Search

The article discusses the issue of common-method bias (CMB) in organizational behavior (OB) and management-related journals. The author argues that CMB is overused by reviewers and editors as a reason to reject papers, and presents empirical, theoretical, and practical evidence to support this argument. The author suggests that concerns about CMB are often unnecessary and that single-source and single-wave data can still provide valuable insights. The article also addresses the practical implications of requiring multi-phase studies to avoid CMB, such as the potential for fake data and difficulties in surveying certain populations. Overall, the author contends that CMB should not be treated as a fatal flaw in papers. [Extracted from the article]

students’ research topics: a rubric to examine proposed topics in terms of scope, development, and the “researchability” of the topic, as well as textual analysis, using ATLAS.ti, to provide an overview of the types of subjects students select for a persuasive research essay. Results indicated that students struggle with defining an appropriate and feasible focus for their topics and that they often select topics related to education, health, and the environment. These findings were used to implement a new information literacy instruction model that better supports student topic development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses how the William G. Squires Library conducted a usability study on their LibGuides to identify student design preferences. The results of the study support previous research concerning best practices for LibGuide creation. This paper offers insight into how librarian-centric design hinders student success and provides suggestions for how to best develop a student-centric template design that offers consistency and increased user proficiency across all guides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To explore and summarise published literature with regards to secondments to clinical research and to identify the gaps in research to inform further work. Design: Systematic scoping review. Method: A scoping review was undertaken in accordance with the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence and Research framework. Databases searched included CINAHL, PubMed, Medline and Embase. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied by two independent reviewers. Two reviewers independently retrieved full‐text studies for inclusion and applied the framework as a tool for synthesising Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence and Research recommendations. Results: Six papers and one abstract published between 2003 and 2018 were included. All secondees (n = 34) were released from NHS posts, with secondments (where specified) ranging in duration from 0.25 to 2 years and for 40%–100% of their working hours. All seven papers reported benefits for personal and professional development, predominantly in the form of personal reflections. Few described involvement with research delivery teams. Conclusion: Published initiatives vary in nature and lack standardised reporting and measurement of impact. Further research is required to identify benefits at a departmental or organisational level, the facilitators for setting up secondments and the application of knowledge gained from secondment opportunities. Implications for the Profession: Undertaking a research secondment is reported to offer professional and personal benefit for clinical staff. Research secondments are one way in which a research culture can practically be embedded within clinical settings. Impact: This scoping review identified a lack of published empirical research seeking to understand research secondments as a tool to enhance research and evidence engagement. Although there is a suggestion that secondments could positively impact staff retention, there is limited evidence about the benefit for the organisation or for patient care. These findings have implications for staff, managers and their organisations. Reporting Method: The PRISMA‐ScR guidelines were used to guide reporting. No Patient or Public Contribution: This was not relevant to the research design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study employed bibliometric analysis to ascertain the research focus areas among a group of Mexican physicians affiliated with the Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado (ISSSTE). ISSSTE, a healthcare institution catering to a diverse range of diseases, offers a distinctive perspective on the investigated specialties within the realm of health. The primary objective was to identify knowledge gaps in medical care disciplines through a comprehensive examination of scholarly publications. Methods: We retrieved Scopus papers affiliated with "ISSSTE" and saved them as.CSV files. Subsequently, we employed VOSviewer, biblioshiny, and bibliometrix for bibliometric analysis. This enabled us to identify prominent institutions, prolific authors, highly cited researchers, and their respective affiliations. Results: Our analysis identified 2063 publications; the specialty internal medicine accounted for the greatest proportion with 831 publications. Original papers accounted for 82% of the total, with 52% of them being written in Spanish. The majority of scientific output, 92%, originated from Mexico City. The annual production has steadily increased since 2010, peaking in 2021 with over 200 publications. However, papers on prevalent conditions, such as metabolic syndrome, received limited citations, and the L0 index (percentage of uncited items) for all papers is close to 60%. Scopus mislabeled one affiliation, and some cases show a low paper-to-author ratio of 0.5 Discussion: Additional concerns, such as honorary authorship due to excessive authors per paper, and the underlying causes of low citation rates in Mexican publications, warrant further examination. Moreover, our research emphasizes the urgency of bolstering research and development funding, which was consistently below 0.5% of GDP for the past four decades, falling short of legal mandates and international benchmarks. We endorse the establishment of robust research collectives in Latin America to address these challenges, foster regional scientific output, and transition from knowledge consumers to knowledge producers, thereby reducing dependence on foreign technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) chat programs has opened two distinct paths, one enhancing interaction and another potentially replacing personal understanding. Ethical and legal concerns arise due to the rapid development of these programs. This paper investigates academic discussions on AI in medicine, analyzing the context, frequency, and reasons behind these conversations. Methods: The study collected data from the Web of Science database on articles containing the keyword "ChatGPT" published from January to September 2023, resulting in 786 medically related journal articles. The inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed articles in English related to medicine. Results: The United States led in publications (38.1%), followed by India (15.5%) and China (7.0%). Keywords such as "patient" (16.7%), "research" (12%), and "performance" (10.6%) were prevalent. The Cureus Journal of Medical Science (11.8%) had the most publications, followed by the Annals of Biomedical Engineering (8.3%). August 2023 had the highest number of publications (29.3%), with significant growth between February to March and April to May. Medical General Internal (21.0%) was the most common category, followed by Surgery (15.4%) and Radiology (7.9%). Discussion: The prominence of India in ChatGPT research, despite lower research funding, indicates the platform's popularity and highlights the importance of monitoring its use for potential medical misinformation. China's interest in ChatGPT research suggests a focus on Natural Language Processing (NLP) AI applications, despite public bans on