1,720,971 research outputs found

    Which impact had the introduction of performance evaluation system adopted by Tuscany Region on regional healthcare system culture?

    No full text
    Paper presentato in XVI IRSPM Conference a Roma il 11-13 aprile 2012 presso Università Tor Vergata, Rom

    Involving hybrid professionals in top management decision-making: how managerial training can make the difference

    Full text link
    Hybrid professionals have a two-fold - professional and managerial - role, which requires appropriate management skills. Investing on managerial training programs aims to empower professionals with managerial skills and competencies. Does this pay back? Assessing the impact of such training programs is still a limited practice. This paper explores whether participation in managerial training programs in healthcare can enhance the involvement of hybrid professionals (namely, clinical directors) in top management decision-making. The mediational effects of knowledge of performance information and its use are explored. Survey data were collected from more than 3,000 clinical directors of 69 public health authorities from five regional healthcare systems in Italy. Relationships between participation in managerial training programs, performance management practices (i.e., knowledge and use of performance information) and the level of clinicians’ involvement by the top management were studied using a three-path mediation analysis with structural equation modelling. Propensity score matching was also performed to mitigate selection bias. Knowledge and use of performance information positively mediate, both independently and sequentially, the relationship between head of departments’ participation in managerial training programs and the level of clinical directors’ involvement in decision-making. The results of the study suggest that managerial training can support hybrid professionals in engaging with managerialism and playing upward influence on top management decision-making

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore