Anderson School of Management

While digital tools, such as the Internet, smartphones, and social media, are an important part of modern society, little is known about the specific role they play in the healthcare management of individuals and caregivers affected by rare disease. Collectively, rare diseases directly affect up to 10% of the global population, suggesting that a significant number of individuals might benefit from the use of digital tools. The purpose of this qualitative interview-based study was to explore: (a) the ways in which digital tools help the rare disease community; (b) the healthcare gaps not addressed by current digital tools; and (c) recommended digital tool features. Individuals and caregivers affected by rare disease who were comfortable using a smartphone and at least 18 years old were eligible to participate. We recruited from rare disease organizations using purposive sampling in order to achieve a diverse and information rich sample. Interviews took place over Zoom and reflexive thematic analysis was utilized to conceptualize themes. Eight semistructured interviews took place with four individuals and four caregivers. Three themes were conceptualized which elucidated key aspects of how digital tools were utilized in disease management: (1) digital tools should lessen the burden of managing a rare disease condition; (2) digital tools should foster community building and promote trust; and (3) digital tools should provide trusted and personalized information to understand the condition and what the future may hold. These results suggest that digital tools play a central role in the lives of individuals with rare disease and their caregivers. Digital tools that centralize trustworthy information, and that bring the relevant community together to interact and promote trust are needed. Genetic counselors can consider these ideal attributes of digital tools when providing resources to individuals and caretakers of rare disease.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, cancers, diabetes, and mental health disorders pose a significant global health challenge, accounting for the majority of fatalities and disability-adjusted life years worldwide. These diseases arise from the complex interactions between genetic, behavioral, and environmental factors, necessitating a thorough understanding of these dynamics to identify effective diagnostic strategies and interventions. Although recent advances in multi-omics technologies have greatly enhanced our ability to explore these interactions, several challenges remain. These challenges include the inherent complexity and heterogeneity of multi-omic datasets, limitations in analytical approaches, and severe underrepresentation of non-European genetic ancestries in most omics datasets, which restricts the generalizability of findings and exacerbates health disparities. This scoping review evaluates the global landscape of multi-omics data related to NCDs from 2000 to 2024, focusing on recent advancements in multi-omics data integration, translational applications, and equity considerations. We highlight the need for standardized protocols, harmonized data-sharing policies, and advanced approaches such as artificial intelligence/machine learning to integrate multi-omics data and study gene-environment interactions. We also explore challenges and opportunities in translating insights from gene-environment (GxE) research into precision medicine strategies. We underscore the potential of global multi-omics research in advancing our understanding of NCDs and enhancing patient outcomes across diverse and underserved populations, emphasizing the need for equity and fairness-centered research and strategic investments to build local capacities in underrepresented populations and regions.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Over the last two decades, the sociology of entrepreneurship has exploded as an area of academic inquiry. Most of this research has been focused on understanding the environmental conditions that promote entrepreneurship and processes related to the initial formation of an organization. Despite this surge in activity, many important questions remain open. Only more recently have scholars begun to turn their attention to what happens to organizations, and the people connected to them, as they mature and move through the life cycle of entrepreneurship. These open questions, moreover, connect to many classic themes in the literature on careers, organizational sociology, stratification, and work and occupations. Using a framework that focuses on three phases of the entrepreneurial life cycle—pre-entry, entry, and post-entry—we summarize sociological research on entrepreneurship and highlight opportunities for future research.

As behavioural science is increasingly adopted by organizations, there is a growing need to assess the robustness and transferability of empirical findings. Here, we investigate the transferability of insights from various sources of behavioural science knowledge to field settings. Across three pre-registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs, N = 314,824) involving a critical policy domain-COVID-19 booster uptake-we field tested text-based interventions that either increased vaccinations in prior field work (RCT1, NCT05586204), elevated vaccination intentions in an online study (RCT2, NCT05586178) or were favoured by scientists and non-experts (RCT3, NCT05586165). Despite repeated exposure to COVID-19 vaccination messaging in our population, reminders and psychological ownership language increased booster uptake, replicating prior findings. However, strategies deemed effective by prediction or intention surveys, such as encouraging the bundling of COVID-19 boosters and flu shots or addressing misconceptions, yielded no detectable benefits over simple reminders. These findings underscore the importance of testing interventions transferability to real-world settings.

Countless policies are crafted with the intention of punishing all who do wrong or rewarding only those who do right. However, this requires accommodating certain mistakes: some who do not deserve to be punished might be, and some who deserve to be rewarded might not be. Six preregistered experiments (N = 3,484 U.S. adults) reveal that people are more willing to accept this trade-off in principle, before errors occur, than in practice, after errors occur. The result is an asymmetry such that for punishments, people believe it is more important to prevent false negatives (e.g., criminals escaping justice) than to fix them, and more important to fix false positives (e.g., wrongful convictions) than to prevent them. For rewards, people believe it is more important to prevent false positives (e.g., welfare fraud) than to fix them and more important to fix false negatives (e.g., improperly denied benefits) than to prevent them.

Abstract: Research Summary: We examine to what extent and when multiunit firms internally redeploy managers between units. While theory has emphasized how changes in demand conditions affect redeployment, we argue that optimal internal resource allocation involves consideration of both demand and each unit's resource supply. We formalize this argument, showing how redeployment arises from “supply‐side inducements”—return advantages in new over existing resource uses resulting from changes in resource supply. Empirical tests using manager deaths as an exogenous, supply‐side shock to firms' resource stocks support our arguments, showing that firms frequently redeploy resources away from better‐endowed and toward negatively affected units. Incorporating supply‐side inducements into redeployment theory implies additional value‐creation opportunities from redeployment and carries novel predictions for the direction of intra‐firm resource flows. Managerial Summary: Firms continuously decide how to allocate valuable resources—such as their most productive workers, unique inputs, or machinery—among different units. We argue that to optimally allocate such resources, managers must respond to changes in both the demand environment and in the resource stock of different units. When some units successfully accumulate resources while others suffer adverse shocks, opportunity exists to improve efficiency by internally redeploying resources. Counterintuitively, optimal redeployment frequently involves shifting resources away from successful, well‐endowed units. New business units, being resource‐poor, are often the most important recipients of resources. Empirical analyses studying how firms allocate managers in a large sample of Brazilian firms offer support for these arguments.

When searching for a solution to a problem, having a theory—an underlying causal structure that explains outcomes as a consequence of antecedents and that allows for the prediction of potential consequences of combinations of choices not yet tried—changes the way in which people explore the solution space. Whether a theory proves useful to search, however, depends not just on its predictive precision. This essay argues that the internal structures of theories—their size, complexity, the extent of their elaboration, and the confidence that their users have in the assumptions—also influences how people search for solutions and the efficiency of their search processes. It offers several conjectures about how theory and theory structure influence search and about which types of theories prove most useful to success.