There are few studies providing a more comprehensive picture of advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems in clinical practice. The aim was to evaluate the effects of the AHCL systems, Tandem
The socio-technical theory is concerned with humanistic welfare paradigm. The socio-technical principles aim to improve redundant jobs and thereby benefit human work lives. Hence, jobs are enriched using flexible work methods, empowerment strategies and new technologies. Balanced scorecard is a framework that measures whether the firm is meeting its objectives in terms of vision and strategy. It assesses four perspectives: financial, customer, internal business processes and innovation & learning. Even though the balanced scorecard has proven to be beneficial in the for-profit organizations of the past, most non-profit organizations were unable to utilize the balanced scorecard. The original configuration of balanced scorecard placed financial goals on the top of the hierarchy and since maximizing shareholder wealth is not the main objective for most non-profit organizations, it was not widely applied by these organizations. Since non-profit organizations usually operate to maximize the well-being of the society, socio-technical work design principles may receive a greater acceptance in these organizations than in for-profit organizations. Thus, a socio-technical balanced scorecard for the non-profit organizations will be formulated with an emphasis on employee perspective and a public university wide assessment will be proposed.Request access from your librarian to read this chapter's full text.
The emphasis of reusing domain knowledge in system development makes ontology the most important disciplines in the information system industry at present. Many domain specific ontology editors are currently available for developing ontologies. However, selecting the most appropriate editor is a challenge because each ontology construction initiative requires its own budget, time, and resources. Therefore, to overcome this challenge, we propose a criterion to evaluate ontology construction tools. We define evaluation criteria such as functionality, reusability, data storage, complexity, association, scalability, resilience, reliability, robustness, learnability, availability, efficiency, and visibility. Then, on the basis of criteria, we propose a technique to rank ontology tools and finally, we evaluate three ontology construction editors based on the ranking technique.
'%3e%3ccircle r='20' fill='%23008'/%3e%3ccircle r='17.5' fill='%23fff'/%3e%3ccircle r='3.5' fill='%23008'/%3e%3cg id='d'%3e%3cg id='c'%3e%3cg id='b'%3e%3cg id='a' fill='%23008'%3e%3ccircle r='.875' transform='rotate(7.5 -8.75 133.5)'/%3e%3cpath d='M0 17.5.6 7 0 2l-.6 5L0 17.5z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='rotate(15)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23b' transform='rotate(30)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23c' transform='rotate(60)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' transform='rotate(120)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' transform='rotate(-120)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