the platform. Cureus' success in publishing ChatGPT articles can be attributed to its open-access, rapid publication model. The study identifies research trends in plastic surgery, radiology, and obstetric gynecology, emphasizing the need for ethical considerations and reliability assessments in the application of ChatGPT in medical practice. Conclusion: ChatGPT's presence in medical literature is growing rapidly across various specialties, but concerns related to safety, privacy, and accuracy persist. More research is needed to assess its suitability for patient care and implications for non-medical use. Skepticism and thorough review of research are essential, as current studies may face retraction as more information emerges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study presents a global research scenario in the broad domain of osteoarthritis (OA) research, using quantitative and qualitative publication and citation indicators. Methods: The study is based on 45,368 global publications, sourced from the Scopus bibliographical database, covering three decades (1994–2023). We studied the performance of the top 12 developed and top 12 developing countries. The key countries, organizations and authors at national and international levels were identified. The broad subject areas and key journals contributing to global OA research were delineated, besides identifying the broad characteristics of highly cited papers in the field. Results: The United States and China were the most productive countries, while the Netherlands and Canada made the largest citation impact. Harvard Medical School and the University of Sydney made the most contribution, while Boston University and Pfizer Inc., USA registered the highest citation impact. Hunter DJ and Guermazi A were the most productive authors, while Lohmander LS, and Hochberg MC registered the highest citation impact. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (n = 4879) and Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (n = 786) published the maximum papers, while Arthritis and Rheumatism and Nature Reviews Rheumatology registered the largest citation impact. The highly cited papers with 100 or more citations constituted 6.25% of the total publications. Conclusions: There has been a systematic growth of publications on OA. The research on OA was mainly done in developed countries, with the maximum publications coming from the United States of America, China and Canada. The most impactful publications on OA were from the Netherlands, Canada and the United States of America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few investigations have been done to analyze the level of evidence in journals related to hand surgery, compared to other related research fields. The objective of this study was to assess the level of evidence of the clinical research papers published in the Ibero-american (RICMA), the European (JHSE) and American (JHSA) Journals of Hand Surgery. Methods: A total of 932 clinical research papers published between 2005 and 2009 (RICMA 60, JHSE 461, and JHSA 411) were reviewed. Two independent observers classified the level of evidence based on the Oxford International Classification, 5 being the lowest level and 1 the highest level. The observed frequencies of the level of evidence for each journal were compared with the expected frequencies by a chi-square (χ 2) test for categorical variables with a significance level of 0.05. Results: Inter-observer agreement analysis showed a Kappa of 0.617. Intra-observer agreement analysis presented a Kappa of 0.66 for the observer 1, and a Kappa of 0.751 for the observer 2. More than 80% of the papers in RICMA and JHSE and a 67.6% in the JHSA presented a level of 4. No level 1 or 2 studies were published in RICMA, compared to JHSE (0.9% level 1 and 5.0% level 2) and JHSA (8.3% level 1 and 10% level 2). The percentage of papers with level 3 published in RICMA (16.7%) was higher compared to the JHSE (11.1%) and the JHSA (14.1%). All the results were statistically significant (χ 2 =63.945; p<0.001). Conclusions: The level of evidence in hand surgery is dependent on the type of journal; being the highest level evidence papers those published in the JHSA, followed by the JHSE and finally the RICMA. Knowing the status of the level of evidence published in hand surgery is the starting point to face the challenges of improving the quality of our clinical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this perspective paper we use publicly-available data to show that, despite much positive rhetoric in support of reforms in Scotland to integrate health and social care, these reforms, in their current state, have failed to meet their stated objectives. Rather than regress to the previous system, we propose continued evaluation of even more radical forms of such integration. This analysis, and set of future proposals, are timely given current considerations with respect to a National Care Service in Scotland and recent similar reforms in England and in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Within the past decade, Africa has faced several recurrent outbreaks of Ebola virus disease (EVD), including the 2014-2016 outbreak in West Africa and the recent 2018-2020 Kivu outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The study thus aimed at quantifying and mapping the scientific output of EVD research published within 2010-2020 though a bibliometric perspective. Methods. EVD-related publications from 2010 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases by using the keywords 'Ebola', 'Ebola Virus Disease', 'Ebolas', and 'ebolavirus'. Biblioshiny software (using R-studio cloud) was used to categorise and evaluate authors', countries' and journals' contribution. VOSviewer was used for network visualisation. Results. According to the used search strategy, a total of 3865 and 3848 EVD documents were published in WoS and Scopus, respectively. The average citation per document was 16.1 (WoS) and 16.3 (Scopus). The results show an overall increase in the publication trend within the study period. The leading countries in EVD research were the USA and UK, with over 100 papers in both databases, including Nigeria and South Africa. NIAID and CDC-USA were the most influential institutions, while "Infectious Diseases" and "Medicine" were the most decisive research fields. The most contributing authors included Feldmann H and Qiu XG with over 60 papers in each database, while Journal of Infectious Diseases was the most crucial journal. The most cited article was from Aylward et al. published in 2014, while recent years displayed a keyword focus on "double-blind", "efficacy", "ring vaccination" and "drug effect". Conclusion. This bibliometric analysis provides an updated historical perspective of progress in EVD research and has highlighted the role played by various stakeholders. However, the contribution of African countries and institutions is not sufficiently reflected, implying a need for increased funding and focus on EVD research for effective prevention and control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports that in the most extensive scientific misconduct case the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has seen in decades, a researcher formerly at the University of Vermont College of Medicine in Burlington has admitted in court documents to falsifying data in 15 federal grant applications and numerous published articles. Eric Poehlman, an expert on menopause, aging, and metabolism, faces up to 5 years in jail and a $250,000 fine and has been barred for life from receiving any U.S. research funding. Last week the Department of Justice announced that the total was 17, and that NIH and the U.S. Department of Agriculture had given Poehlman $2.9 million in grants based on fraudulent applications. In addition to pleading guilty to making a false statement on a federal grant application, Poehlman agreed to pay $180,000 to settle a civil suit with the government.

