Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Health Sciences Education: a Scoping Review

  • Review
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and Purpose

This scoping review aimed to explore the connection between health education and entrepreneurship and to identify gaps in the current literature, educational models, and best practices regarding teaching medical professionals about entrepreneurship and innovation.

Methods

The methodology for this review was based on the principles of Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) model for scoping review design. Results from Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Emcare, AMED, PubMed, and Google Scholar were scanned, filtered, and mapped.

Results

Fifty-nine unique papers were found and mapped. The papers discussed common themes, including the entrepreneurial environment (n = 29), career planning and skill development (n = 3), and various skills crucial for the health entrepreneur. The satisfaction was high for most programs, but few reported more fulsome outcomes. The teaching techniques used to engage trainees or physicians in entrepreneurship were also fairly limited.

Conclusion

Though some programs are described, few have demonstrated efficacy. More attention should be paid towards faculty-level recruitment, development and reward, so that they may in turn teach these approaches. Those involved with educational planning can help close this gap.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Drucker PF (Peter F. Management Challenges for the 21st Century. HarperBusiness; 1999.

  2. Innovation | Definition of Innovation by Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation. Accessed February 9, 2020.

  3. Entrepreneur | Definition of Entrepreneur by Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entrepreneur. Accessed February 9, 2020.

  4. Audretsch DB, Falck O, Heblich S, Lederer A, editors. Handbook of research on innovation and entrepreneurship. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brown TE, Ulijn JE. Innovation, entrepreneurship and culture: the interaction between technology. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2004.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Galindo MÁ, Méndez-Picazo MT. Innovation, entrepreneurship and economic growth. Manag Decis. 2013;51(3):501–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741311309625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hisrich RD. Entrepreneurship/intrapreneurship. Am Psychol. 1990;45(2):209–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boore J, Porter S. Education for entrepreneurship in nursing. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(2):184–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.05.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Antoncic B, Hisrich RD. Intrapreneurship: construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. J Bus Ventur. 2001;16(5):495–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00054-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mondoux S, Chan TM, Ankel F, Sklar DP. Teaching quality improvement in emergency medicine training programs: a review of best practices. AEM Educ Train. 2017;1(4):301–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Juzwishin D, Bond K. Cultivating excellence in leadership: wicked problems and virtues. Healthc Manag Forum. 2012;25(3):161–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hcmf.2012.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hussain N, Ritchey T. Wicked problems. Ind Pharm. 2011;31:4–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mnl.2016.08.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Niccum BA, Sarker A, Wolf SJ, Trowbridge MJ. Innovation and entrepreneurship programs in US medical education: a landscape review and thematic analysis. Med Educ Online. 2017;22(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2017.1360722.

  14. Buescher B, Viguerie P. Thriving under disruption: how to succeed in the years ahead | McKinsey on Healthcare. McKinsey on Healthcare. https://healthcare.mckinsey.com/thriving-under-disruption-how-succeed-years-ahead. Published 2014. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  15. Naylor D, Girard F. Unleashing innovation: excellent healthcare for Canada report of the advisory panel on healthcare innovation.; 2015. https://healthycanadians.gc.ca/publications/health-system-systeme-sante/report-healthcare-innovation-rapport-soins/alt/report-healthcare-innovation-rapport-soins-eng.pdf.

