The VASelfCare T2D project plan: fostering innovation through the StartUp Research program

The role of open innovation in addressing resource constraints in healthcare: a systematic literature review

“…Only one study discussed funding the open innovation project through hospital financial resources (Bababekov et al ., 2021). Influencers were the most diverse group of mostly external actors covering everyone that had an impact on the innovation process, such as politicians (Brissos et al ., 2021; Iyawa et al ., 2017), regulators (Carroll et al ., 2010; Litovuo et al ., 2017; Pino et al ., 2015), general public (Bullinger et al ., 2012; Geenhuizen and Faber, 2015; Schucht et al ., 2020) or media (Schucht et al ., 2020).…”

“…A total of 22 studies (third highest group after healthcare and innovation providers) mentioned some form of actor that organised the open innovation process or provided its know-how or facilities to make the project happen. These were living labs (Bababekov et al ., 2021; Geenhuizen and Faber, 2015; Haukipuro et al ., 2018; Chaher et al ., 2017), online platforms (Bullinger et al ., 2012; O’Donnell et al ., 2019; Rubinelli et al ., 2013; Schucht et al ., 2020; Spena and Cristina, 2019), innovation or design facilitators (Bababekov et al ., 2021; Brissos et al ., 2021; Haukipuro et al ., 2018; Iyawa et al ., 2017; Lassen et al ., 2015; Pedersen, 2015; Spena and Cristina, 2019) and also researchers (Bjorkquist et al ., 2015; Geenhuizen and Faber, 2015; Litovuo et al ., 2017; Sjölinder et al ., 2016), community organisations (Carroll et al ., 2010; Litovuo et al ., 2017; Neinstein et al ., 2016; Ramatowski et al ., 2017) and project managers (Bababekov et al ., 2021; Bjorkquist et al ., 2015; Brissos et al ., 2021; Simeone et al ., 2017). Of the 22 studies, only a tiny fraction involved internal intermediaries (Haukipuro et al ., 2018; Pedersen, 2015), while the others were external to the focal healthcare organisation.…”

“…In 16 studies, projects brought value in the form of health outcomes. This was specified as eliminating adverse events, such as medication error (Molin, 2011), but also improving diagnostics (Carroll et al ., 2010), prevention (Bababekov et al ., 2021; Molin, 2011; Ramatowski et al ., 2017; Spena and Cristina, 2019) and symptoms management (Brissos et al ., 2021; Haukipuro et al ., 2018; O’Donnell et al ., 2019). Health outcomes most frequently co-appeared in the studies with healthcare providers, intermediaries and innovation suppliers.…”

“…We also described how eHealth supports patient autonomy. The studies included in this review provide further evidence of these mechanisms, such as the impact of eHealth on positive outcomes, Mobile applications to support T2D self-management have demonstrated a positive effect in improving glycaemic control (Brissos et al, 2021), support of home care, which saves resources, Increasing the patient's role in treatment and rehabilitation and transferring treatments from healthcare organisations to people's homes (Litovuo et al, 2017), and empowering individuals in general: PHS can assist in the provision of continuous, quality-controlled, and personalised health services to empowered individuals (Pombo-Juarez et al, 2017).…”

Dialogue Management and Language Generation for a Robust Conversational Virtual Coach: Validation and User Study

“…These systems employ a rule-based DM and an NLG based on templates or on predefined statements. Some examples are the prototype of the VaSelfCare project [ 37 ], the CADLAC system [ 38 ] and the virtual therapist presented in [ 39 ]. Nonetheless, these works also show some similarities with our proposal.…”