CAPÍTULO 4: DESARROLLO DE LA PROPUESTA DE CENTRO DE SERVICIOS DE USUARIOS
5.7. Tratamiento de los datos
5.7.2. Análisis de la Regresión Múltiple
REFERENCES
1. Link AN. The history of public/private partnerships. In: Public/Private Partnerships. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2006:7-22. doi:10.1007/0-387-29775-8_2 2. Custos D, Reitz J. Public-private partnerships. Am J Comp Law. 2010;58(1):555-584.
doi:10.5131/ajcl.2009.0037
3. Roman A V. A guide to public-private partnerships.
https://www.nigp.org/docs/default-source/New-Site/research-reports/guidetopublic- privatepartnerships(ppps)-
whatpublicprocurementspecialistsneednowfinal.pdf?sfvrsn=4. Published 2015. Accessed October 6, 2019.
4. Chen Z, Daito N, Gifford JL. Data review of transportation infrastructure public– private partnership: a meta-analysis. Transp Rev. 2016;36(2):228-250.
doi:10.1080/01441647.2015.1076535
5. Estache A, Juan E, Trujillo L. Public-Private Partnerships In Transport. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2008. doi:10.1596/1813-9450-4436
6. Widdus R. Public-private partnerships: an overview. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2005;99(Suppl 1):S1-S8. doi:10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.06.005
7. Miller JB. Principles of Public and Private Infrastructure Delivery. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000.
8. Bellis M. The most important inventions of the 19th century.
https://www.thoughtco.com/inventions-nineteenth-century-4144740. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
9. Hamowy R. The early development of medical licensing laws in the United States, 1875-1900. J Libert Stud. 1979;3(1):73-119.
10. Higgs R. The Growth of Government in the United States: News. The Independent Institute. https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1390. Published 1990. Accessed October 6, 2019.
11. Frank DJ, Gabler J. Reconstructing the University: Worldwide Shifts in Academia in the 20th Century. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 2006.
12. Lee S. Public investment. Encyclopedia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/public-investment. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2016.
13. Kohrs DG. Higher education in mid 19th and early 20th century America. In:
Chautauqua: The Nature Study Movement in Pacific Grove, California. Pacific Grove, CA: Stanford University Hopkins Marine Station; 2015.
14. U.S. Census Bureau. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/1975/compendia/hist_stats_colonial- 1970.html. Published 1975. Accessed October 6, 2019.
15. Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Education in the 20th century. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/education/Education-in-the-20th- century. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
16. National Center for Education Statistics. NCES Fast Facts.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/dailyarchive.asp. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
17. U.S. Census Bureau. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2011.
https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed.html. Published 2011. Accessed October 6, 2019.
18. Goldin C, Katz LF. The shaping of higher education: the formative years in the United States, 1890 to 1940. J Econ Perspect. 1999;13(1):37-62.
19. Mead L. UN partners with private sector actors to advance SDGs. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://sdg.iisd.org/news/un-partners-with- private-sector-actors-to-advance-sdgs/. Published 2017. Accessed October 6, 2019. 20. Forrer J, Kee JE, Newcomer KE, Boyer E. Public-private partnerships and the public accountability question. Public Adm Rev. 2010;70(3):475-484. doi:10.1111/j.1540- 6210.2010.02161.x
21. Croft SL. Public-private partnership: from there to here. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2005;99(Suppl 1):S9-S14. doi:10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.06.008
22. Roehrich JK, Lewis MA, George G. Are public–private partnerships a healthy option? A systematic literature review. Soc Sci Med. 2014;113:110-119.
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.037
23. Nishtar S. Public–private “partnerships” in health – a global call to action. Heal Res Policy Syst. 2004;2(1):5. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-2-5
24. Barr DA. Ethics in public health research: a research protocol to evaluate the
effectiveness of public-private partnerships as a means to improve health and welfare systems worldwide. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(1):19-25. doi:10.2105/AJPH
25. Kim J, Daim TU. A new approach to measuring time-lags in technology licensing: study of U.S. academic research institutions. J Technol Transf. 2014;39(5):748-773.
doi:10.1007/s10961-013-9327-6
26. National Research Council. An Assessment of the SBIR Program at the Department of Defense. (Wessner CW, ed.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2009. doi:10.17226/11963
28. Sabol P, Puentes R. Private Capital, Public Good: Drivers of Successful Infrastructure Public-Private Partnerships. https://www.brookings.edu/research/private-capital- public-good-drivers-of-successful-infrastructure-public-private-partnerships/. Published 2014. Accessed October 6, 2019.
