Course closed

posted 19 Aug 2013 03:16 by Marco Spruit

As it turns out, only one of you followed up on the provided opportunity to further improve your grades. The deadline has now passed and we have forwarded all finalised grades to the MBI student administration. We wish you all the best in your remaining courses and perhaps we meet again when you get ready to pursue your graduation project. Thanks for your participation; we will for sure incorporate parts of your contributions into our STRIPA-based ERC-StG proposal! --Marco & Michiel

Second chance exam opportunity

posted 12 Jul 2013 11:44 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 19 Jul 2013 14:18 ]

Since I have been receiving some email requests for clarification from you guys and gall after publishing the final grades, as is to be expected, I have decided to provide you with an opportunity for a second chance exam on the B1 and B2 parts on an individual basis.

More specifically, you have up until Aug 18 23:59 to submit --to the course email address-- an *individual* revision of *either* the B1 *or* B2 report, improving upon your group's original version. Please note that a 4 will not be converted to a straight 10, as this would be unfair. However, you will have the opportunity to raise your grade to a certain degree.

On a final note, it has become clear to me that some of you are quite surprised with respect to the individual participation grade. The origin lies within the *ad-hoc/snapshot* nature of the +/- in the attendance list column, which I apparently have not been communicating clearly enough, whereas the diary grade is on the *final* result. Regarding the MOOC portion, the ++s were given out to distinguish between the regular and distinction track certificates.

I will re-examine any submissions when I get back from my holiday which starts about NOW!

Update: as a final additional third option for the few of you who screwed up the course diary, you can now also opt to write a retrospective introspective which provides a personal weekly chronicle of your experiences throughout the course. Maximum grade will be a 6. Please note that you can only resubmit one out of three deliverables.

Final grades are here!

posted 11 Jul 2013 08:32 by Marco Spruit

Below are the final grades for the seminar. We're glad to see you all pass, although it was pretty close for some...  Thanks for your contributions throughout these months, and we hope that the research process may be of benefit to you during your thesis research and throughout your professional career as well. Michiel and I hope to reuse portions of your work in preparing our next research funding proposal. The forum will remain open for a while so you are welcome to post any closing remarks regarding this seminar if you like. For now.... Happy holidays!

Course grading aspects

posted 27 Jun 2013 08:21 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 27 Jun 2013 08:22 ]

Below you'll find the grading aspects and their relative importance which we will use to determine your final grade.

Grading aspect Relative weight
B1 research proposal assignment  30% 
B2 beyond-the-state-of-the-art literature review  20% 
Presentations (Or,E,Te,S,B1)  20% 
Individual participation (SF assignment, Diary reflection, MOOC certification) 15% 
Group participation  15% 

B1 storyline suggestion

posted 27 Jun 2013 08:14 by Marco Spruit

As discussed in our final workshop, below you'll find our suggestion on the B1 structure, which you can tune according to its FIT with your proposal components (including but not limited to situational country profiles, situational factor groupings, existing IS models such as PPT and TT-FIT, potential STRIPA2 interventions (i.e. the 7 SLR topics), the STRIP method steps, and so on).
  1. Research Trigger, which already indicates the ground-breaking nature (and previews the high risk-high gain balance) 
  2. Research Question! (Explicit, consise, creative, Big)
    1. Scientific contribution (innovative model/method/framework/…)
    • Societal contribution (e.g. your previous workshop presentation) 
  3. Theoretical framework which contributes to the field of information science
    • We have suggested a creative combination of the TT-FIT and situational factors 
    • a European context 
    • Indicate where and how you go beyond the state-of-the-art, utilizing your SLR findings as indicative examples. 
  4. Research Methods & Approach 
    • STRIPA2 inverventions as highly promising operalisations to evaluate your contributions (prototype evaluation), interviews? Field work? Survey? etc 
Lastly, be sure to mold everything into one coherent story which will appeal to a reviewer. Communicate one main message.

B1 evaluation criteria

posted 26 Jun 2013 08:56 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 27 Jun 2013 02:01 by Michiel Meulendijk ]

Tomorrow you will present your B1 proposal in 5-10 minutes in our final workshop, and answer some questions. We are anxious to find out what you have come up with! As an obvioous guideline to how we will grades for your work, we will use the ERC StG evaluation criteria, so just google to find out! For example, this "section 4: Check the potential of your Proposal against the Evaluation Criteria":
  1. Ground-breaking nature and potential impact of your ERC proposal 
    • To what extent does the proposed research address important challenges?
    • To what extent are the objectives ambitious and beyond the state of the art (e.g. novel concepts and approaches or development across disciplines)?
    • How much is the proposed research high risk/high gain?
  2. Scientific approach of your ERC proposal
    • - To what extent is the scientific approach feasible (please clarify in the Extended Synopsis)?
    • - To what extent is the research methodology appropriate to achieve the goals of the project (please explain in the Scientific Proposal)?
    • - To what extent does the proposal involve the development of novel methodology (please explain in the Scientific Proposal)?
Good luck! And remember that you are applying for scientific research funding, not completing a course assignment. Be 'scientific' in your language and approach, i.e. be ready to defend each step.

Assignments posted

posted 11 Jun 2013 06:03 by Michiel Meulendijk

Please note that on the tasks page, descriptions for the three assignments (B1, B2-literature review, and societal gains) have been posted. For the next workshop, you should calculate the societal gains for your country and present them. Find the required 'societal benefits.xlsm' file on the download page.

SLR: pick your Top-3 topics!

posted 6 Jun 2013 07:40 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 6 Jun 2013 07:40 ]

People: {passive, active, collaborative} data gathering
  1. Domotics / Ambient intelligence / Sensor intelligence / 
    • patient involvement, monitoring side effects
  2. Selfmanagement / Mobile computing / e-Diaries / 
    • patient input side effects, reminder of dosage and confirmation
  3. Social media / Social computing / Web 2.0 /
    • polypharmacy 2.0

Process: facilitating {collaborating, learning}

  1. TeleHealth / GSS for Health / Collaborative Decision Support /
    • expert system for treatment plan, collaboration between gps/phs
  2. Knowledge management system / e-Learning / 
    • <not covered during our brainstorms>

Technology: {descriptive, prescriptive} analytics

  1. Descriptive analytics / Software Operation Knowledge / Software Usage Mining / 
    • link meds to diseases, datamining ignored warnings, identifying interactions caused by meds, ...
  2. Predictive analytics / Self-learning system / Agent technology
    • suggestions on more effective/new meds, mining for unknown diseases

MILSI 2012 - SLR assignment


Punchline: Real-time Prescribing Intelligence

posted 23 May 2013 07:49 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 24 May 2013 07:46 ]

As you can also read on our forum, this is the tentative research framework which we will further pursue during the remainder of the course, with the following punchline: “Towards Real-time Prescribing Intelligence fostering Europe-wide Patient Empowerment and Primary Care Collaboration”.

The cloudy parts in the slide are the open Technological issues which we will further investigate.

Contribute to the Ideabox

posted 29 Apr 2013 02:10 by Marco Spruit   [ updated 29 Apr 2013 02:11 ]

On May 7 we will have our first brainstorm session, where we will hopefully generate a lot of useless, unpractical, unfeasible, and some promising ideas.
But... why wait?! If you have some wild suggestion on how to deepen and/or broaden the STRIP Assistant project, then submit it here, and we'll have something to start with.
You can submit as many Ideas as you want! Finally, this is on an optional and anonymous basis, and you can't be wrong. So... speak up!

1-10 of 13