Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39120246›Full record

ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Needs in Health Care Sectors-A Critical Analysis of Social Innovation in the Health Sector in Taiwan.

Winnie Chu, Nain-Feng Chu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Winnie ChuDepartment of Occupational Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung 813414, Taiwan.
Nain-Feng ChuDepartment of Occupational Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung 813414, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial innovation is often used as a mechanism to jump-start public-private partnerships to leverage resources to achieve social impact; the analysis of sustainability and the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) cannot be emphasized enough. Due to advances in the information and communication technology industry in Taiwan, this paper aims to explore whether these advancements drive CSR as a form of social innovation to meet health needs in Taiwan. METHODOLOGY: This paper uses a case study to look at CSR programs in the health sector in Taiwan. Corporations with diverse missions and different CSR approaches that are available on the internet are selected. The analysis of the case study takes a qualitative, exploratory approach to shed light on current initiatives.

resultsThe majority of CSR programs in Taiwan are private sector activities that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic; current CSR activities in Taiwan are driven by awards, public relations, and external interests. Corporations in Taiwan have the potential to address the health care gaps of urban-rural health utilization among Taiwanese indigenous communities. It is recommended for corporations to (1) develop partnerships with public health experts or to (2) employ CSR personnel with health care backgrounds who can navigate the intersection between health, business, and policies to develop CSR strategies.

conclusionsFurther evaluation of the projects mentioned in this paper to assess the direct and indirect impact on health outcomes could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the field of CSR in the health sector in Taiwan.

Indexed as

corporate social responsibilityCOVID-19 pandemichealth sectorsocial innovationTaiwan

Identifiers

PMID39120246
PMCPMC11311689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.