Engaged scholarship (Van de Ven 2007) offers a grand opportunity to address key challenges within the Information Systems (IS) discipline in a novel and constructive way. To explore this opportunity, we adapt the principles of engaged scholarship and apply them to analyze Scandinavian IS research through the lens of Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems (SJIS). We consider the Scandinavian tradition based on review papers in SJIS; we review all research papers published in SJIS over the past 20 years; finally, we discuss the possible role of engaged scholarship in shaping the future of Scandinavian IS research. We conclude with implications of engaged scholarship for IS research and practice in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A transformation of global health research is urgently needed if it is to eliminate long‐standing structural inequities within the field and help reduce global health disparities. Ethics has a key role to play in fostering such a transformation: it can help identify what the transformation should entail. Yet, ethics scholarship linking global health research to greater equity and social justice has limited authority and capacity to do so for two related reasons: it largely fails to apply theories and concepts of justice from the global South and it says little about whether or how to address the coloniality and epistemic injustices inherent within global health research. This paper develops a multidimensional social justice lens using social justice and decolonial theory from the global North and global South. This lens identifies five core dimensions of social justice: power, recognition, harmony, inclusion, and well‐being. This paper then applies the multidimensional lens to the global health research context. For each dimension of social justice, several key ways to transform global health research are identified and described. They include shifting control of global health research funding, education, conduct, and publishing away from the global North and making knowledge from the global South visible and valued. To conclude, potential objections are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although there are several international cleft-care organizations, there are variations in how these organizations are structured. The purpose of this paper was to analyze international cleft-care organizations based out of the United States. We provided an analysis of each, with a specific focus on team structure, funding, location, and model of care. Methods: A systematized review was conducted using PubMed using specific MeSH terms and related keywords. Organizations screened had to have the following inclusion criteria: (1) be based out of the United States (2) have a valid web presence. Results: Nineteen unique international cleft-care organizations were identified in the database search. Most international cleft-care organizations included in this review had originally started with the vertical model and, over time, adopted a diagonal approach including a team-based structure, resulting in an increased need for volunteers. Most organizations reviewed in this paper also demonstrated expansion of care beyond cleft lip and/or palate treatment. The cost of trip per volunteer was variable. The number of trips per year ranged from a minimum of one trip per year to a maximum of 150 trips. Conclusion: Throughout the analysis of each international cleft-care organization, a common theme of sustainability and self-sufficiency was present. The data compiled in this manuscript enables critical appraisal of various cleft-care organizations, comparison of different models of care, and provides insight on engaging in international cleft-care initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Metrics which quantify the impact of a scientist are increasingly incorporated into decisions about how to rate and fund individuals and institutions. Several commonly used metrics, based on journal impact factors and citation counts, have been criticised as they do not reliably predict real-world impact, are highly variable between fields and are vulnerable to gaming. Bibliometrics have been incorporated into systems of research assessment but these may create flawed incentives, failing to reward research that is validated, reproducible and with wider impacts. A recent proposal for a new standardised citation metric based on a composite indicator of 6 measures has led to an online database of 100 000 of the most highly cited scientists in all fields. In this perspective article, we provide an overview and evaluation of this new citation metric as it applies to mental health research. We provide a summary of its findings for psychiatry and psychology, including clustering in certain countries and institutions, and outline some implications for mental health research. We discuss strengths and limitations of this new metric, and how further refinements could align impact metrics more closely with wider goals of scientific research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Viscosupplementation for knee osteoarthritis (OA) may raise concerns regarding conflicts of interest (COI). Evidence of inconclusive study results and publication bias in previous studies has led to concern that financial COI have influenced viscosupplementation outcomes. It is critical to ensure that clinical practice is guided by informed decision making and evidence-based medicine. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles pertaining to hyaluronic acid (or similarly derived) injections to native knees with primary OA only. Bibliometric data, financial COI, and study outcomes were assessed. 67 studies met inclusion criteria for analysis, 53 of which (79.1%) presented Level I evidence, and 21 of which (31.3%) reported at least one author with COI. All studies reporting COI also disclosed industry funding. There were no relationships between reported COI and study outcomes (Χ 2 = 0.31, P = 0.577), levels of evidence (Χ 2 = 3.48, P = 0.176), or relative citation ratio (RCR) (S = 743, P = 0.591). Studies reporting COIs/industry funding tended to be published in journals with significantly higher impact factors (IF) (reporting COI: IF = 3.5 ± 2.0; no COI: IF = 1.8 ± 1.1; S = 950, P < 0.001). Study outcomes were not related to the probability of being published in an open access journal (Χ 2 = 0.01, P = 0.960), nor to level of evidence (Χ 2 = 2.67, P = 0.263), RCR (S = 618, P = 0.835), or IF (S = 563, P = 0.655). Investigator COIs (and commercial funding of studies) have not significantly influenced the frequency of favorable outcomes or study level of evidence regarding contemporary viscosupplementation for the treatment of knee OA. Studies reporting COIs/industry funding tended to be published in journals