前瞻性技术扫描:医疗保健领域的 Metaverse 应用案例

IF 3 3区 管理学 Q1 ECONOMICS Futures Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1016/j.futures.2024.103476
Francesca Zoccarato, Antonio Ghezzi, Emanuele Lettieri, Giovanni Toletti
{"title":"前瞻性技术扫描:医疗保健领域的 Metaverse 应用案例","authors":"Francesca Zoccarato,&nbsp;Antonio Ghezzi,&nbsp;Emanuele Lettieri,&nbsp;Giovanni Toletti","doi":"10.1016/j.futures.2024.103476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The process of foresight, which allows companies and organizations to build scenarios and inform the creation and sustainment of their competitive advantage, relies on the integration of several steps. Scanning is a crucial step of foresight, as it informs and influences the results of the whole process and, thus, the strategic decision-making of the company. Sources and methods of scanning for foresight analysis can be diverse and lead to different results, although few studies investigate such differences: more specifically, the informative power of academic and non-academic articles and reports has not been assessed yet. This study aims to shed novel light on how the different analysis methods of full reading of records and text mining analysis isolate and gather forces of change differently, based on the source analyzed. The study’s empirical context is the metaverse and its application in healthcare. We find that each source and method by itself is unable to fully gather the whole set of forces of change; however, each source presents some topics that are specific to the target readers of the source, and each methodology presents some advantages as well as some limitations. From the comparison of the results, theoretical and managerial implications are drawn.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48239,"journal":{"name":"Futures","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 103476"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724001599/pdfft?md5=3ff487ce4f19d894fc6203afa71d17ea&pid=1-s2.0-S0016328724001599-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technological Scanning for Foresight: The case of Metaverse applications for Healthcare\",\"authors\":\"Francesca Zoccarato,&nbsp;Antonio Ghezzi,&nbsp;Emanuele Lettieri,&nbsp;Giovanni Toletti\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.futures.2024.103476\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The process of foresight, which allows companies and organizations to build scenarios and inform the creation and sustainment of their competitive advantage, relies on the integration of several steps. Scanning is a crucial step of foresight, as it informs and influences the results of the whole process and, thus, the strategic decision-making of the company. Sources and methods of scanning for foresight analysis can be diverse and lead to different results, although few studies investigate such differences: more specifically, the informative power of academic and non-academic articles and reports has not been assessed yet. This study aims to shed novel light on how the different analysis methods of full reading of records and text mining analysis isolate and gather forces of change differently, based on the source analyzed. The study’s empirical context is the metaverse and its application in healthcare. We find that each source and method by itself is unable to fully gather the whole set of forces of change; however, each source presents some topics that are specific to the target readers of the source, and each methodology presents some advantages as well as some limitations. From the comparison of the results, theoretical and managerial implications are drawn.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Futures\",\"volume\":\"164 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103476\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724001599/pdfft?md5=3ff487ce4f19d894fc6203afa71d17ea&pid=1-s2.0-S0016328724001599-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Futures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724001599\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Futures","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724001599","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

展望过程使公司和组织能够建立各种设想方案,为创造和保持其竞争优势提供信息,这一过程依赖于几个步骤的整合。扫描是展望的一个关键步骤,因为它为整个过程的结果提供信息并产生影响,从而影响公司的战略决策。展望分析的扫描来源和方法可能多种多样,并导致不同的结果,但很少有研究对这种差异进行调查:更具体地说,学术和非学术文章和报告的信息能力尚未得到评估。本研究旨在揭示全面阅读记录和文本挖掘分析这两种不同的分析方法是如何根据所分析的来源,以不同的方式隔离和收集变革力量的。本研究的实证背景是元数据及其在医疗保健领域的应用。我们发现,每种资料来源和方法本身都无法完全收集到整套变革力量;但是,每种资料来源都提出了一些针对资料来源目标读者的特定主题,每种方法都有一些优势和局限性。通过对结果的比较,我们得出了理论和管理方面的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Technological Scanning for Foresight: The case of Metaverse applications for Healthcare

The process of foresight, which allows companies and organizations to build scenarios and inform the creation and sustainment of their competitive advantage, relies on the integration of several steps. Scanning is a crucial step of foresight, as it informs and influences the results of the whole process and, thus, the strategic decision-making of the company. Sources and methods of scanning for foresight analysis can be diverse and lead to different results, although few studies investigate such differences: more specifically, the informative power of academic and non-academic articles and reports has not been assessed yet. This study aims to shed novel light on how the different analysis methods of full reading of records and text mining analysis isolate and gather forces of change differently, based on the source analyzed. The study’s empirical context is the metaverse and its application in healthcare. We find that each source and method by itself is unable to fully gather the whole set of forces of change; however, each source presents some topics that are specific to the target readers of the source, and each methodology presents some advantages as well as some limitations. From the comparison of the results, theoretical and managerial implications are drawn.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Futures
Futures Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
124
期刊介绍: Futures is an international, refereed, multidisciplinary journal concerned with medium and long-term futures of cultures and societies, science and technology, economics and politics, environment and the planet and individuals and humanity. Covering methods and practices of futures studies, the journal seeks to examine possible and alternative futures of all human endeavours. Futures seeks to promote divergent and pluralistic visions, ideas and opinions about the future. The editors do not necessarily agree with the views expressed in the pages of Futures
期刊最新文献
Feminist urban futures: Envisioning the future of Ukrainian cities through the lens of the displaced community in Valencia (Spain) Imagined futures in sustainability transitions: Towards diverse future-making Temporality in the United Nations 2030 Agenda: development or rupture? From “snowflake generation” to “agents of social change”: Recognizing the voice of Spanish young people in the post-pandemic era The politics of transdisciplinary research on societal transitions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1