Search

Background: Preprints are scientific manuscripts that are made available on open-access servers but are not yet peer-reviewed. Although preprints are becoming more prevalent, uptake is not optimal. Understanding researchers' opinions and attitudes toward preprints is valuable to optimize their use. Understanding knowledge gaps and researchers' attitudes toward preprinting can assist stakeholders, such as journals, funding agencies, and universities, to use preprints more effectively. Here, we aimed to collect perceptions and behaviours regarding preprints across an international sample of biomedical researchers., Methods: Corresponding authors of articles published in biomedical research journals were identified from a random sample of journals from the MEDLINE database. Their names and email addresses were extracted to invite them to our anonymous, cross-sectional survey, which asked participants questions about their knowledge, attitudes, and opinions regarding preprinting., Results: The survey was completed by 730 respondents providing a response rate of 3.20% and demonstrated a wide range of attitudes and opinions about preprints with authors from various disciplines and career stages worldwide. Most respondents were familiar with the concept of preprints but most had not previously posted one. The lead author of the project and journal policy had the greatest impact on decisions to post a preprint, whereas employers/research institutes had the least impact. Supporting open science practices was the highest ranked incentive, while increasing authors' visibility was the highest ranked motivation for publishing preprints., Conclusions: Although many biomedical researchers recognize the benefits of preprints, there is still hesitation among others to engage in this practice. This may be due to the general lack of peer review of preprints and little enthusiasm from external organizations such as journals, funding agencies, and universities. Future work is needed to determine optimal ways to improve researchers' attitudes through modifications to current preprint systems and policies., Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed., (Copyright: © 2024 Ng JY et al.)

Transparency within biomedical research is essential for research integrity, credibility, and reproducibility. To increase adherence to optimal scientific practices and enhance transparency, we propose the creation of a journal transparency tool (JTT) that will allow users to obtain information about a given scholarly journal's operations and transparency policies. This study is part of a program of research to obtain user preferences to inform the proposed JTT. Here, we report on our consultation with clinicians and researchers. This mixed-methods study was conducted in two parts. The first part involved a cross-sectional survey conducted on a random sample of authors from biomedical journals. The survey asked clinicians and researchers about the inclusion of a series of potential scholarly metrics and user features in the proposed JTT. Quantitative survey items were summarized with descriptive statistics. Thematic content analysis was employed to analyze text-based responses. Subsequent focus groups used survey responses to further explore the inclusion of items in the JTT. Items with less than 70% agreement were used to structure discussion points during these sessions. Participants voted on the use of user features and metrics to be considered within the journal tool after each discussion. Thematic content analysis was conducted on interview transcripts to identify the core themes discussed. A total of 632 participants (5.5% response rate) took part in the survey. A collective total of 74.7% of respondents found it either 'occasionally, 'often', or 'almost always' difficult to determine if health information online is based on reliable research evidence. Twenty-two participants took part in the focus groups. Three user features and five journal tool metrics were major discussion points during these sessions. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts resulted in six themes. The use of registration was the only item to not meet the 70% threshold after both the survey and focus groups. Participants demonstrated low scholarly communication literacy when discussing tool metric suggestions. Our findings suggest that the JTT would be valuable for both researchers and clinicians. The outcomes of this research will contribute to developing and refining the tool in accordance with researchers and clinicians., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Scientists who manage research laboratories often face ethical dilemmas related to conflicts between their different roles, such as researcher, mentor, entrepreneur, and manager. It is not known how often uncertainty about conflicting role obligations leads scientists to engage in unethical conduct, but this probably occurs more often than many people would like to think. In this paper, we reflect on ethical decision-making in scientific laboratory management with special attention to how different roles create conflicting obligations and expectations that may produce moral uncertainty and lead to violations of research norms, especially when combined with self-interest and other factors that increase the risk of misbehavior. We also offer some suggestions and guidance for investigators and research institutions.