with significantly higher impact factors. Results overwhelmingly supported using viscosupplementation to treat knee OA. Level V Systematic Review. • Viscosupplementation may represent a promising treatment modality for knee osteoarthritis. • Wide variation in reported efficacy necessitates further analysis for sources of bias. • Author conflicts and industry funding had no significant effect on study results or conclusions. • Conflicted papers had higher impact factors, yet similar evidence level and relative citation ratio to non-conflicted papers. • Most papers reported favorable outcomes regardless of presence of industry funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The value of an academic conference lies in its ability to engage attendees in ongoing scholarly conversations. Such engagement depends on presentations that are intellectually sound and effectively delivered, but it also requires thoughtful participation by discussants, session chairs, and audience members. Shared understanding of the responsibilities that accompany these roles would help advance the conversation of educational scholarship. By adhering to a few simple principles, participants at AERA's annual meeting could better ensure that the conference lives up to its potential for promoting meaningful dialogue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building fair, equitable, and beneficial partnerships between institutions collaborating in research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and high-income countries (HIC) has become an integral part of research capacity building in global health in recent years. In this paper, we offer an example of an academic collaboration between the University of California Los Angeles, Center for Health Policy and Research (UCLA CHPR) and the University of Philippines, Manila, College of Public Health (UPM CPH) that sought to build an equitable partnership between research institutions. The partnership was built on a project to build capacity for research and produce data for policy action for the prevention and care of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) through primary healthcare in the Philippines. The specific objectives of the project were to: (1) locally adapt the Primary Care Assessment Tool for the Philippines and use the adapted tool to measure facility-level primary care delivery, (2) conduct focus group discussions (FGDs) to gather qualitative observations regarding primary care readiness and capacity, and (3) conduct a comprehensive population-based health survey among adults on NCDs and prior healthcare experience. We describe here the progression of the partnership between these institutions to carry out the project and the elements that helped build a stronger connection between the institutions, such as mutual goal setting, cultural bridging, collaborative teams, and capacity building. This example, which can be used as a model depicting new directionality and opportunities for LMIC-HIC academic partnerships, was written based on the review of shared project documents, including study protocols, and written and oral communications with the project team members, including the primary investigators. The innovation of this partnership includes: LMIC-initiated project need identification, LMIC-based funding allocation, a capacity-building role of the HIC institution, and the expansion of scope through jointly offered courses on global health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Palliative care (PC) has continued to be less available, underutilized, and unintegrated in many of the healthcare systems, especially in Africa. This scoping review synthesized existing published papers on adult PC in Africa, to report the barriers to PC and to assess the methodologies used in these studies. Eight electronic databases and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant studies published between 2005 and 2018. Overall, 42 publications (34 empirical studies and 9 reviews) that reported issues related to barriers to adult PC were selected. Three themes identified were individual-level, system-level, and relational barriers. The studies reviewed predominantly utilized cross-sectional and retrospective study design, underscoring the need for more studies employing qualitative design. Findings highlight the need for health education, training opportunities, more funding, communication, and timely referral. Future works could focus on underlying factors to these barriers and ethno-religious perspectives to PC in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose - To introduce a commemorative collection of articles by colleagues and former students of the late Professor Ross Davies, a leading UK academic in the field of retail management. Design/methodology/approach - Outlines the development of Ross Davies' career and enumerates his particular contributions to the development of academic studies of retailing. Summarises the objectives of each paper in the collection. Findings - The paper identifies the link between the authors of papers and Professor Davies' work. Originality/value - Demonstrates the ways in which an academic was able to relate sound scholarship to the practical needs of retailers, service companies and public sector agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information about several awards presented by the American Society of Naturalists. The President's award of the American Society of Naturalists is given to the best paper that appeared in the journal "American Naturalist" in the preceding calendar year. The Edward Osborne Wilson Naturalist Award was established in 1997 on the occasion of Professor Wilson's retirement in recognition of his lifetime of outstanding contributions in the areas of ecology and evolutionary biology, including the study of social insects, biodiversity, and biophilia. The Sewall Wright Award, which recognizes a senior-level active researcher for significant and continuing contributions to the objectives of the American Society of Naturalists, was awarded in 2005 to Robert E. Ricklefs. The Young Investigators' Prizes recognize outstanding and promising work by investigators who received their doctorates in the three years preceding the application deadline or are in their final year of graduate school. The prizes include presentation of a research paper at the annual meeting of the American Society of Naturalists, reimbursement for travel to the annual meeting, and a $500 honorarium.

Focuses on the research spending of various nations. Output and outcomes from research investments during the 1990s; Quality of research on national scales; Ways of evaluating the quality of scientific research; Number of published research papers and reviews; Countries that top research output and quality evaluation.