29. Marmot M. Social determinants of health inequalities. Lancet. 2005;365(9464):1099- 1104. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)71146-6
30. Mitra PP. The brain’s highways: mapping the last frontier. Scientific American.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brains-highways-mapping-last-frontier/. Published May 2012. Accessed October 6, 2019.
31. Library of Congress. Presidential Proclamation 6158: Project on the Decade of the Brain. http://www.loc.gov/loc/brain/proclaim.html. Published 1990. Accessed October 6, 2019.
32. Bloom DE, Cafiero E, Jané-Llopis E, et al. The Global Economic Burden of
Noncommunicable Diseases. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum; 2011. doi:10.1192/bjp.184.5.393
33. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Traumatic Brain Injury: Hope Through Research. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2015.
https://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/Patient-Caregiver-Education/Hope-Through- Research/Traumatic-Brain-Injury-Hope-Through.
34. Administration for Community Living. A profile of older Americans. https://acl.gov/sites/default/files/Aging and Disability in
America/2017OlderAmericansProfile.pdf. Published 2018. Accessed October 6, 2019. 35. Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders. Neuroscience clinical trials: an
overview of challenges and potential cpportunities. In: Neuroscience Trials of the Future: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2016:Chapter 2. doi:10.17226/23502
36. Dwyer C. Pfizer halts research into Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s treatments. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-
way/2018/01/08/576443442/pfizer-halts-research-efforts-into-alzheimers-and- parkinsons-treatments. Published 2018. Accessed October 6, 2019.
37. Medical Dictionary Editors. Blockbuster drug. Medical Dictionary. https://medical- dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/blockbuster+drug. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
38. Stevens AJ, Jensen JJ, Wyller K, Kilgore PC, Chatterjee S, Rohrbaugh ML. The role of public-sector research in the discovery of drugs and vaccines. N Engl J Med.
2011;364(6):535-541. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1008268
39. Office of the Commissioner. FDA basics: what does FDA regulate.
https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-basics/what-does-fda-regulate. Published 2018. Accessed October 6, 2019.
40. Cheeran B, Cohen L, Dobkin B, et al. The future of restorative neurosciences in stroke: driving the translational research pipeline from basic science to rehabilitation of people after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(2):97-107.
doi:10.1177/1545968308326636
41. National Institutes of Health. Brain Research through Advancing Innovative
Neurotechnologies (BRAIN). 2019. https://braininitiative.nih.gov. Accessed October 6, 2019.
42. Martin CL, Chun M. The BRAIN Initiative: building, strengthening, and sustaining. Neuron. 2016;92(3):570-573. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.039
43. Jabalpurwala I. Brain Canada: one brain one community. Neuron. 2016;92(3):601-606. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.049
44. TRACK-TBI. Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in TBI.
https://tracktbi.ucsf.edu/transforming-research-and-clinical-knowledge-tbi. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
45. Liu E, Luthman J, Cedarbaum JM, et al. Perspective: the Alzheimer’s Disease
Neuroimaging Initiative and the role and contributions of the private partner scientific board (PPSB). Alzheimer’s Dement. 2015;11(7):840-849.
doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2015.04.001
46. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Historical trends in federal R&D. https://www.aaas.org/programs/r-d-budget-and-policy/historical-trends- federal-rd. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
47. West C, Villasenor J, Schneider J. Private Sector Investment in Global Health R&D. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution; 2017.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/private-sector-investment-in-global-health-rd/. 48. Shiffrin RM, Börner K, Stigler SM. Scientific progress despite irreproducibility: A
seeming paradox. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(11):2632-2639. doi:10.1073/pnas.1711786114
49. Marohn C. 4 qualities of a successful public-private partnership.
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/2/4/public-private-partnership. Published 2018. Accessed June 3, 2020.
50. Osborne S. Public-Private Partnerships: Theory and Practice in International Perspective. New York, NY: Routledge; 2000.
51. Urban Land Institute. Ten principles for successful public/private partnerships. https://uli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/Successful-Public-Private- Partnerships.pdf. Published 2005. Accessed June 3, 2020.
52. Kilpatrick DG. Definitions of public policy and the law. Medical University of South Carolina. https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/policy/definition.shtml. Published 2000. Accessed October 6, 2019.
53. World Bank Group. What are public private partnerships?
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/overview/what-are-public- private-partnerships. Published 2015. Accessed October 6, 2019.
