Background Artificial Intelligence (AI) innovations in radiology offer a potential solution to the increasing demand for imaging tests and the ongoing workforce crisis. Crucial to their adoption is the involvement of different professional groups, namely radiologists and radiographers, who work interdependently but whose perceptions and responses towards AI may differ. We aim to explore the knowledge, awareness and attitudes towards AI amongst professional groups in radiology, and to analyse the implications for the future adoption of these technologies into practice. Methods We conducted 18 semi-structured interviews with 12 radiologists and 6 radiographers from four breast units in National Health Services (NHS) organisations and one focus group with 8 radiographers from a fifth NHS breast unit, between 2018 and 2020. Results We found that radiographers and radiologists vary with respect to their awareness and knowledge around AI. Through their professional networks, conference attendance, and contacts with industry developers, radiologists receive more information and acquire more knowledge of the potential applications of AI. Radiographers instead rely more on localized personal networks for information. Our results also show that although both groups believe AI innovations offer a potential solution to workforce shortages, they differ significantly regarding the impact they believe it will have on their professional roles. Radiologists believe AI has the potential to take on more repetitive tasks and allow them to focus on more interesting and challenging work. They are less concerned that AI technology might constrain their professional role and autonomy. Radiographers showed greater concern about the potential impact that AI technology could have on their roles and skills development. They were less confident of their ability to respond positively to the potential risks and opportunities posed by AI technology. Conclusions In summary, our findings suggest that professional responses to AI are linked to existing work roles, but are also mediated by differences in knowledge and attitudes attributable to inter-professional differences in status and identity. These findings question broad-brush assertions about the future deskilling impact of AI which neglect the need for AI innovations in healthcare to be integrated into existing work processes subject to high levels of professional autonomy.

Under Xi Jinping's leadership, China has actively promoted “Internet sovereignty” as a means to reshape the discourse and practices of global cyber governance. By analyzing Chinese‐language literature, this article unpacks the Chinese discourse of Internet sovereignty. Despite significant interest in promoting it as China's normative position on cyberspace, we find that Chinese formulations of Internet sovereignty are fragmented, diverse, and underdeveloped. There are substantial disagreements and uncertainty over what Internet sovereignty is and how it can be put into practice. This is principally due to the evolving pattern of Chinese policy formation, whereby political ideas are often not clearly defined when first proposed by Chinese leaders. This article argues that an underdeveloped domestic discourse of Internet sovereignty has significantly restricted China's capacity to provide alternative norms in global cyberspace. Appreciating this ambiguity, diversity, and, sometimes, inconsistency is vital to accurate understanding of transformations in global cyber governance occasioned by China's rise. Related Articles

How do professionals respond when they are required to conduct work that does not match with their identity? We investigated this situation in an English public services organization where a major work redesign initiative required professionals to engage in new tasks that they did not want to do. Based on our findings, we develop a process model of professional identity restructuring that includes the following four stages: (1) resisting identity change and mourning the loss of previous work, (2) conserving professional identity and avoiding the new work, (3) parking professional identity and learning the new work, and (4) retrieving and modifying professional identity and affirming the new work. Our model explicates the dynamics between professional work and professional identity, showing how requirements for new professional work can lead to a new professional identity. We also contribute to the literature by showing how parking one’s professional identity facilitates the creation of liminal space that allows professional identity restructuring.

Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) lead a network of organisations that plan and make decisions about what services to provide through the NHS. To make commissioning decisions based on evidence, CCGs need to develop capacity to acquire and use evidence of different types. CCGs can not only draw on evidence about what is most clinically effective or cost-effective, but also consider patient experience and local knowledge held by doctors. Policy-makers recognise this and require that CCG-led commissioning networks include general practitioners (GPs), so that their knowledge about the local population and services is considered, and patient and public involvement (PPI) representatives, so that patient experience is considered, in their decision-making. In the context of older persons’ care and potentially avoidable admissions, CCGs should also seek to integrate evidence from health-care organisations with that held by social care organisations (adult social care departments in local authorities).Funded by the National Institute for Health Research, through its Health Services and Delivery Research programme (12/5002/01), our research empirically focuses on a tracer study of reducing potentially avoidable admissions of older people into acute hospitals. Our study examines the critical review capacity of 13 cases of representative (region, size, urban/rural) commissioning networks in England to acquire and use different types of evidence to inform their decisions about service interventions.Conceptually, we apply a specific model of knowledge mobilisation, absorptive capacity (ACAP), which details the antecedents and dimensions of an organisation’s capacity to acquire and use knowledge for enhanced performance. Drawing on interviews with commissioning managers, GPs, PPI representatives and other relevant stakeholders, our study highlights that commissioning networks led by CCGs lack capacity to use different types of evidence to make well-informed decisions. We find that the use of local knowledge about patients, and the patient experience of services, may be poor. CCGs make poor use of data about population need and existing services, which the external organisation (commissioning support units) potentially provides. Voluntary organisations have a role to play in providing evidence about gaps in patient need and local services. Finally, given the need for health and social care organisations to work together, specifically in older people’s care, there is a need to integrate different evidence and perspectives in decision-making across health and social care organisations. Based on the above, our study develops a self-development psychometric tool for CCG-led commissioning networks to reflect on and enhance their critical review capacity with respect to the acquisition and use of different types of evidence.Limitations are threefold. First, we sampled only 13 cases. Nevertheless, we have attempted to generate transferable lessons for other commissioning networks through theoretical analysis, drawing on dimensions of ACAP to highlight factors influencing evidence use. Second, GPs engaged variably across the cases with our study. Others might carry out a more specific study of GP involvement in commissioning. Third, at the inception of our study, CCGs were fledgling organisations. Others may study development of critical review capacity of CCGs as their relationships developed across the commissioning network.

How and why do employees from heterogeneous professional and occupational groups respond to the same HR practice differently-job redesign-and what is the implication of this for human resource management (HRM) implementation? Drawing upon a qualitative case study of job redesign in the English health and social care sector, affecting three distinct groups of employees, we highlight the different ways these employees respond to the implementation of job redesign over time. We contribute to a nascent literature discussing employees' role in HRM implementation. We also show that different types of professionals (occupational professionals, paraprofessionals, and organisational professionals) respond to job redesign differently, depending on its impact on their professional identity, which, in turn, affects its implementation.