Canadian science policy has increasingly linked the value of academic knowledge to its contribution to economic competitiveness. A market vision of scientific quality is embedded in new funding criteria which encourage academic scientists to collaborate with industry, generate intellectual property, and found companies. While the “Mode 2” thesis advanced by Gibbons and Nowotny asserts that quality criteria in science are changing to incorporate economic relevance, there is little empirical evidence to either refute or substantiate this claim. Using Bourdieu’s theory of practice, this study explores the responses of basic health scientists to market-oriented funding criteria. The goal of the study was to understand how scientists, occupying different positions of power in the scientific field, defined “good science” and pursued scientific prestige. Twenty semi-structured interviews were carried out with 11 scientists trained before and 9 trained after the rise of market-oriented science policy. Data derived from Curriculum Vitae and Background Information Forms were used to estimate the type and volume of capital each participant held. Scientific capital, as reflected in peer-reviewed publications and grants, was perceived as the dominant form of recognition of scientific quality. However, “entrepreneurial capital”, as reflected in patents, licenses, industry funding and company spin-offs, functioned as a new form of power in accessing resources. Study participants adopted different positions in a symbolic struggle over competing visions of “good science” and used different strategies to acquire scientific prestige. Some pursued a traditional strategy of accumulation of scientific capital, while others sought to accumulate and convert entrepreneurial capital into scientific capital. Findings suggest that there is no longer a single symbolic order in the scientific field, but that the field is stratified according to a scientific and market logic. Hence, support is provided for both continuity with “Mode 1” and change towards “Mode 2” evaluation of academic quality.

Pain management in hospitalized infants in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit continues to be substandard despite the development and availability of evidence-based guidelines. The Evidence-based Practice Identification and Change (Lee et al., 2009) strategy is a multifaceted tailored intervention that has been used to promote evidence-based practice. However, the process of delivering the components of the intervention is not well understood and no valid measure for evaluating the fidelity of intervention implementation exists. The overall objective was to develop and determine the face validity, content validity, construct validity, feasibility, and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist. Three prospective studies were conducted. In Study 1, the face and content validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was determined. In Study 2, the construct validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was examined by assessing the fidelity of implementing the Evidence-based Practice Identification and Change intervention in a clinical setting. In Study 3, the feasibility and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist was determined. Overall, the face and content validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was achieved. The intervention was implemented with high fidelity, supporting the construct validity of the measure. A Research Practice Council, with assistance from an external facilitator and internal facilitators, implemented multifaceted knowledge translation strategies in the form of constant reminders to improve sucrose administration practices. Post intervention admission orders were significantly more likely to include sucrose, and odds of being administered sucrose were 13 times greater compared to baseline. Beginning support was provided for the content and construct validity, feasibility, and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist for use with complex interventions. Using this measure to monitor intervention fidelity in different contexts and with different users over longer periods of time will provide additional support to the validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist.

Canadian science policy has increasingly linked the value of academic knowledge to its contribution to economic competitiveness. A market vision of scientific quality is embedded in new funding criteria which encourage academic scientists to collaborate with industry, generate intellectual property, and found companies. While the “Mode 2” thesis advanced by Gibbons and Nowotny asserts that quality criteria in science are changing to incorporate economic relevance, there is little empirical evidence to either refute or substantiate this claim. Using Bourdieu’s theory of practice, this study explores the responses of basic health scientists to market-oriented funding criteria. The goal of the study was to understand how scientists, occupying different positions of power in the scientific field, defined “good science” and pursued scientific prestige. Twenty semi-structured interviews were carried out with 11 scientists trained before and 9 trained after the rise of market-oriented science policy. Data derived from Curriculum Vitae and Background Information Forms were used to estimate the type and volume of capital each participant held. Scientific capital, as reflected in peer-reviewed publications and grants, was perceived as the dominant form of recognition of scientific quality. However, “entrepreneurial capital”, as reflected in patents, licenses, industry funding and company spin-offs, functioned as a new form of power in accessing resources. Study participants adopted different positions in a symbolic struggle over competing visions of “good science” and used different strategies to acquire scientific prestige. Some pursued a traditional strategy of accumulation of scientific capital, while others sought to accumulate and convert entrepreneurial capital into scientific capital. Findings suggest that there is no longer a single symbolic order in the scientific field, but that the field is stratified according to a scientific and market logic. Hence, support is provided for both continuity with “Mode 1” and change towards “Mode 2” evaluation of academic quality.

Pain management in hospitalized infants in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit continues to be substandard despite the development and availability of evidence-based guidelines. The Evidence-based Practice Identification and Change (Lee et al., 2009) strategy is a multifaceted tailored intervention that has been used to promote evidence-based practice. However, the process of delivering the components of the intervention is not well understood and no valid measure for evaluating the fidelity of intervention implementation exists. The overall objective was to develop and determine the face validity, content validity, construct validity, feasibility, and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist. Three prospective studies were conducted. In Study 1, the face and content validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was determined. In Study 2, the construct validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was examined by assessing the fidelity of implementing the Evidence-based Practice Identification and Change intervention in a clinical setting. In Study 3, the feasibility and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist was determined. Overall, the face and content validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist was achieved. The intervention was implemented with high fidelity, supporting the construct validity of the measure. A Research Practice Council, with assistance from an external facilitator and internal facilitators, implemented multifaceted knowledge translation strategies in the form of constant reminders to improve sucrose administration practices. Post intervention admission orders were significantly more likely to include sucrose, and odds of being administered sucrose were 13 times greater compared to baseline. Beginning support was provided for the content and construct validity, feasibility, and clinical utility of the Process Evaluation Checklist for use with complex interventions. Using this measure to monitor intervention fidelity in different contexts and with different users over longer periods of time will provide additional support to the validity of the Process Evaluation Checklist.