Serious and continuing research noncompliance and integrity violations undermine the quality of research and trust in science. When researchers engage in these behaviors, institutional officials (IOs) often develop corrective action plans. Ideally, such plans address the root causes so noncompliance or research integrity violations discontinue. The aim of this study was to identify what IOs perceive as causes and action plan activities typically prescribed. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 47 IOs at research institutions across the U.S. including: institutional review board and institutional animal care and use committee chairs and directors, chief research officers, research compliance and integrity officers, and institutional conflicts of interest chairs and directors. The most common root causes identified were: 1) lack of knowledge or training, 2) failure to provide research team supervision, and 3) researcher attitudes toward compliance. The most common action plan activities include: 1) retraining in compliance or research integrity, 2) follow-up and hands-on involvement with the researcher, and 3) mandated oversight or mentoring. Because the most commonly identified action plan activities fail to adequately address the majority of root causes, our findings suggest a need for IOs to rethink existing approaches to action plan development to more effectively target root causes.

There has been growing attention toward including people with lived and living experience (PWLLE) with substance use, substance use disorders, and recovery in public-facing activities. The goals of including PWLLE in sharing their perspectives often include demonstrating that recovery is possible, destigmatizing and humanizing people who have substance use experiences, and leveraging their lived experience to illuminate a particular topic or issue. Recently, the National Council for Mental Wellbeing issued a set of guidelines entitled, "Protecting Individuals with Lived Experience in Public Disclosure," which included a "Lived Experience Safeguard Scale." We offer the present commentary to bolster some of the ideas presented by the Council and to articulate suggested changes to this guidance, with the goal of reducing unintentional gatekeeping and stigma. Specifically, we offer that there are numerous problems with the recommendation to only invite people who have "five or more years of sustained recovery" to contribute to public discourse. The idea of perceived stability after five years of abstinence is not new to us or the field. We suggest that this idea excludes people who have experienced the present rapidly changing substance use landscape, people who have briefly returned to use, some young people, and people with living experience who also can valuably contribute to public discourse. We offer alternative guidelines to the National Council for Mental Wellbeing and others seeking to promote practices that are inclusive to the diversity of PWLLE., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic forced Principal Investigators (PIs) to make rapid and unprecedented decisions about ongoing research projects and research teams. Confronted with vague or shifting guidance from institutional administrators and public health officials, PIs nonetheless had to decide whether their projects were "essential," who could conduct on-site "essential" research, how to continue research activities by remote means if possible, and how to safely and effectively manage personnel during the crisis. Based on both narrative comments from a federally sponsored survey of over a thousand NIH- and NSF-funded PIs and their personnel, as well as follow-up interviews with over 60 survey participants, this study examines various ways PI and institutional decisions raised issues of procedural and distributive fairness. These fairness issues include the challenge of treating research personnel fairly in light of their disparate personal circumstances and inconsistent enforcement of COVID-19-related directives. Our findings highlight aspects of fairness and equitability that all PIs and research administrators should keep in mind for when future research disruptions occur.

Background: Scholarly publications are important indicators of research productivity and investigator development in Centers of Biomedical Research Excellence (COBREs). However, no information is available to describe implementation and evaluation of writing development programs within COBREs. Therefore, this paper aimed to evaluate the first year of a campus-wide COBRE-supported writing program., Methods: A convergent parallel mixed-methods design (QUAN + QUAL) was used. All writing program participants were invited to complete post-participation surveys, and a subgroup was selected using purposive sampling to complete individual semi-structured interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize survey data, and qualitative content analysis was employed to analyze interview data. Self-determination theory served as the theoretical framework by which themes were developed and interpreted., Results: Professional staff, post-doctoral fellows, and faculty from all academic ranks (n = 29) participated in the writing program during its first year. Survey respondents (n = 18, response rate 62%) rated social support (89%), group accountability (89%), hearing group members' writing goals (78%), receiving group advice (67%), and setting a weekly writing schedule (56%) as beneficial program components. Participants rated program benefits such as breaking away from other responsibilities, staying on task with writing goals, and receiving social support as most beneficial. During interviews, participants (n = 14) described five major themes related to the benefits received: 1) belonging to a community of writers; 2) managing writing-related emotions; 3) improved productivity; 4) establishing