Does green HRM really matter for sustainable performance? The role of environmental consciousness and green intellectual capital.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of a set of green human resource management (HRM) practices on sustainable performance in Pakistani higher education institutions (HEIs), while also taking into account the mediating influence of environmental consciousness and green intellectual capital. Furthermore, the study aims to assess the association between environmental consciousness and green intellectual capital, along with the sustainable outcome. The study data was collected from 250 HR managers and executive officers who were responsible for implementing green HRM practices and sustainable performance in the education sector of Pakistan. Smart PLS-4 software was used to perform the statistical analysis of the data. According to the results of this study, green HRM practices play a substantial role in enhancing sustainable performance. The study also identified a link between green HRM practices and sustainable performance via environmental awareness and green intellectual capital. The research contributes to the theoretical paradigm's social cognitive theory by offering information on green HRM practice bundles and sustainable performance. The research also demonstrates that green intellectual capital and environmental consciousness operate as a bridge between green HRM practices and long-term sustainable performance. The study's findings have real-world applications for education, policymakers, and human resource managers at the highest levels. In order to achieve sustainable performance, the study emphasizes the significance of developing green intellectual capital and implementing green HRM practices.

A "Do No Harm" Novel Safety Checklist and Research Approach to Determine Whether to Launch an Artificial Intelligence-Based Medical Technology: Introducing the Biological-Psychological, Economic, and Social (BPES) Framework.

Given the impact artificial intelligence (AI)-based medical technologies (hardware devices, software programs, and mobile apps) can have on society, debates regarding the principles behind their development and deployment are emerging. Using the biopsychosocial model applied in psychiatry and other fields of medicine as our foundation, we propose a novel 3-step framework to guide industry developers of AI-based medical tools as well as health care regulatory agencies on how to decide if a product should be launched-a "Go or No-Go" approach. More specifically, our novel framework places stakeholders' (patients, health care professionals, industry, and government institutions) safety at its core by asking developers to demonstrate the biological-psychological (impact on physical and mental health), economic, and social value of their AI tool before it is launched. We also introduce a novel cost-effective, time-sensitive, and safety-oriented mixed quantitative and qualitative clinical phased trial approach to help industry and government health care regulatory agencies test and deliberate on whether to launch these AI-based medical technologies. To our knowledge, our biological-psychological, economic, and social (BPES) framework and mixed method phased trial approach are the first to place the Hippocratic Oath of "Do No Harm" at the center of developers', implementers', regulators', and users' mindsets when determining whether an AI-based medical technology is safe to launch. Moreover, as the welfare of AI users and developers becomes a greater concern, our framework's novel safety feature will allow it to complement existing and future AI reporting guidelines.

Understanding Decision-Making in the Adoption of Digital Health Technology: The Role of Behavioral Economics' Prospect Theory.

The decision to accept or reject new digital health technologies remains an ongoing challenge among health care patients, providers, technology companies, and policymakers. Over the past few decades, interest in understanding the choice to adopt technology has led to the development of numerous theories and models. In 1979, however, psychologists Kahneman and Tversky published their seminal research article that has pioneered the field of behavioral economics. They named their model the prospect theory and used it to explain decision-making behaviors under conditions of risk and uncertainty as well as to provide an understanding of why individuals may make irrational or inconsistent choices. Although the prospect theory has been used to explain decision-making in economics, law, political science, and clinically, at the individual level, its application to understanding choice in the adoption of digital health technology has not been explored. Herein, we discuss how the main components of the prospect theory's editing phase (framing effect) and evaluation phase (value function and weighting function) can provide valuable insight on why health care patients, providers, technology companies, and policymakers may decide to accept or reject digital health technologies.

Cost-effective enhanced iron bioavailability in rice grain grown on calcareous soil by sulfur mediation and its effect on heavy metals mineralization.

Calcareous soil, high pH, and low organic matter are the major factors that limit iron (Fe) availability to rice crop. The present study was planned with the aim to biofortified rice grain with Fe, by integrated use of chemical and organic amendments in pH-manipulated calcareous soil. The soil pH was reduced (pHL2) by using elemental sulfur (S) at the rate of 0.25 % (w/w). The organic amendments, biochar (BC) and poultry manure (PM) [1 % (w/w)], along with ferrous sulfate at the rate of 7.5 mg kg-1 soil were used. The incorporation of Fe with BC in soil at pHL2 significantly improved plant biomass, photosynthetic rate, and paddy yield up to 99, 97, and 36 %, respectively, compared to control. A significant increase in grain Fe (190 %), protein (58 %), and ferritin (400 %) contents was observed while anti-nutrients, i.e., polyphenols (37 %) and phytate (21 %) were significantly decreased by the addition of Fe and BC in soil at pHL2 relative to control. Among the organic amendments, PM significantly increased Cd, Pb, Ni, and Cr concentrations in rice grain relative to control but their concentration values were below as compared to the toxic limits of hazard quotients and hazard index (HQ and HI). Hence, this study implies that Fe applied with BC in the soil at pHL2 can be considered as an effective strategy to augment Fe bioavailability and to reduce non-essential heavy metal accumulation in rice grain.

All-cause mortality after drug-eluting stent implantation in African-Americans.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have questioned the safety of drug-eluting stents because of a higher incidence of late stent thrombosis, raising the possibility that drug-eluting stents may be associated with an increased mortality. The effect of drug-eluting stents on mortality in African-Americans is unknown. METHODS: We evaluated 628 African-American patients (354 patients treated with drug-eluting stents and 274 patients treated with bare metal stents) between January 2003 and August 2005, using data from our bolus-only platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor database. The primary end point was all-cause mortality obtained using social security death index. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 3+/-0.9 years, the mortality rate in the bare metal stents group was 12.8% compared with 7.1% in the drug-eluting stents group [adjusted P value=0.19; hazard ratio (HR) for bare metal stents group compared with drug-eluting stents group for death=1.4; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-2.4]. In a subgroup analysis, patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome had a higher mortality when treated with bare metal stents compared with drug-eluting stents (17.1 vs. 6.3%, P=0.022; HR=2.2; 95% CI: 1.1-4.4). Patients with chronic kidney disease (all patients with creatinine >1.5 mg/dl) also had a higher mortality with bare metal stents compared with drug-eluting stents (36.7 vs. 20.4%, P=0.044; HR=2.3; 95% CI: 1.02-5.2). CONCLUSION: Drug-eluting stents seem to be safe in African-Americans and may improve survival in certain subgroups such as patients with acute coronary syndromes and chronic kidney disease.