Background: Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is a novel healthcare technology, for which much research evidence has been published. The objectives of this work were to compare the oncologic outcomes of this technology across different study types, and to define patterns of adoption on the basis of the literature. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of the literature was conducted using 1) existing systematic reviews, 2) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 3) observational studies. Outcomes of interest were overall survival, and total lymph node harvest. Outcomes were compared for congruence. Adoption was evaluated by means of summary expert opinions in the literature. Results: 1) Existing systematic reviews were of low to moderate quality and displayed evidence of overlap and duplication. 2) Laparoscopy was not inferior to open surgery in terms of oncologic outcomes in any study type. 3) Oncologic outcomes from RCTs and observational studies were congruent. 4) Expert opinion in the literature has been supportive of this technology, paralleling the publication of large RCTs. Conclusions: The evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in RCTs and observational studies suggests that it is not inferior to open surgery. Adoption of this technology has paralleled RCT evidence.

This thesis investigates the use of a combined set of quantitative and qualitative tools to help address known barriers associated with adopting and sustaining pollution prevention (P2) in an industrial manufacturing setting. The research was conducted at an Ontario dairy processing facility in the form of a case study. P2 is an alternative approach to traditional pollution control or abatement techniques. P2 is a preferred method for pollution management, both environmentally and economically, as it focuses on the efficient use of resources to prevent pollution at the source. The tools used in this research included: wastewater treatability testing, hierarchical process mapping, employee interviews, and causal loop diagrams (CLDs). The application of these tools assisted the participating facility in better characterizing its existing environmental problems, uncovering concrete resource saving opportunities within its processes, and providing more adaptive visual approaches of documenting and conveying P2 concepts. / OMAFRA Agri-Food and Rural Link KTT Funding Program

No description available.

Knowledge alone is not enough to ensure that the individual will act in a healthy manner or choose positive health behaviors. However, knowledge may enable one to engage in sound health practices. Health education must respond to the changes in American culture by developing approaches that achieve maximum communication and learning. The purpose of this thesis is to assess the suitability of the Health Knowledge Inventory – High School Version (HKI-HS) for testing with high school seniors. A field test was performed to assess whether the HKI-HS is an appropriate measurement instrument of personal health knowledge among high school seniors. During the spring of 1990 the HKI-HS was administered to 418 students at four high schools in Western Kentucky. Estimates of construct validity, internal consistency reliability, and test-retest reliability were obtained. Within the context of this study and its limitations, the HKI-HS was demonstrated to be a valid and reliable test for the high school population. Potential uses of the HKI-HS include measuring knowledge gained through high school personal health courses.

Organizational learning through experience has been found to be associated with enhanced firm performance. Organizational experiments are a method of experiential learning that enable organizations to learn from experience and gain context-specific knowledge of how and why to implement new knowledge. Pilot projects, a type of organizational experiment, involve making intentional, systematic efforts to gather and analyze feedback in order to accurately assess the action-outcome relationships of adopting new knowledge prior to embarking on full-scale implementation. Despite the popularity of pilot projects used to test products, programs, and services as well as reports on the outcomes of such experiments, there is a dearth of research focusing on how organizational learning occurs during organizational experiments, and on the processes and structural mechanisms of organizational experiments that contribute to organizational learning. A qualitative, multiple-case study of eight pilot projects was carried out within nursing units across five acute health care organizations during Fall 2008. Interviews were conducted with 32 individuals, including pilot project leaders, nursing program managers and direct care nurses. An inductive approach to data analysis was applied and themes identified. Results were compared to 14 propositions that were developed based on the knowledge transfer, innovation diffusion, and organizational learning literature, and which were bracketed before data analysis to allow findings to emerge from the data. The findings advance existing organizational learning, innovation diffusion, and knowledge transfer models by illuminating the complexity of organizational learning processes. Several processes and structural mechanisms of organizational experiments were found to facilitate single-loop organizational learning, leading to incremental changes to meet existing goals and objectives. Although double-loop organizational learning, which may result in fundamental changes in an organization’s assumptions, norms, policies, goals and objectives was not observed, the study revealed a number of processes and structural mechanisms that have the potential to encourage this type of learning. Studies of organizational experiments are rare. Future directions for research and theory development are suggested to build on the findings of this study. Practical implications are offered to organizations in any industry interested in realizing the potential that organizational experiments have for double-loop learning and enhanced organizational performance.

Background: Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) is a method of delivering high-dose radiation to tumours while sparing surrounding healthy tissues. Despite its wide availability IMRT utilization varies across Ontario. The study’s objective was to examine key steps in the implementation process and identify factors that facilitate or impede IMRT implementation. Research Methods: An embedded multiple case study design, utilizing document analysis and key-informant interviews, was employed. Four cancer centres were selected and key-informant interviews were conducted with radiation oncologists, physicists, radiation therapists, and administrators. Results: Eighteen of 21 invited key-informants participated (86% participation rate) providing a range of insights on the factors influencing IMRT implementation. Overall, three cases made progress in the implementation of IMRT, while one case had limited implementation over the same time period. Conclusion: These findings help explain the observed variation in IMRT implementation across Ontario, which is multifaceted and reflects ongoing processes of change and reinvention.