Validity Of Conceptual Framework Research Articles

Validation of the conceptual framework and intervention scope of oral function rehabilitation exercise.

This study used a Delphi survey to define the concept of oral function rehabilitation exercise (OFRE) based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) and to categorise intervention domains for community-dwelling older adults. While numerous studies have been conducted to improve oral function through exercise interventions, the conceptual definition of oral exercise remains unclear and there is a lack of systematic categorisation of oral exercise intervention domains. A preliminary model was developed based on the key findings of 19 papers selected from a prior systematic review. Its validity was confirmed through a Delphi survey conducted twice with eight expert panellists. Consensus was achieved by evaluating the validity of the OFRE conceptual framework, the accuracy of OFRE conceptual definitions, and intervention domains. Through expert consensus, an ICF-based OFRE conceptual framework was developed that includes 21 factors that affect the oral health status of the older adults. The OFRE intervention domain for improving the health status consisted of oral function rehabilitation warm-up exercise, masticatory function exercise, swallowing function exercise, articulatory function exercise, salivary function exercise, and oral function rehabilitation cool-down exercise, and 11 specific intervention methods were derived. The OFRE intervention can be used for planning and applying successful interventions to improve oral function and life function of older adults.

Collectively innovating; modelling responsible exposure in heterarchical organisations

PurposeThis paper aims to develop a model of collective innovation, with respect to innovation strategy, structure and culture in heterarchies. The enabling of collective innovation in heterarchies is conceptualised as “responsible exposure”.Design/methodology/approachA study adopting cross-case analysis was undertaken with five organisations perceived to have heterarchical characteristics. These included one small company, two medium-sized companies and two larger companies, all were European. Data from semi-structured interviews, a survey of staff and other sources provide evidence of collective innovation practices.FindingsThe cross-case analysis suggests that the management of collective innovation is different from “classic” innovation management. It is more about enabling “responsible exposure” than the management of “shelter” for collective innovation.Research limitations/implicationsThe strength of cross-case analysis and conceptual framework validation is limited by the cases being all from the European region.Practical implicationsWhat strategy, structure and culture for “responsible exposure” may mean can be described. Heterarchies will always be relatively rare, though lessons from how they enable collective innovation can be more widely learned. Lessons for the wider population of organisation that combine hierarchical and heterarchical characteristics and seek greater innovation are identified.Social implicationsCollective innovation, which requires “responsible exposure” has implications for the capabilities of managers and professionals concerned with innovation.Originality/valueThe cross-case analysis of innovation in heterarchies is original, leading to the description of a model of “responsible exposure” for collective innovation.