54. Moreton E. LibGuides: creating a PRISMA flow diagram. https://guides.lib.unc.edu/prisma. Accessed June 3, 2020.
55. Manley GT, Mac Donald CL, Markowitz AJ, et al. The Traumatic Brain Injury Endpoints Development (TED) initiative: progress on a public-private regulatory collaboration to accelerate diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma.
2017;34(19):2721-2730. doi:10.1089/neu.2016.4729
56. Jones-Davis DM, Buckholtz N. The impact of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 2: what role do public-private partnerships have in pushing the boundaries of clinical and basic science research on Alzheimer’s disease? Alzheimer’s Dement. 2015;11(7):860-864. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2015.05.006
57. Shihabuddin LS, Brundin P, Greenamyre JT, Stephenson D, Sardi SP. New frontiers in Parkinson’s disease: from genetics to the clinic. J Neurosci. 2018;38(44):9375-9382. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1666-18.2018
58. Crous-Bou M, Minguillón C, Gramunt N, Molinuevo JL. Alzheimer’s disease prevention: from risk factors to early intervention. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017;9(1):71.
doi:10.1186/s13195-017-0297-z
59. Feldman HH, Haas M, Gandy S, et al. Alzheimer’s disease research and development: a call for a new research roadmap. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014;1313(1):1-16.
doi:10.1111/nyas.12424
60. Haarbauer-Krupa J, Taylor CA, Yue JK, et al. Screening for post-traumatic stress disorder in a civilian emergency department population with traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2017;34(1):50-58. doi:10.1089/neu.2015.4158
61. Fins JJ, Dorfman GS, Pancrazio JJ. Challenges to deep brain stimulation: a pragmatic response to ethical, fiscal, and regulatory concerns. Ann N Y Acad Sci.
2012;1265(1):80-90. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06598.x
62. Hodge GA, Greve C. On public–private partnership performance. Public Work Manag Policy. 2017;22(1):55-78. doi:10.1177/1087724X16657830
63. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Strategic Partnering: A Guide to the Conceptual Framework How to use the Strategic Partnering Framework.
https://www.cdc.gov/dhdsp/programs/spha/roadmap/docs/Strategic Partnering Conceptual Framework_ac.pdf. Accessed October 6, 2019.
64. Welsh Government. WEP strategic partnering framework template project co- shareholders’ agreement. https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018- 11/template-project-co-shareholders-agreement.pdf. Published 2018. Accessed June 3, 2020.
65. Nova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness. Understanding publicly funded immunization, environmental health, healthy communities, healthy development protocol 8. https://novascotia.ca/dhw/publichealth/.
66. Horn T, Sherwood J, Remien RH, et al. Towards an integrated primary and secondary HIV prevention continuum for the United States: a cyclical process model. J Int AIDS Soc. 2016;19(1):21263. doi:10.7448/IAS.19.1.21263
67. Corbin JM, Strauss AL. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2015.
68. Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2017.
69. Kettl D. The Next Government of the United States: Why Our Institutions Fail Us and How to Fix Them. New York, NY: W.W. Norton
70. Khandkar SH. Open coding.
http://pages.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/~saul/wiki/uploads/CPSC681/open-coding.pdf. Accessed June 3, 2020.
71. Allen M. Axial coding. In: The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2017. doi:10.4135/9781483381411.n33
72. MacQueen KM, McLellan E, Kay K, Milstein B. Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. CAM J. 1998;10(2):31-36. doi:10.1177/1525822X980100020301 73. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 1994.
74. Bradley EH, Curry LA, Devers KJ. Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Serv Res. 2007;42(4):1758-1772. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00684.x
75. Coyne I. Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? J Adv Nurs. 1997;26(3):623-630. doi:10.1046/j.1365- 2648.1997.t01-25-00999.x
76. Rev.com. Rev Transcribe. https://www.rev.com. Published 2019. Accessed October 6, 2019.
77. Birken SA, Powell BJ, Shea CM, et al. Criteria for selecting implementation science theories and frameworks: results from an international survey. Implement Sci. 2017;12(1):124. doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0656-y
78. Birken SA, Rohweder CL, Powell BJ, et al. T-CaST: an implementation theory comparison and selection tool. Implement Sci. 2018;13(1):143. doi:10.1186/s13012- 018-0836-4
80. Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K. Using the Knowledge to Action Framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review. Implement Sci. 2014;9(1):172. doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0172-2
81. State of Michigan. Step 2: define goals and objectives.
https://www.michigan.gov/documents/8-pub207_60743_7.pdf. Published 2003. Accessed June 3, 2020.
