The application of scientific tools to analyse the use of Internet-based e-learning tools in academic settings is in general an ignored area. E-learning tools are actually an emergent topic as a result of the new ideas introduced by the European Higher Education Area. Lifelong learning, or the promotion of student initiative, is the new paradigm of a learner-centred education. In this context, e-learning tools can represent an effective way of supporting this new trend in education. Assuming the premise that successful use of these web-based tools depends primarily on a user's behaviour, the objective of this research is to examine the technology acceptance model (TAM) of web-based elearning tools used in practical and laboratory teaching. The research hypotheses derived from this model have empirically been validated using the responses to a survey on e-learning usage among 220 users. These responses have been examined through partial least square. The obtained results strongly support the extended TAM in predicting a student's intention to use e-learning and define a set of external variables with a significant influence in the original TAM variables. Surprisingly, perceived ease of use did not posit a significant impact on student attitude or intention towards e-learning tool usage. Therefore, early evaluation of e-learning material is considered essential to providing a framework for further improvements of the tool.

Health system resilience, known as the ability for health systems to absorb, adapt or transform to maintain essential functions when stressed or shocked, has quickly gained popularity following shocks like COVID-19. The concept is relatively new in health policy and systems research and the existing research remains mostly theoretical. Research to date has viewed resilience as an outcome that can be measured through performance outcomes, as an ability of complex adaptive systems that is derived from dynamic behaviour and interactions, or as both. However, there is little congruence on the theory and the existing frameworks have not been widely used, which as diluted the research applications for health system resilience. A global group of health system researchers were convened in March 2021 to discuss and identify priorities for health system resilience research and implementation based on lessons from COVID-19 and other health emergencies. Five research priority areas were identified: (1) measuring and managing systems dynamic performance, (2) the linkages between societal resilience and health system resilience, (3) the effect of governance on the capacity for resilience, (4) creating legitimacy and (5) the influence of the private sector on health system resilience. A key to filling these research gaps will be longitudinal and comparative case studies that use cocreation and coproduction approaches that go beyond researchers to include policy-makers, practitioners and the public.

The study investigates the management of risk in E-Commerce and what different barriers are faced by consumers during an uncertain and risky situation. The study utilizes both primary and secondary data in order to get reliable results. There are different risk factors that affect the purchasing behaviour of consumers who shop online. The consumer's perception of risk may be the result of all the emotional processes through which consumers recognize, organize and provide meaning to sensations received, such as the need for product quality, safety online and overall satisfaction. The primary data consists of a survey of online shoppers. The research data and questionnaire was administered to 972 internet users who are classed as experienced and avid users. The secondary data includes an analysis of the various theories of consumer behaviour, models of online adoption, risk factors to marketing and shopping online, models of the adoption of innovation and new ways of marketing and trade. Both techniques are utilized that would examine the relationship between perceived risk strategies and customer satisfaction as well as examined the customer involvement and propensity to take risk on existing relation of online shopping.

The year 2022 saw COVID‐19 as the primary public health concern, with vaccine rollout and mandates at the forefront. Other viral infectious diseases, such as Monkeypox and Ebola, emerged as public health concerns. Climate change and political conflicts significantly impacted global health, increasing the demand for humanitarian assistance and protection. In 2023, it remains crucial to identify global and public health priority areas to coordinate and implement effective solutions. Through discussions with public health practitioners and researchers, we have identified key priority areas for 2023, namely, health systems, the mental health crisis, substance abuse, infectious diseases, malnutrition and food insecurity, sexual and reproductive health challenges, environmental pollution, the climate crisis, cancer, and diabetes. These priority areas highlight shared concerns that should be addressed to facilitate proactive and innovative health interventions and practices. To achieve universal healthcare targets for 2030, prioritization, financial investment, international cooperation, and collaboration in addressing these global health challenges are crucial. This requires coordination among public health decision‐makers, the private health sector, and opinion leaders to implement country‐specific healthcare financing and food security measures. Research, scientific knowledge, and technical capacities must be leveraged to produce sustainable interventions that effectively reduce health disparities and improve health system responsiveness to prevent these challenges from progressing to public health emergencies.

The COVID-19 pandemic will not be the last of its kind. As the world charts a way towards an equitable and resilient recovery, Public Health and Social Measures (PHSMs) that were implemented since the beginning of the pandemic need to be made a permanent feature of health systems that can be activated and readily deployed to tackle sudden surges in infections going forward. Although PHSMs aim to blunt the spread of the virus, and in turn protect lives and preserve health system capacity, there are also unintended consequences attributed to them. Importantly, the interactions between PHSMs and their accompanying key indicators that influence the strength and duration of PHSMs are elements that require in-depth exploration. This research employs case studies from six Asian countries, namely Indonesia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam, to paint a comprehensive picture of PHSMs that protect the lives and livelihoods of populations. Nine typologies of PHSMs that emerged are as follows: (1) physical distancing, (2) border controls, (3) personal protective equipment requirements, (4) transmission monitoring, (5) surge health infrastructure capacity, (6) surge medical supplies, (7) surge human resources, (8) vaccine availability and roll-out and (9) social and economic support measures. The key indicators that influence the strength and duration of PHSMs are as follows: (1) size of community transmission, (2) number of severe cases and mortality, (3) health system capacity, (4) vaccine coverage, (5) fiscal space and (6) technology. Interactions between PHSMs can be synergistic or inhibiting, depending on various contextual factors. Fundamentally, PHSMs do not operate in silos, and a suite of PHSMs that are complementary is required to ensure that lives and livelihoods are safeguarded with an equity lens. For that to be achieved, strong governance structures and community engagement are also required at all levels of the health system.