI itself embodies a political agenda, conceals alternative experiences by those on whom security is enacted upon and that its key propositions of openness and transparency are hardly met in practice due to confidentiality agreements. Our hope is to contribute to work on RRI and emerging debates about how the concept can (or cannot) be contextualized for the field of security—a field that might be more in need than any other to consider the ethical dimension of its activities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document