helpful writing habits; and 5) improved motivation for scholarly writing., Conclusions: This first-year programmatic evaluation demonstrates the writing program's effectiveness as a campus-level development resource supported by a research center. Both survey and interview data affirmed that participants perceived autonomy, competence, and relatedness were supported through participation in the writing program. Participants placed particular emphasis on the writing program's successful development of a community of scholarly writers., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Franks et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Institutions are increasingly employing algorithms to provide performance feedback to individuals by tracking productivity, conducting performance appraisals, and developing improvement plans, compared to traditional human managers. However, this shift has provoked considerable debate over the effectiveness and fairness of algorithmic feedback. This study investigates the effects of negative performance feedback (NPF) on the attitudes, cognition and behavior of medical researchers, comparing NPF from algorithms versus humans. Two scenario-based experimental studies were conducted with a total sample of 660 medical researchers (algorithm group: N1 = 411; human group: N2 = 249). Study 1 analyzes the differences in scientific misconduct, moral disengagement, and algorithmic attitudes between the two sources of NPF. The findings reveal that NPF from algorithms shows higher levels of moral disengagement, scientific misconduct, and negative attitudes towards algorithms compared to NPF from humans. Study 2, grounded in trait activation theory, investigates how NPF from algorithms triggers individual's egoism and algorithm aversion, potentially leading to moral disengagement and scientific misconduct. Results indicate that algorithm aversion triggers individuals' egoism, and their interaction enhances moral disengagement, which in turn leads to increased scientific misconduct among researchers. This relationship is also moderated by algorithmic transparency. The study concludes that while algorithms can streamline performance evaluations, they pose significant risks to scientific misconduct of researchers if not properly designed. These findings extend our understanding of NPF by highlighting the emotional and cognitive challenges algorithms face in decision-making processes, while also underscoring the importance of balancing technological efficiency with moral considerations to promote a healthy research environment. Moreover, managerial implications include integrating human oversight in algorithmic NPF processes and enhancing transparency and fairness to mitigate negative impacts on medical researchers' attitudes and behaviors., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Human challenge trials (HCTs) may accelerate the development of treatments and vaccines, and deliver novel insights into the course and consequences of infection. However, HCTs are contentious because they involve purposely exposing volunteers to infection. Consultation with the public and other stakeholders is essential for understanding how HCTs can be most ethically and acceptably pursued. Previous research has found public support for COVID-19 HCTs, but little research has considered public attitudes towards HCTs in principle and the various factors making a trial more or less acceptable. Empirical data on the attitudes of research personnel is also missing. We generated an online survey covering overarching support/opposition towards HCTs, as well as factors of importance for deciding whether or not an HCT is ethically acceptable. Our sample of the US public represents the responses of 1500 participants sampled via Prolific, poststratified to be representative of the general US adult population. We additionally collected a convenience sample of 33 research personnel engaged in phase III clinical trials for infectious diseases. Estimates for the US public suggest substantial support for using HCTs to develop new vaccines, new treatments, and knowledge about diseases, with similarly high support among research personnel. The most important factors in determining acceptability of an HCT were the risk to participants and their comprehension of this risk. The general public, in particular, appear relatively unconcerned about participants' motivations, and favor higher payment in accordance with risk. This study adds to a growing body of public consultation surrounding HCTs, demonstrating high levels of support for their use in principle-not just in relation to COVID-19. The importance attributed to various ethically-relevant factors can help in designing HCTs with high public acceptance., Competing Interests: This work was supported by an ACX Grant to 1Day Sooner, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that advocates for people who participate and want to participate in high-impact medical studies, including HCTs. Rethink Priorities was contracted by 1Day Sooner to execute this research project and collected and analyzed data independently of 1Day Sooner. