The introduction of interdisciplinarity and industry-academia collaborations (IAC) into higher education institutions (HEIs) and curricula as tools for promoting sustainable development has been debated both in academic and non-academic contexts. While overall rising trends in the acceptance of interdisciplinarity and IAC exist, research has stressed difficulty in implementation and practices. We conducted eight focus groups at six European Universities (members of the SEA-EU alliance) and analysed the transcripts using Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic approach to qualitative analysis in order to develop themes on barriers and facilitators to both conducting interdisciplinarity and IAC, as well as the inclusion of university students in interdisciplinary research. We observed that the main barriers to IR and IAC and the inclusion of students in such activities include traditional HEI structures focused on single-discipline approaches, a lack of joint platforms for IR and IAC, and academic differences (publication outcome differences, academic background). Likewise, a lack of funding (especially for early career researchers), employability (for students willing to do a research career), and a lack of validation by HEIs for researchers conducting IR and IAC are major barriers. To IDR- and IAC-related activities, a top-down approach is needed to restructure HEIs and make them more accommodating to both students and staff willing to conduct IR and IAC activities, thus refocusing them towards sustainability.

Although reproducibility is central to the scientific method, its understanding within the research community remains insufficient. We aimed to explore the perceptions of research reproducibility among stakeholders within academia, learn about possible barriers and facilitators to reproducibility-related practices, and gather their suggestions for the Croatian Reproducibility Network website. We conducted four focus groups with researchers, teachers, editors, research managers, and policymakers from Croatia (n = 23). The participants observed a lack of consensus on the core definitions of reproducibility, both generally and between disciplines. They noted that incentivization and recognition of reproducibility-related practices from publishers and institutions, alongside comprehensive education adapted to the researchers' career stage, could help with implementing reproducibility. Education was considered essential to these efforts, as it could help create a research culture based on good reproducibility-related practices and behavior rather than one driven by mandates or career advancement. This was particularly found to be relevant for growing reproducibility efforts globally. Regarding the Croatian Reproducibility Network website, the participants suggested we adapt the content to users from different disciplines or career stages and offer guidance and tools for reproducibility through which we should present core reproducibility concepts. Our findings could inform other initiatives focused on improving research reproducibility.

During health emergencies, healthcare organisations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC), and United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), provide rapid clinical and public health guidelines [1–3]. In the case of the WHO, despite the expedited development process and the possible lack of […]

Objective To explore the barriers and facilitators to implementing the WHO’s Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) at a tertiary-level hospital in Croatia, a country with a publicly funded universal healthcare system. Design Focus group-based study which used Graneheim and Lundman’s qualitative content analysis approach. Setting and participants We used purposive sampling to gather participants who were representative of the usual surgical team: nurses, residents, anaesthesiologists and surgeons. Aside from this requirement, we set no specific inclusion or exclusion criteria. We conducted 6 focus groups (2 with nurses, 2 with residents, 1 with anaesthesiologists and 1 with surgeons) with 29 participants. The nurses were all female, the residents and surgeons were all male, and anaesthesiologists were mostly male (60%). Most participants had at least a bachelor’s degree (93%). The focus groups were held in person at the hospital’s Department of Surgery in Croatia and were conducted in the local language, based on a predeveloped topic guide. Results Our analysis revealed two distinct themes that were fundamentally independent of each other. The first concerned within-team hierarchies and relationships that prevented the SSC from being used as intended, while the second was related to a diverse set of resource and logistical constraints that had existed before the implementation of the SSC. Conclusions Understanding the barriers faced by healthcare providers is crucial in designing training programmes that could help integrate the SSC into routine surgical practice. Our findings highlight the importance of actively including members of the surgical team in the implementation of the SSC and implementing interventions for improving within-team communication.

Aim: To develop a methodology for the estimation of the preservation of human skeletal remains – the relics in the Vodnjan assembly; to estimate the minimum number of individuals (MNI), sex, and age; to evaluate the physical state of their remains, and to individualize the remains to verify the list of saints allegedly buried at the monastery. Methods: Standard crime scene investigation and forensic anthropology methods were used, including trace evidence marking, photography, minimum number of individuals (MNI) estimation, sex, age, stature estimation, pathological and traumatic changes examination, individuation, and individualization by the comparison to the biography. Results: The total sample of the bones in the Vodnjan relic collection was very poorly preserved. The MNI in the sarcophagus was twenty-two. Of those, three were female, twelve were male, and seven were subadults. Conclusion: The forensic approach to the documentation and analysis of relics was appropriate for this kind of skeletal material. The final identification was not possible because of the poor preservation of skeletal material and the lack of hagiographical (antemortem) data. However, the forensic anthropology approach enabled us to create osteobiographies, and after the comparison with the existing antemortem data, we could not exclude that the remains belonged to the named saints.