Ten years ago, we presented the DeLone and McLean Information Systems (IS) Success Model as a framework and model for measuring the complex-dependent variable in IS research. In this paper, we discuss many of the important IS success research contributions of the last decade, focusing especially on research efforts that apply, validate, challenge, and propose enhancements to our original model. Based on our evaluation of those contributions, we propose minor refinements to the model and propose an updated DeLone and McLean IS Success Model. We discuss the utility of the updated model for measuring e-commerce system success. Finally, we make a series of recommendations regarding current and future measurement of IS success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence based tool developed by OpenAI (California, USA). This systematic review examines the potential of ChatGPT in patient care and its role in medical research. Methods: The systematic review was done according to the PRISMA guidelines. Embase, Scopus, PubMed and Google Scholar data bases were searched. We also searched preprint data bases. Our search was aimed to identify all kinds of publications, without any restrictions, on ChatGPT and its application in medical research, medical publishing and patient care. We used search term "ChatGPT". We reviewed all kinds of publications including original articles, reviews, editorial/ commentaries, and even letter to the editor. Each selected records were analysed using ChatGPT and responses generated were compiled in a table. The word table was transformed in to a PDF and was further analysed using ChatPDF. Results: We reviewed full texts of 118 articles. ChatGPT can assist with patient enquiries, note writing, decision-making, trial enrolment, data management, decision support, research support, and patient education. But the solutions it offers are usually insufficient and contradictory, raising questions about their originality, privacy, correctness, bias, and legality. Due to its lack of human-like qualities, ChatGPT's legitimacy as an author is questioned when used for academic writing. ChatGPT generated contents have concerns with bias and possible plagiarism. Conclusion: Although it can help with patient treatment and research, there are issues with accuracy, authorship, and bias. ChatGPT can serve as a "clinical assistant" and be a help in research and scholarly writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite increases in Indigenous enrolment in post-secondary institutions (PSIs) in British Columbia, Canada, there are significant disparities in Indigenous student access, retention, and success in work-integrated learning (WIL) programs. By analyzing Indigenous-specific WIL literature, this article identifies existing barriers to Indigenous WIL as well as unrealized opportunities to expand and transform WIL approaches and practices. Based on these findings, the paper offers 10 recommendations for the development of resources and strategic Indigenous WIL initiatives, recommendations that also served to guide the creation of a publicly-accessible Indigenous WIL Resource Hub (IRH). However, the literature review also revealed limitations to academic publishing and challenges in institutional reporting. Accounting for these scholarly limitations and recognizing the value of on-the-ground and community-held knowledge, the directives guiding the IRH and shared in this article's conclusions are based on the understanding that initiatives to act on opportunities and address barriers must be needs-based and community-specific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on bias being defined as any tendency preventing unprejudiced consideration of a question. Topics include study design, data collection, data analysis and publication impacting on the validity and reliability of study findings; and comparing primary research studies of drugs or medical devices sponsored by industry with studies with other sources of sponsorship.

In academia, scholarship and research productivity is the lifeblood of success. The question is, "What is the best way to be productive and more forward in a academic career-collaboration or individualism?" Obviously, the final choice is personal. However, for the purpose of this paper, the two sides will be discussed regarding the strengths and weaknesses of each avenue. Recommendations regarding the viability of collaboration and competition will be discussed in relation to personal attributes, career goals, and rank. In addition, a new methodology, tentatively called Layered Narrative, will be piloted with this project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Randomised clinical trials are key to advancing medical knowledge and to enhancing patient care, but major barriers to their conduct exist. The present paper presents some of these barriers.Methods: We performed systematic literature searches and internal European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network (ECRIN) communications during face-to-face meetings and telephone conferences from 2013 to 2017 within the context of the ECRIN Integrating Activity (ECRIN-IA) project.Results: The following barriers to randomised clinical trials were identified: inadequate knowledge of clinical research and trial methodology; lack of funding; excessive monitoring; restrictive privacy law and lack of transparency; complex regulatory requirements; and inadequate infrastructures. There is a need for more pragmatic randomised clinical trials conducted with low risks of systematic and random errors, and multinational cooperation is essential.Conclusions: The present paper presents major barriers to randomised clinical trials. It also underlines the value of using a pan-European-distributed infrastructure to help investigators overcome barriers for multi-country trials in any disease area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper goal was to analyze the technical endowment in terms of machinery in Romania's agriculture in the period 2007-2015 and to identify the main trends and problems which affect performance and competitiveness. In the analyzed period, the park of tractors and machinery increased as follows: tractors by 14.5%, ploughs by 13.9%, cultivators by 11.3%, seeders by 14.6%, combines for cereals by 11.4 and for fodder by 17%, machines for potatoes harvesting by 43.5%, presses for hay and straw by 121.7%, only windrowers and sprayers and dusters declined by 1.2%, respectively, by 2.6%. Despite this slight increase, the structure of agricultural machinery is still an uncorresponding one for keeping pace with new technologies. The utilized agricultural area (UAA) increased and as a result the UAA per tractor declined from 44.5 ha to 41.3, which is also a good aspect. Despite that agricultural production increase, its performance is not supported by mechanization mainly in the small sized holdings. The replacement of the existing old machinery with a high usage degree, whose repairs are costing, is obviously needed and requires substantial financial resources. the continuous growth of farm inputs price and the low price at farm gate for agricultural products do not assure farmers enough income to modernize mechanization. The Romanian Government should allocate a higher percentage from budget to agriculture for improving the park of tractors and