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials., (Copyright: © 2024 Elsey et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Discipline-based education research-a field of research that investigates teaching and learning within STEM disciplines-has emerged over the last few decades to improve the quality of STEM education worldwide. Simple qualitative questions concerning the career backgrounds and motivations of the individuals who conduct this research have yet to be explored. Here, we surveyed and interviewed discipline-based education researchers about their career trajectories and motivations to pursue this field of research. We focused specifically on recruiting biology education research faculty members at colleges and universities. We used the Social Influence Model and Social Cognitive Career Theory to develop and analyze survey and semi-structured interview questions. Findings revealed participant career paths all began with disciplinary undergraduate and graduate-level biology education. We noticed participants began conducting biology education research due to their values and personal interests, while additionally being swayed by contextual factors. Specifically, participants valued biology education research because it allowed them to make a difference in the world and provided them with a community open to change and collaboration. Biology education research allowed them to explore their interests in teaching and evidence-based approaches to education. These values and interests were impacted by contextual factors, including discoveries of opportunities, positive (or negative) experiences with mentorship, exposure to evidence-based teaching literature, considerations of salary and job security, and experiences with gender-based discrimination. Our results underscore the importance of harnessing individual values and interests-especially those centered on evidence-based teaching practices and making a difference in the world-while fostering a positive and supportive academic environment. This research reveals pathways toward discipline-based education research careers. Additionally, this research can inform the development of graduate programs and funding opportunities., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to disclose., (Copyright: © 2024 Driessen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Transgender individuals often face stigma, discrimination, and various forms of abuse, which negatively impact their mental and physical health. They face a significantly greater risk of HIV, with a higher prevalence than the general population. Despite these challenges, transgender people have limited access to healthcare due to violence, legal barriers, and societal stigma, further exacerbated in countries like Uganda, where transgender identities are criminalized. Therefore, this study explored the lived experiences of HIV researchers working with gender minority populations in criminalizing contexts., Methods: This was an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) qualitative study. Twelve (12) research team members at all levels were involved in the study. Participants had less than five years of involvement in HIV research among gender minority populations. Data were collected using field notes, reflective journals, documentation from daily team debriefing sessions, and semi-structured interviews. The analysis used NVivo software., Results: Positive experiences, barriers, and challenges were captured. The positive experiences were 'respecting cultural diversity', 'expanding networks', 'addressing misconceptions' and 'finding allies'. The barriers included 'experiencing stigma', 'lengthy research processes', 'feeling isolated', 'fearing for personal safety', 'unexpected logistical costs', and 'criminalization of sexual and gender minorities'. The key themes that emerged from the lessons learned were: 'dealing with gatekeepers', 'diversity and sensitivity training', 'leveraging networks', 'meaningful community engagement', 'reflexivity', 'ensuring safety', 'equal partnership', 'giving feedback' and 'awareness of legal implications'., Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of cultural sensitivity, community engagement, and reflexivity in research design and implementation. The findings emphasize the need for innovative strategies to navigate legal, social, and logistical barriers that researchers and participants face. Despite these challenges, the study demonstrates that meaningful collaboration with community members and building trust can significantly enhance the research process and outcomes. Future research should continue to explore these strategies while addressing ethical and safety concerns., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aim: We investigated the levels of anxiety and the factors influencing it among Japanese nursing researchers before and after engaging in dispatch support activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study also tested the relationships between pre- and post-relief anxiety and their enhancing and buffering factors., Methods: A web-based survey was conducted with 9832 members from the Japan Academy of Nursing Science, covering 15 items related to participant attributes such as age and disaster relief qualifications, factors affecting anxiety about support activities such as the content and duration of one activity, and the level of anxiety before and after activities. After performing multiple regression analyses on the effects of the attributes and the factors influencing anxiety before and after support activities, path analysis was conducted on the adopted independent variables to examine their influence on anxiety before and after support activities., Results: Of the 886 participants, 82.3% were affiliated with educational institutions and 94.8% had no qualifications in disaster relief. Most of the support involved vaccination and activities at health centers. The relationship between pre- and post-relief activities and factors influencing anxiety constituted a high goodness-of-fit, with health center assistance being both a direct and indirect reinforcer of post-relief anxiety., Conclusions: Participants expressed anxiety enhanced by activities at the health center both before and after support activities in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Intervention research should examine anxiety-buffering and -enhancing factors, and a support system to respond to rapidly increasing medical needs is necessary., (© 2024 The Author(s). Japan Journal of Nursing Science published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Academy of Nursing Science.)