82. University of California. SMART goals: a how to guide. https://www.ucop.edu/local- human-resources/_files/performance-appraisal/How to write SMART Goals v2.pdf. Published 2016. Accessed March 9, 2020.
83. Welch JA, Ranganathan Nayak P. Strategic sourcing: a progressive approach to the make-or-buy decision. Executive. 2011;6(1):23-31. doi:10.5465/ame.1992.4274302 84. Rubin H, Rubin I. Qualitative Interviewing : The Art of Hearing Data. 2nd ed. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage; 2012. doi:10.4135/9781452226651
85. Seth C. The SWOT Analysis: A Key Tool for Developing Your Business Strategy.
https://www.50minutes.com/title/the-swot-analysis/. Published 2015. Accessed April 2, 2020.
86. Munns AK, Bjeirmi BF. The role of project management in achieving project success. Int J Proj Manag. 1996;14(2):81-87. doi:10.1016/0263-7863(95)00057-7
87. Bertocci DI. Leadership in Organizations: There Is a Difference Between Leaders and Managers. Lanham, MD: University Press of America; 2009.
88. Toor S-R. Differentiating leadership from management: an empirical investigation of leaders and managers. Leadersh Manag Eng. 2011;11(4):310-320.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)LM.1943-5630.0000138
89. Prybil L, Scutchfield FD, Killian R, Kelly A, Mays GP. Improving community health through hospital-public health collaboration: insights and lessons learned from successful partnerships.
https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=hsm_book. Published 2014. Accessed April 7, 2020.
90. Kaplan RS. How the balanced scorecard complements the McKinsey 7‐S model. Emerald Insight.
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/10878570510594442/full/ht ml. Published 2005. Accessed March 30, 2020.
91. Sarsby A. SWOT Analysis. http://www.leadership-library.co.uk. Published 2016. Accessed April 2, 2020.
92. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Public-private partnerships and CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/partners/index.html. Published 2019. Accessed April 2, 2020.
93. Lewicki R. Trust, Trust Development, and Trust Repair.
http://ombudsfac.unm.edu/Article_Summaries/Trust_Trust_Development_and_Trust_ Repair.pdf. Accessed April 3, 2020.
94. Abramov I. Building peace in fragile states - building trust is essential for effective public-private partnerships. J Bus Ethics. 2009;89(Suppl 4):481-494.
doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0402-8
95. Reissner S, Pagan V. Generating employee engagement in a public-private partnership: management communication activities and employee experiences. Int J Hum Resour Manag. 2013;24(14):2741-2759. doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.765497
96. Sparrow J. The Culture Builders: Leadership Strategies for Employee Performance. Surrey, UK: Gower Publishing; 2012.
97. Syafii LI, Thoyib A, Nimran U, Djumahir. The role of corporate culture and employee motivation as a mediating variable of leadership style related with the employee performance (studies in Perum Perhutani). Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2015;211:1142- 1147. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.152
98. Jannetti AJ. A guide to performing a needs assessment and a gap analysis.
https://www.suna.org/events/needsAssessment.pdf. Published 2012. Accessed June 3, 2020.
99. Estache A, Juan E, Trujillo L. Public-Private Partnerships in Transport. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2008. doi:10.1596/1813-9450-4436
100. Creswell JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2014.
101. Istrate E, Puentes R. [USC02] 35 USC Ch. 18: Patent Rights in Inventions Made With Federal Assistance.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title35/part2/chapter18&edition =prelim. Accessed April 8, 2020.
102. Ezell S. The Bayh-Dole Act’s vital importance to the U.S. life-sciences innovation system. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation.
https://itif.org/publications/2019/03/04/bayh-dole-acts-vital-importance-us-life- sciences-innovation-system?mc_cid=f1a53e317f&mc_eid=036ea718cf. Published 2019. Accessed June 3, 2020.
103. Pressman L, Planting M, Yuskavage R, Okubo S, Moylan C, Bond J. The Economic Contribution of University/Nonprofit Inventions in the United States: 1996-2015.; 2017.
104. Library of Congress. H.R.4485 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Public-Private Partnerships for Prosperity (P4) Act.