agricultural machinery. Also, the financial aid per ha coming from the EU should be equitably divided among member states. Farmers need a better endowment in their farms to apply modern technologies and increase production, quality of agricultural products, economic efficiency and competitiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Major research-reporting statements, such as PRISMA and CONSORT, require authors to provide information about funding. The objectives of this study were (1) to assess the reporting of funding in health policy and systems research (HPSR) papers and (2) to assess the funding reporting policies of journals publishing on HPSR.Methods: We conducted two cross-sectional surveys for papers published in 2016 addressing HPSR (both primary studies and systematic reviews) and for journals publishing on HPSR (both journals under the 'Health Policy and Services' (HPS) category in the Web of Science, and non-HPS journals that published on HPSR). Teams of two reviewers selected studies and abstracted data in duplicate and independently. We conducted descriptive analyses and a regression analysis to investigate the association between reporting of funding by papers and the journal's characteristics.Results: We included 400 studies (200 systematic reviews and 200 primary studies) that were published in 198 journals. Approximately one-third (31%) of HPSR papers did not report on funding. Of those that did, only 11% reported on the role of funders (15% of systematic reviews and 7% of primary studies). Of the 198 journals publishing on HPSR, 89% required reporting of the source of funding. Of those that did, about one-third (34%) required reporting of the role of funders. Journals classified under the HPS category (n = 72) were less likely than non-HPS journals that published HPSR studies (n = 142) to require information on the role of funders (15% vs. 32%). We did not find any of the journals' characteristics to be associated with the reporting of funding by papers.Conclusions: Despite the majority of journals publishing on HPSR requiring the reporting of funding, approximately one-third of HPSR papers did not report on the funding source. Moreover, few journals publishing on HPSR required the reporting of the role of funders, and few HPSR papers reported on that role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Obtaining grant funding is a fundamental component to achieving a successful research career. A successful grant application needs to meet specific mechanistic expectations of reviewers and funders. This paper provides an overview of the importance of grant funding within medical education, followed by a stepwise discussion of strategies for creating a successful grant application for medical education-based proposals. The last section includes a list of available medical education research grants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research councils, universities and funding agencies are increasingly asking for tools to measure the quality of research in the humanities. One of their preferred methods is a ranking of journals according to their supposed level of internationality. Our quantitative survey of seventeen major journals of medical history reveals the futility of such an approach. Most journals have a strong national character with a dominance of native language, authors and topics. The most common case is a paper written by a local author in his own language on a national subject regarding the nineteenth or twentieth century. American and British journals are taken notice of internationally but they only rarely mention articles from other history of medicine journals. Continental European journals show a more international review of literature, but are in their turn not noticed globally. Increasing specialisation and fragmentation has changed the role of general medical history journals. They run the risk of losing their function as international platforms of discourse on general and theoretical issues and major trends in historiography, to international collections of papers. Journal editors should therefore force their authors to write a more international report, and authors should be encouraged to submit papers of international interest and from a more general, transnational and methodological point of view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few studies address publication and outcome reporting biases of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in psychiatry. The objective of this study was to determine publication and outcome reporting bias in RCTs funded by the Stanley Medical Research Institute (SMRI), a U.S. based, non-profit organization funding RCTs in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. We identified all RCTs (n = 280) funded by SMRI between 2000 and 2011, and using non-public, final study reports and published manuscripts, we classified the results as positive or negative in terms of the drug compared to placebo. Design, outcome measures and statistical methods specified in the original protocol were compared to the published manuscript. Of 280 RCTs funded by SMRI between 2000 and 2011, at the time of this writing, three RCTs were ongoing and 39 were not performed. Among the 238 completed RCTs, 86 (36.1%) reported positive and 152 (63.9%) reported negative results: 86% (74/86) of those with positive findings were published in contrast to 53% (80/152) of those with negative findings (P <.001). In 70% of the manuscripts published, there were major discrepancies between the published manuscript and the original RCT protocol (change in the primary outcome measure or statistics, change in a number of patient groups, 25% or more reduction in sample size). We conclude that publication bias and outcome reporting bias is common in papers reporting RCTs in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. These data have major implications regarding the validity of the reports of clinical trials published in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Nursing research is fundamental to driving evidence-based practice and achieving safe outcomes for patients. Underpinning the discussion in this paper are nurse researchers who thought strategically during their undergraduate and postgraduate studies to build a body of credible research influencing patient outcomes and, in so doing, establish their careers. Aim To provide an overview of some of the career essentials that support a transition in role for the beginner or emerging researcher, otherwise known as the early career researcher. Discussion Early career researchers need to acquire research competencies, to get involved in research teams, and to understand the research landscape and the various associated subtleties/vagaries and career trajectories. This is fundamental for establishing their credibility as researchers, and enabling them to undertake research that will influence policy and practice. Conclusion Establishing a research career is challenging, and takes time, effort, patience, perseverance and commitment. For beginner researchers, collegial support and mentoring are essential to support a viable, professional, sustainable, enquiring profession, and a satisfying career. Implications for practice Building individual capabilities and collaborative research teams together is fundamental to research success in adapting