Though community-based participatory research (CBPR) boasts a robust history, challenges to conducting such work ethically and equitably remain. Common difficulties, such as addressing power dynamics and navigating mutuality, are heightened when doing participatory research with young people, specifically youth participatory action research (YPAR). Additional obstacles also emerge when engaging in such research as junior scholars, who lack tenure and occupy more precarious positions within academia. To elucidate these hurdles and illuminate the labor required to traverse them, we draw upon our experiences as early career academics facilitating YPAR projects with young people who have been historically marginalized. Employing an autoethnographic approach, we utilize qualitative data sources including field notes and reflective memos, from which three themes emerged after iterative rounds of reflection and review. Through descriptive vignettes, we unpack how we attended to positionality and power, interrogated shared benefit and mutuality, and engaged with the unique complexities of working with young people-as informed by our specific identities. In examining our experiences and their alignment with prior research, we aim to expand upon existing literature that has explored best practices within CBPR, but with a specific focus on youth-adult partnerships and consideration of the realities of junior scholars. It is our hope that this discussion will support early career researchers who wish to conduct YPAR but are unsure how to do so given their particular positionalities, by making visible the often-invisible work involved., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Aim: User participation is a prerequisite for receiving research funding in healthcare in Norway. Despite many positive benefits, studies report challenges from users' and researchers' perspectives. Limited knowledge exists concerning researchers' experiences in scenarios where the users are professionals within healthcare and research. The aim of this retrospective study was to explore and reflect on personal experiences as researchers from a process of planning and developing research questions for a PhD project, following the James Lind Alliance guidelines, which were a requirement for funding. We focused on how the process of collaboration with a specific group of users influenced the researchers' sense of selves., Design and Method: We used a qualitative design based on collaborative autoethnography, exploring personal experiences from a sociocultural point of view. Two of the three researchers in the team recollected their experiences from the user involvement process while applying the James Lind Alliance guidelines. We used different data sources to develop two autoethnographic narratives. The narratives were analysed using thematic analysis., Results: The autoethnographic narratives demonstrate the complexity of user involvement from the researchers' perspectives. We identified four themes in the analysis: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, competing paradigms, hierarchy and dual roles. The accounts illustrated the researchers' ambivalence within the process, indicating that they feared a loss of control over the direction of the research project. The narratives visualised a struggle to appear as credible researchers, illustrating how the involvement of a specific group of users and adherence to a specific guideline for user involvement influenced the researchers' experiences of their roles and identities in the collaboration., Conclusion: The results point to the relevance of the sociocultural backdrop; researchers might become frontline providers of policy implementation in research, balancing tensions between regulatory constraints, user involvement and researchers' professional identity and research ideals, when a specific, detailed procedure for user involvement is required., Patient or Public Contribution: Two user panels comprising participants from clinical practice, education and research, along with a service user, collaborated in the planning and development of research questions for a PhD project. This autoethnographic study elaborates this process., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected research activities across various fields. This study aimed to determine nursing researchers' concerns about research activities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan and subsequent changes brought on by it. For this study, we conducted descriptive statistics and text mining analyses using data from two surveys conducted by the Japan Academy of Nursing Science (JANS) in the early days of the pandemic (first survey: mid-2020) and after 2 years (second survey: early 2022). Concerns about research activities were observed in 89% and 80% of the nursing researchers in the first and second surveys, respectively. Furthermore, concerns about "Difficulty in collecting research data" and "Content and quality of your research" were stronger in the second survey. Text mining analyses revealed that in the first survey, they were concerned about environmental changes and restrictions when proceeding with research during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was unfamiliar at the time. In the second survey, after overcoming environmental changes in the early stages of the pandemic, nursing researchers' concerns shifted to anxiety about the future, such as concerns about degree acquisition, employment and career advancement, and research results. The current study highlights various concerns among nursing researchers regarding research activities that have evolved over time during the pandemic. Academic societies must flexibly construct support measures for nursing researchers when a new infectious disease occurs. Such measures should be sensitive to the prevailing social circumstances and the evolving needs of researchers., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

In a rapidly changing healthcare environment, we need a robust evidence base to inform effective education and training. This study aimed to examine factors perceived to determine career progression in clinical education research in the UK. Six online focus groups were conducted, with 35 participants from a range of medical, dental, nursing, and allied health professions who identified as aspiring or early career clinical education researchers. Transcripts underwent thematic analysis. Two themes and associated subthemes were constructed to illustrate perceived factors impacting on career development: (1) A cultural challenge from clinical norms. Challenges included differences between the epistemological assumptions of biomedical and clinical research, and the underlying philosophy of education research, which is more closely aligned with the knowledge generation of the social sciences. This led to difficulty communicating the impact of education research to patient care. There were also blurred boundaries between education delivery and research, with the latter lacking a clearly defined group identity. (2) Structures, systems and relationships for career progression. Practical considerations included time and funding (or lack thereof), the opportunity to undertake formal training, networking and role models. This research highlights a number of systemic barriers and facilitators to careers in clinical education research and offers targets of intervention to enable a sustainable academic workforce in clinical education research.