105. Istrate E, Puentes R. Moving forward on public private partnerships: U.S. and international experience with PPP units. Brookings Institution.
https://www.brookings.edu/research/moving-forward-on-public-private-partnerships- u-s-and-international-experience-with-ppp-units/. Published 2011. Accessed June 3, 2020.
106. Blumenauer E. Neuroscience and the Congressional Neuroscience Caucus.
https://blumenauer.house.gov/issues/neuroscience. Published 2020. Accessed April 9, 2020.
107. Society for Neuroscience. Lawmakers support neuroscience on Capitol Hill.
https://www.sfn.org/sitecore/content/home/sfn/news-and-calendar/neuroscience- quarterly/winter-2016/congressional-neuroscience. Published 2016. Accessed April 9, 2020.
108. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Office of Science: Technology and Innovation - about us.
https://www.cdc.gov/os/technology/techtransfer/aboutus.htm. Published 2020. Accessed April 10, 2020.
109. CDC Foundation. CDC Foundation. https://www.cdcfoundation.org. Published 2020. Accessed April 10, 2020.
110. U.S. Government Accountability Office. U.S. Government Accountability Office. https://www.gao.gov. Published 2020. Accessed April 10, 2020.
111. U.S. Government Accountability Office. Partnership Projects: Federal Support for Public-Private Housing and Development Effort. https://www.gao.gov/products/PEMD- 89-25FS. Published 1989. Accessed June 3, 2020.
112. Mihm JC. Public Private Partnership–Key Element of Federal Building and Facility Partnerships. Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office; 1999.
113. Geddes RR, Wagner BL. Why do U.S. states adopt public-private partnership enabling legislation? J Urban Econ. 2013;78:30-41. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2013.05.003
114. Missouri House of Representatives. Bill Information for HB1088.
https://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills191/hlrbillspdf/2314S.07T.pdf. Published 2019. Accessed April 10, 2020.
115. Boyer EJ, Scheller DS. An examination of state-level public–private partnership adoption: analyzing economic, political, and demand-related determinants of PPPs. Public Work Manag Policy. 2018;23(1):5-33. doi:10.1177/1087724X17729097
116. P3 Government Conference. 2020 P3 Government Conference. https://www.p3gov.com. Accessed April 10, 2020.
117. Administrative Conference of the United States. Administrative Conference of the United States. https://www.acus.gov. Published 2020. Accessed April 11, 2020.
118. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Developing a software precertification program: a working model. https://www.fda.gov/media/112680/download. Published 2018. Accessed April 11, 2020.
119. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Premarket Approval (PMA).
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfPMA/pma.cfm. Published 2020. Accessed April 11, 2020.
120. Small Business Innovation Research. SBIR.gov. https://www.sbir.gov. Published 2020. Accessed April 8, 2020.
121. Small Business Innovation Research. About SBIR. https://www.sbir.gov/about. Published 2020. Accessed April 11, 2020.
122. U.S. Small Business Administration. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program Policy Directive.
https://www.sbir.gov/sites/default/files/SBIR-STTR_Policy_Directive_2019.pdf. Published 2019. Accessed June 3, 2020.
123. White House. Fact Sheet: BRAIN Initiative.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/02/fact-sheet- brain-initiative. Published 2013. Accessed April 11, 2020.
124. Solomon Y. A simple tool for better make-versus-buy decisions. Inc.com. https://www.inc.com/yoram-solomon/a-simple-tool-for-better-make-vs-buy- decisions.html. Published 2017. Accessed April 29, 2020.
125. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard—measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/1992/01/the-balanced-scorecard-measures- that-drive-performance-2. Published 1992. Accessed April 12, 2020.
126. Bain & Company. Management tools: core competencies.
https://www.bain.com/insights/management-tools-core-competencies/. Published 2018. Accessed April 13, 2020.
127. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Development and execution of Memoranda of Understanding and Memoranda of Agreement operational policy.
https://www.cdc.gov/partners/pdf/policy597.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed April 12, 2020.
128. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Technology and innovation: advancing excellence and integrity of CDC science.
https://www.cdc.gov/od/science/technology/index.htm. Accessed April 12, 2020. 129. National Institutes of Health. Office of Technology Transfer: resources.
https://www.ott.nih.gov/resources. Published 2020. Accessed April 12, 2020.
130. University of Chicago University Research Administration. Conflict of Interest-Conflict of Commitment (COI-COC). https://ura.uchicago.edu/page/conflict-interest-conflict- commitment-coi-coc. Published 2017. Accessed April 12, 2020.