to new roles and workplaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research partnerships between high-income countries (HICs) and low- or middle-income countries (LMICs) are a leading model in research capacity strengthening activities. Although numerous frameworks and guiding principles for effective research partnerships exist, few include the perspective of the LMIC partner. This paper draws out lessons for establishing and maintaining successful research collaborations, based on partnership dynamics, from the perspectives of both HIC and LMIC stakeholders through the evaluation of a research capacity strengthening partnership award scheme.Methods: A mixed-method retrospective evaluation approach was used. Initially, a cross-sectional survey was administered to all award holders, which focused on partnership outputs and continuation. Fifty individuals were purposively selected to participate in interviews or focus group discussions from 12 different institutions in HICs and LMICs; the sample included the research investigators, research assistants, laboratory scientists and post-doctoral students. The evaluation collected data on critical elements of research partnership dynamics such as research outputs, nature of the partnership, future plans and research capacity. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data were analysed using an iterative framework approach.Results: The majority of United Kingdom and African award holders stated they would like to pursue future collaborations together. Key aspects within partnerships that appeared to influence this were; the perceived benefits of the partnership at the individual and institutional level such as publication of papers or collaborative grants; ability to influence 'research culture' and instigate critical thinking among mid-career researchers; previous working relationships, for example supervisor-student relationships; and equity within partnerships linked to partnership formation and experience of United Kingdom partners within LMICs. Factors which may hinder development of long term partnerships were also identified such as financial control or differing expectations of partners.Conclusions: This paper provides evidence of what encourages international research partnerships for capacity strengthening to continue past award tenure, from the perspective of researchers in high and LMICs. Although every partnership is unique and individual experiences subjective, this paper provides extension and support of key principles and mechanisms that can contribute to successful research partnerships between researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information systems (IS) researchers have intensively investigated information and communication technology (ICT) adoption. However, very little research has analyzed ICT adoption in the Arab region. This paper aims to review research related to ICT adoption in the Arab world to identify the current state of this research area and provide direction for future research. Fifty articles that addressed ICT adoption in three Arabic countries, namely United Arab Emirates (UAE), Jordan, and Egypt, were found and selected for review. These articles were analyzed based on a research framework that included eight elements: the selected Arabic countries, applied theoretical models, adoption factors, type of adopted ICT, applied research methods, level of adoption, publication year, and quality of publications (i.e. journals ranking). This paper discusses the current trends of ICT adoption research in the Arab region based on the findings of this analysis and provides two main directions for future research: conceptual and theoretical research development and methodological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Undertaking a research project is mandatory for MD Psychiatry trainees. The present study was undertaken to assess the type of research activity being undertaken as part of MD Psychiatry dissertation, and its contribution to national and international literature. Materials and Methods: Three medical colleges supplied the data about the topic, names of the supervisor and the candidate, collaboration, funding accrued, and publication details of MD-based research carried out between years 2000 and 2010 inclusive; 95 records were collected for the final analysis. The details of the publications provided were cross-checked on the internet, which would have taken care of missed publications as well. Results: Most studies were single-point assessment clinical studies. Only 2 studies had been funded, 11 had collaboration with other departments within the same institute, and 5 had inter-institute collaborations. Majority of the studies were not published. Only 30 were published as full paper and 9 as abstracts. Of these 30 full publications, only 3 were published in journals having JCI impact factor values (1.4, 1.3, and 1.4, respectively). Conclusions: The main finding of this pilot study was that MD-based research has low contribution to the national and international literature, and those articles which are published are in low impact journals. Suggestions for modifying this state of affairs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient "engagement" in health research broadly refers to including people with lived experience in the research process. Although previous reviews have systematically summarized approaches to engaging older adults and their caregivers in health research, there is currently little guidance on how to meaningfully engage older adults with multimorbidity as research partners. Objectives: This paper describes the lessons learned from a patient-oriented research program, the Aging, Community and Health Research Unit (ACHRU), on how to engage older adults with multimorbidity as research partners. Over the past 7-years, over 40 older adults from across Canada have been involved in 17 ACHRU projects as patient research partners. Methods: We developed this list of lessons learned through iterative consensus building with ACHRU researchers and patient partners. We then met to collectively identify and summarize the reported successes, challenges and lessons learned from the experience of engaging older adults with multimorbidity as research partners. Results: ACHRU researchers reported engaging older adult partners across many phases of the research process. Five challenges and lessons learned were identified: 1) actively finding patient partners who reflect the diversity of older adults with multimorbidity, 2) developing strong working relationships with patient partners, 3) providing education and support for both patient partners and researchers, 4) using flexible approaches for engaging patients, and 5) securing adequate resources to enable meaningful engagement. Conclusion: The lessons learned through this work may provide guidance to researchers on how to facilitate meaningful engagement of this vulnerable and understudied subgroup in the patient engagement literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors announce that beginning in January 22, the journal "European Journal of Public Health" will be published fully open access. They talk about the changes in the publishing landscape as of February 2021, the strong international momentum to increase the transition to open access, and concern on the cost of publishing.

