In recent times, there has been increased focus on the utilisation of virtual reality flight simulators in flight training, driven by their advantages compared to conventional methods. However, a paucity of empirical evidence has prevented their widespread introduction and regulatory approval. Existing research focuses on single-user simulators, leaving a gap in studies of collaborative training within virtual environments. Consequently, this paper investigates evidence-based simulator training within a collaborative virtual environment.

A mixed methods approach was adopted, where behaviours related to industry-standard competencies were observed in a virtual reality complex aircraft and thematic analysis applied to a post-experiment participant debrief. The findings showcase the feasibility of utilising a collaborative virtual environment for evidence-based training purposes in scenarios aligned to typical initial First Officer airline training programmes, which is a precursor to supplementing traditional professional pilot training techniques. In addition, the study found that the visual barriers imposed by head-mounted displays were overcome through the adoption of refined communication strategies, thus laying the groundwork for physically separated multi-crew pilot training.

As funding for large translational research consortia increases across the National Institutes of Health (NIH), focused working groups provide an opportunity to leverage the power of unique networks to conduct high-impact science and offer a strategy for building collaborative infrastructure to sustain networks long-term. This sustainment leverages the existing NIH investments, amplifying the impact and creating conditions for future innovative translational research. However, few resources exist that detail practical strategies for establishing and sustaining working groups in consortia. Here, we describe how the Coordinating Center for the National Cancer Institute-funded Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) utilized principles derived from the Science of Team Science to develop replicable strategies for building and sustaining an effective working group-led consortium. These strategies include continually engaging community members in strategic planning, prioritizing diversity in leadership and membership, creating multi-level opportunities for leadership and participation, providing intensive community management and facilitation, and incentivizing projects that support the consortium sustainment. When assessing the impact of these interventions through qualitative exit interviews, four key themes emerged: through the C3I working group consortium, members co-created new dissemination products, gained new insights and innovations, enhanced local program implementation, and invested in cross-network collaboration to support sustained engagement in the initiative.

We often seek empathy from others by asking them to listen to our stories. But what exactly is the role of listening in empathy? One might think that it is merely a means for the empathizer to gather rich information about the empathized. We shall rather argue that listening is an embodied action, one that plays a significant role in empathic perspective-taking. We make our case via a descriptive analysis of a paradigm case of empathy mediated by listening or what we can call empathy through listening. On our view, empathy through listening involves three distinctive features: (1) dynamic unfolding, (2) collaboration, and (3) mutual perspective reshaping. Listening contributes to this process by initiating and sustaining a feedback loop of receptivity that occurs between empathizing and empathized agents.

Although collaboration is an intensive way of working together, it is essential for such efforts to achieve shared goals. Health technology assessment (HTA) is transdisciplinary and has an important history of collaboration, with collaboration featuring increasingly in the strategic plans of HTA bodies and stakeholders. Collaboration can be between HTA bodies and between HTA bodies and other stakeholders—most notably regulators but increasingly payers, patient and caregiver organizations, clinicians–clinical societies, and academia. The 2024 HTAi Global Policy Forum (GPF) discussed collaborations involving HTA bodies, reviewing existing and previous collaborations to see what has worked and what can be learned. Core discussion themes included: (i) determining the collaboration purpose is essential but may be dynamic, changing over time; (ii) choosing the collaboration topic takes time, requiring upfront investment and stakeholder mapping; (iii) inviting the right participants and treating them equally is important, including those who can impact HTA, those who will be impacted by HTA and those who bring new information; (iv) collaborations need clear governance, defined roles, responsibilities, metrics, and case study–pilots can be a useful operational model; (v) resourcing collaborations sustainably is a challenge—the time, people, and money required are often under-estimated; (vi) undertaking continual, iterative learning reviews ensures ongoing value and impact of collaborations. Recommendations for future work include the development of a “go/no-go” checklist to determine when collaboration is needed, supplemented with a set of “best practice” principles for establishing and working in collaborations involving HTA bodies.

Effective collaboration between key stakeholders increases the educational opportunities and outcomes of students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Although the value of collaboration between the central members of a student’s network has been widely cited, how collaboration occurs between different stakeholder groups in the education of Australian primary and secondary students with ASD is not widely known. The aim of this review was to identify the factors that influence collaborative practices between three primary stakeholder groups supporting the education of Australian students with ASD: family, school, and community. Through this lens, we analysed the intent of the collaborative practices as well as the specific details of the collaborative practices identified across the research literature published since the implementation of the Disability Standards for Education 2005 (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006). Results from this review indicate existing motivations and processes of collaboration, as well as directions for future research and practice.

COVID-19 presented many challenges while the shift to online learning also provided unexpected opportunities for music teachers. During the pandemic, two researchers who are teacher educators undertook a composing project with music teacher education students in Scotland and Australia in response to the theme: My Life in Isolation: A World Apart or Same Difference? Turino’s (2008) theory of participatory music making will be drawn upon to analyse this collaborative online music and video creation project. What participation means as a music-maker will be discussed. The paper argues for greater attention to the affordances of digital collaborative music technology tools to build the confidence of pre-service teachers to facilitate real-world composing projects to promote participation, collaboration and social interaction.

The momentum surrounding the use of data for the public good has grown over the past few years, resulting in several initiatives, and rising interest from public bodies, intergovernmental organizations, and private organizations. The potential benefits of data collaboratives (DCs) have been proved in several contexts, including health, migration, pandemics, and public transport. However, these cross-sectoral partnerships have frequently not progressed beyond the pilot level, a condition hindering their ability to generate long-term societal benefits and scale their impact. Governance models play an important role in ensuring DCs’ stability over time; however, existing models do not address this issue. Our research investigates DCs’ governance settings to determine governance dimensions’ design settings enhancing DCs’ long-term stability. The research identifies through the literature on collaborative governance and DCs seven key governance dimensions for the long-term stability of DCs. Then, through the analysis of 16 heterogeneous case studies, it outlines the optimal design configurations for each dimension. Findings make a significant contribution to academic discourse by shedding light on the governance aspects that bolster the long-term stability of DCs. Additionally, this research offers practical insights and evidence-based guidelines for practitioners, aiding in the creation and maintenance of enduring DCs.