Background: Underrepresentation of care home residents in research has resulted in a poorer evidence base for health care in care homes. Fewer opportunities to take part in research, as well as assumptions made by others about their interest or wishes, creates challenges for residents' inclusion in research. Early discussions about research preferences and wishes may be beneficial. This qualitative study aimed to explore stakeholders' views about how care home residents can be supported to communicate their wishes about research participation., Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 stakeholders: care home residents (n = 5), relatives (n = 5), care home staff (n = 5), other health and social care professionals who work with care homes (n = 6), and care home researchers (n = 4). Interviews were conducted virtually or face-to-face and data were analysed using thematic analysis., Results: Views about resident research participation, the barriers and facilitators to their inclusion, and the role of advance research planning were iteratively organized into three themes: (i) We're of no value to research; (ii) Research is difficult; and (iii) Advance research planning: good in theory, challenging in practice. Subthemes were also identified, and findings were discussed with a Patient and Public Involvement group for additional reflections., Conclusions: Stakeholders identified a number of barriers to including care home residents in research, including knowing their preferences about research. The development of interventions to facilitate communication that can be adapted to individuals' requirements are needed to support discussions and decision-making with care home residents about wishes and preferences for future research participation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Phenomenological researchers are obliged to grasp the epistemological and ontological differences between the Husserlian and Heideggerian branches of phenomenology to avoid misappropriating phenomenological terms or mischaracterizing study design. To that end, we spell out the key differences between both phenomenological traditions as background for describing the indelible role that the researcher's background assumptions, or fore-structure, play in interpretive studies. We draw on our four studies to illustrate how we traversed the hermeneutic circle to disclose, challenge, and refine the personal, cultural, clinical, and scientific assumptions hidden in our fore-structures. Our reflections highlight how understanding evolves, not by bracketing or disengaging ourselves from the phenomena we study, but by engaging in an open dialog that seeks understanding as lived by patients and families., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Qualitative social scientists working in medical faculties have to meet multiple expectations. On the one hand, they are expected to comply with the philosophical and theoretical expectations of the social sciences. On the other hand, they may also be expected to produce publications which align with biomedical definitions and framings of quality. As interdisciplinary scholars, they must handle (at least) two sets of journal editors, peer reviewers, grant-awarding panels, and conference audiences. In this paper, we extend the current knowledge base on the 'dual expectations' challenge by drawing on Orlikowski and Yates' theoretical concept of communicative genres. A 'genre' in this context is a format of communication (e.g. letter, email, academic paper, and conference presentation) aimed at a particular audience, having a particular material form and socio-linguistic style, and governed by both formal requirements and unwritten social rules. Becoming a member of any community of practice involves becoming familiar with its accepted communicative genres and adept in using them. Academic writing, for example, is a craft that is learned through participation in the social process of communicating one's ideas to one's peers in journal articles and other formats. In this reflective paper, we show how the concept of a communicative genre can sensitise us to the conflicting and often dissonant expectations and rule systems governing different academic fields. We use this key concept to suggest ways in which the faculty can support early-career researchers to progress in careers which straddle qualitative social science and medical science., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Introduction: Long COVID is a life-limiting condition that affects 65 million people worldwide. It devastates lives with uncertain illness trajectories, and yet, there are many research uncertainties as there is a lack of understanding of its causes, effective treatments and management plans. We set out to identify current research priorities for people with Long COVID, carers, healthcare professionals and researchers., Methods: A systematic literature review and previous Long COVID priority-setting exercises identified three broad under-researched areas of Long COVID research within the fields of Public Health and Health Services Research: symptoms; managing day-to-day life; and the emotional impact of Long COVID. We disseminated an elicitation survey that asked for research questions in these areas; responses were analysed and summarised into 42 research questions. A survey was then disseminated, asking respondents to prioritise these 42 questions. Workshops were held with people with Long COVID, carers, healthcare professionals and researchers to analyse responses and agree the top 10 priorities., Results: The top priorities in order were pharmacological treatment of Long COVID; understanding the pathophysiology; nonpharmacological symptom management; improving public and professional understanding of Long COVID; understanding of the long-term risks of Long COVID; improving financial and social supports; improving understanding of postviral syndromes; diagnostics; service redesign/pathways; and the well-being of children with Long COVID., Conclusion: Four years into the pandemic, there is an emphasis on the need for research on treatment, understanding and support for people living with Long COVID., Patient and Public Contribution: People with Long COVID and carers were involved in the study design, survey design, dissemination, data analysis, interpretation and reviewing and editing the manuscript., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A goal of many science communicators is to foster trust in scientists and their work. This study investigates if existing textual resources that scientists create in the course of their regular activities can be improved to enhance perceptions of scientists as trustworthy. Building on Mayer et al.'s integrative model of organizational trust, we examine how communicating benevolence through short biographies can affect trustworthiness perceptions using a 3 (degree of benevolence information: high, unspecified, low) × 3 (research area: crop genetics, corn and soy genetics, biotechnology use) survey design. We find that the degree of benevolence information significantly influences perceptions of benevolence and integrity, as well as willingness to trust, with these effects being consistent across different research areas. However, the degree of benevolence communicated had no significant effect on the perceived competence of the scientists. These findings underscore the importance of highlighting benevolence in communication to positively influence trustworthiness perceptions, thus offering insights for science communication practices.

