No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare physicians', midwives' and lay people's attitudes towards genetic screening and testing to find out whether medical education and experience influence attitudes of genetic screening and testing. The study was based on comparison of answers to joint questions in three different cross-sectional postal surveys between October 1996 and April 1998 in Finland. Target groups were physicians (study base n ¼ 772, response rate 74%, including gynaecologists, paediatricians, general practitioners and clinical geneticists), midwives and public health nurses (collectively referred to as midwives in the following; n ¼ 800, response rate 79%), and lay people (n ¼ 2000, response rate 62%). Midwives were more worried about the consequences of genetic testing and stressed the autonomy of the customer more strongly than lay people did. Furthermore, professionals considered that lay peoples' expectations as regards to genetic testing are too high. Having more medical education was related to having less 'cannot say' and missing responses. Our results do not suggest that major conflicts about the direction of genetic testing and screening would arise in near future. However, different positions and interests should be considered. Reporting in public about new prospects and developments in medical genetics should pay more attention also to concerns for balancing promises and drawbacks.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to the research methodology of analyzing learning in inter‐organizational networks based on an object‐oriented approach.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws from the cultural‐historical activity theory (CHAT), specifically from the concepts of the object of activity, developmental contradiction, and expansive learning. An intermediate concept, the “learning event,” is elaborated to study in a longitudinal way collaboration in a small‐firm network.FindingsLearning in inter‐organizational networks is best captured by analyzing historically the expansive object‐creation at multiple levels of activity. Learning takes place in a dialectical movement across the levels of collaboration and across the objects and outcomes created. Transitions across the levels are critical for learning apparently enhanced by a network's innovative capacity to create intermediate levels. This vertical dimension of collaboration alongside the horizontal dimension may enrich the CHAT approach.Research limitations/implicationsThe model of learning across levels is a generalization to be applied to analyses of learning in networks. The levels are historically emergent and are to be contextually explored case by case.Practical implicationsNetwork partners are encouraged to analyze and utilize the learning potential of network activity where models are needed as pedagogic and developmental tools.Originality/valueThe paper introduces a novel way of conceiving the levels of learning, and strengthens the focus on the object of activity accompanied by contradictions and tensions energizing collaboration and learning, which are often omitted in inter‐organizational studies.

No abstract