  16. Marks G. Amazon, Google And Microsoft Aim To Fix Healthcare...And Other Small Business Tech News This Week. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2018/08/19/amazon-google-and-microsoft-aim-to-fix-healthcare-and-other-small-business-tech-news-this-week/#1cde1fc63d9e. Published 2018. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  17. Viswanathan V. The Rise of the M.D./M.B.A. Degree - The Atlantic. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/the-rise-of-the-mdmba-degree/380683/. Published 2014. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  18. Brinton TJ, Kurihara CQ, Camarillo DB, Pietzsch JB, Gorodsky J, Zenios SA, et al. Outcomes from a postgraduate biomedical technology innovation training program: the first 12 years of stanford biodesign. Ann Biomed Eng. 2013;41(9):1803–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-013-0761-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Majmudar MD, Harrington RA, Brown NJ, Graham G, McConnell MV. Clinician innovator: a novel career path in academic medicine a presidentially commissioned article from the American Heart Association. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(10):e001990. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.001990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hindle K, Cutting N. Can applied entrepreneurship education enhance job satisfaction and financial performance? An empirical investigation in the Australian pharmacy profession. J Small Bus Manag. 2002;40(2):162–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-627x.00048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol Theory Pract. 2005;8(1):19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chan TM, Wallner C, Swoboda TK, Leone KA, Kessler C. Assessing interpersonal and communication skills in emergency medicine. December. 2012;19:1390–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Grp P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement (Reprinted from Annals of Internal Medicine). Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9, W64. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Karl. Digital Health sector investments jumping. CoFounder. http://www.cofmag.com/2019/04/digital-health-sector-investments-jumping/. Published 2019. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  25. McCleary KJ, Rivers PA, Schneller ES. A diagnostic approach to understanding entrepreneurship in health care. J Health Hum Serv Adm. 2006;28(4):550–77.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ljuboja D, Powers BW, Robbins B, Huckman R, Yeshwant K, Jain SH. When doctors go to business school: career choices of physician-MBAs. Am J Manag Care. 2016;22(6):e196–8.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Paul C. A rational approach to career change. Physician Exec. 1995;21(10):42–3.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Anzai Y, Meltzer CC, DeStigter KK, Destounis S, Pawley BK, Oates ME. Entrepreneurial women in radiology: role models of success. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(11):1378–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2016.06.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brian Cassel J, Bowman B, Rogers M, et al. Palliative care leadership centers are key to the diffusion of palliative care innovation. Health Aff. 2018;37(2):231–9. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Fins JJ, Schachter M. Investigators, industry, and the heuristic device: ethics, patent law, and clinical innovation. Account Res. 2001;8(3):219–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620108573975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Noonan WD. Patenting medical and surgical procedures. J Pat Trademark Off Soc. 1995;77.

  32. Garaj E. Practice and theory in systems of education. Vol 5.; 2010.

  33. Dimitriu R, Lungeanu D, Mãnescu C, Pantazi M, Mihalas GI. Open innovation challenge in healthcare. Role for Education. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;213:91–4.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Carroll CA, Rychlewski W, Teat M, Clawson D. Enhancing entrepreneurship and professionalism in medical informatics instruction: a collaborative training model. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004;11(4):317–9. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Servoss J, Chang C, Fay J, Ward K. The early tech development course: experiential commercialization education for the medical academician. Acad Med. 2017;92(4):506–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Servoss J, Chang C, Olson D, Ward KR, Mulholland MW, Cohen MS. The surgery innovation and entrepreneurship development program (SIEDP): an experiential learning program for surgery faculty to ideate and implement innovations in health care. J Surg Educ. 2018;75(4):935–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.09.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Umble KE, Orton S, Rosen B, Ottoson J. Evaluating the impact of the management academy for public health: developing entrepreneurial managers and organizations. J Public Heal Manag Pract. 2006;12(5):436–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/00124784-200609000-00006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ries E. Principles. The Lean Startup Methodology. http://theleanstartup.com/principles. Published 2011.

  39. Business Model Canvas – Download the Official Template. Strategyzer. https://www.strategyzer.com/canvas/business-model-canvas. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  40. The National Science Foundation’s Innovation Corps (I-Corps). National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/i-corps/. Published 2020. Accessed July 26, 2020.

  41. Walker A, Ko N. Bringing medicine to the digital age via hackathons and beyond. J Med Syst. 2016;40(4):1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0461-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hall AK, Hagel C, Chan TM, Thoma B, Murnaghan A, Bhanji F. The writer’s guide to education scholarship in emergency medicine: education innovations (part 3). CJEM. 2018;20(3):563–70. https://doi.org/10.1017/cem.2017.28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Realist methods in medical education research: what are they and what can they contribute? Med Educ. 2012;46(1):89–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04045.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Pawson R. Tilley Ni. Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Ltd.; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Gehanno J, Rollin L, Darmoni S. Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(1):1. https://doi.org/10.5210/ojphi.v5i2.4623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. Margaret Hay and Ms. Mie Østergaard for their contributions as expert consultants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Teresa M. Chan.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

N/A

Informed consent

N/A

Additional information

This study has previously been presented as a poster presentation at the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians conference in 2019.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 14 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suryavanshi, T., Lambert, S., Lal, S. et al. Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Health Sciences Education: a Scoping Review. Med.Sci.Educ. 30, 1797–1809 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01050-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01050-8

Keywords

Navigation