Copyright of Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia is the property of Universidad de Antioquia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objectives There are many barriers impeding the conduct of high-quality emergency care research, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Several of these barriers were originally outlined in 2013 as part of the Academic Emergency Medicine Global Health and Emergency Care Consensus Conference. This paper seeks to establish a broader consensus on the barriers to emergency care research globally and proposes a comprehensive array of new recommendations to overcome these barriers. Methods An electronic survey was conducted of a purposive sample of global emergency medicine research experts from around the world to describe the major challenges and solutions to conducting emergency care research in low-resource settings and rank them by importance. The Global Emergency Medicine Think Tank Clinical Research Working Group at the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2016 Annual Meeting utilized a modified Delphi technique for consensus-based decision making to categorize and expand upon these barriers and develop a comprehensive array of proposed solutions. Results The working group identified four broad categories of barriers to conducting emergency care research globally, including 1) the limited availability of research personnel, particularly those with prior research training; 2) logistic barriers and lack of standardization of data collection; 3) ethical barriers to conducting research in resource-limited settings, particularly when no local institutional review board is available; and 4) the relative dearth of funding for global emergency care research. Proposed solutions included building a diverse and interdisciplinary research team structured to promote mentorship of junior researchers, utilizing local research assistants or technologic tools such as telemedicine for language translation, making use of new tools such as mobile health ( mHealth) to standardize and streamline data collection, identifying alternatives to local institutional review board approval and the use of community consent when appropriate, and increased advocacy for global emergency care research funding. Conclusions Significant barriers to the conduct of high-quality global emergency care research persist, and innovative strategies need to be adopted to promote and grow the field of global emergency care research. This paper provides a global consensus on the most important barriers identified, as well as recommendations for cost-effective strategies for overcoming these barriers with the overall goal of promoting high-quality research and improving emergency care worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Publicly funded biomedical and health research is expected to achieve the best return possible for taxpayers and for society generally. It is therefore important to know whether such research is more productive if concentrated into a small number of 'research groups' or dispersed across many.Methods: We undertook a systematic rapid evidence assessment focused on the research question: do economies of scale and scope exist in biomedical and health research? In other words, is that research more productive per unit of cost if more of it, or a wider variety of it, is done in one location? We reviewed English language literature without date restriction to the end of 2014. To help us to classify and understand that literature, we first undertook a review of econometric literature discussing models for analysing economies of scale and/or scope in research generally (not limited to biomedical and health research).Results: We found a large and disparate literature. We reviewed 60 empirical studies of (dis-)economies of scale and/or scope in biomedical and health research, or in categories of research including or overlapping with biomedical and health research. This literature is varied in methods and findings. At the level of universities or research institutes, studies more often point to positive economies of scale than to diseconomies of scale or constant returns to scale in biomedical and health research. However, all three findings exist in the literature, along with inverse U-shaped relationships. At the level of individual research units, laboratories or projects, the numbers of studies are smaller and evidence is mixed. Concerning economies of scope, the literature more often suggests positive economies of scope than diseconomies, but the picture is again mixed. The effect of varying the scope of activities by a research group was less often reported than the effect of scale and the results were more mixed.Conclusions: The absence of predominant findings for or against the existence of economies of scale or scope implies a continuing need for case by case decisions when distributing research funding, rather than a general policy either to concentrate funding in a few centres or to disperse it across many. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Brazilian Journal of Kineanthropometry & Human Performance is the property of Brazilian Journal of Kineanthropometry & Human Performance and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common aging-associated postoperative complication that has received increasing attention in the context of the aging global population and the number of articles published on POD is gradually increasing. This study aimed to quantify the basic information of scholarly publications on POD and identify the most impactful literature, trends, and hotspots in POD research. Materials and methods: We searched articles on POD through the Science Citation Index Expanded databases published from 2000 to 2020. Bibliographic information, including year, country, authorship, type, journal, funding, affiliations, subject areas, and hotspots, was collected for further analysis. Results: A total of 2,114 articles on POD from 2000 to 2020 were identified. The highest number of studies (n = 748) were published in the United States, comprising the most total citations (13,928), followed by China (n = 278), and Germany (n = 209). Inouye, Sharon K. was the most productive author, with 66 publications on POD. The Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published the highest number of articles (n = 80), with the most total citations (4,561) and average (57.01), followed by Anesthesia and Analgesia (n = 52), and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (n = 43). Harvard University was the most productive institute, with the highest H-index (n = 46) and highest degree centrality (n = 191). The top hotspots in the field of POD during this period were "elderly," "cardiac surgery," "cognitive impairment," "hip fracture," and "intensive care unit." Conclusion: This study provides an overview of developments in the field of POD over the past 20 years using bibliometric analysis. Overall, research on POD has flourished worldwide. The United States (US) has a relatively high academic impact owing to its productive expertise and institutions in this field. Despite much research illustrating the diagnosis and management of POD in clinical practice, more basic research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To question the efficacy of 'gold' open access to published articles. Background Open access is unrestricted access to academic, theoretical and research literature that is scholarly and peer-reviewed. Two models of open access exist: 'gold' and 'green'. Gold open access provides everyone with access to articles during all stages of publication, with processing charges paid by the author(s). Green open access involves placing an already published article into a repository to provide unrestricted access, with processing charges incurred by the publisher. Data sources This is a discussion paper. Review methods An exploration of the relative benefits and drawbacks of the 'gold' and 'green' open access systems. Discussion Green open access is a more economic and efficient means of granting open access to scholarly literature but a large number of researchers select gold open access journals as their first choices for manuscript submissions. This paper questions the efficacy of gold open access models and presents an examination of green open access models to encourage nurse researchers to consider this approach. Conclusion In the current academic environment, with increased pressures to publish and low funding success rates, it is difficult to understand why gold open access still exists. Green open access enhances the visibility of an academic's work, as increased downloads of articles tend to lead to increased citations. Implications for research/practice Green open access is the cheaper option, as well as the most beneficial choice, for universities that want to provide unrestricted access to all literature at minimal risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]