Researchers, organizations, and governments are trying to foster research integrity. In France, the law recently permitted the appointment of research integrity officers (RIOs) in each university, to promote research integrity and handle misconducts. Since we assumed that having adequate bodies to deal with research integrity could foster research integrity, we wanted to understand how this might work more concretely. We interviewed 11 newly appointed RIOs in medical schools about how they perceive their role and cope with their responsibilities. We analyzed data following the Paillé and Muchielli's thematic analysis approach. The RIOs report a strong and interesting appropriation of concepts of research integrity, which allows them to warrant their role. Although they report that they did not seek their appointment, they show a real desire to cope with their responsibilities. They are willing to build a role which is currently poorly defined. They assert their legitimacy through their position and experience. They identify themselves with a preventive and corrective role, in an altruistic way. They emphasize their independent and collective role, congruent with other actors. The RIOs intend to be enablers of a responsible conduct of research. These results are encouraging about the potential impact of RIOs to foster research integrity.

Community-engaged research is increasingly recognized for its potential to advance health equity. The ability to conduct such research in the United States is predicated on the completion of human subjects protection courses; however, prior studies suggest that many of these required courses may not adequately accommodate the varied skillsets and backgrounds of community members involved with carrying out research. The present study explores community researchers' (CRs') experiences with a human subjects protection course frequently required by U.S. academic institutions. Six CRs involved in conducting a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project on Black women's pregnancy-related experiences were interviewed about their completion of the required course. Across multiple interviews, CRs noted challenges with the training length, competing external demands, module readability, content relevancy, end-of-module quizzes, and technology requirements. Despite such obstacles, CRs still valued the opportunity to learn and felt more knowledgeable and capable post-course completion. Recommendations for course improvement were explored. University requirements for human subjects protection trainings may place an undue burden on community members preparing to conduct research, impede academic-community partnerships, and discourage the initiation and continuation of community-engaged studies. Course alternatives that are tailored to CRs as well as community-academic partnerships could enhance the feasibility, relevance, and effectiveness of such trainings.

Problem: There is an increasing awareness of the prevalence of obstetric violence within maternity care and that some women and birthing people are at greater risk of experiencing violence and harm., Background: Supporting self-agency for women and birthing people in maternity care may be a way of addressing the disparities in vulnerability to violence and harm., Aim: To explore researchers' perspectives of self-agency for women from different backgrounds, what inhibits and prevents self-agency, and how self-agency can be enabled., Methods: A qualitative research design was undertaken underpinned by a reproductive justice framework. Group interviews were held with researchers working with perinatal women/birthing people with histories and experiences of violence and abuse. Reflexive thematic analysis using Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory was undertaken., Findings: 12 participants took part in two group interviews. Two themes were developed: 'defining self-agency' and 'ecological influences on self-agency'., Discussion: The findings identify how self-agency should not be perceived as an intrinsic attribute, but rather is underpinned by exogenous and endogenous influences. Whether and how self-agency is enacted is determined by interacting factors that operate on a micro, meso and macro level perspective. Self-agency is undermined by factors including immigration policies and sociocultural perspectives that can lead to under-resourced and judgemental care, other intersectional factors can also lead to some individuals being more vulnerable to violence and harm., Conclusion: Implications from this work include strategies that emphasise woman-centred care, staff training and meaningful organisational change to optimise positive health and wellbeing., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The Dutch graphic novel Naasten , about palliative family caregiving, is the product of an interdisciplinary collaboration between researchers and two comic artists. This paper aims to present lessons, reflections and practical recommendations for other researchers interested in adopting (comic) arts-based research methods, in which artistic methods are used as novel ways for generating, analysing, interpreting or representing research data.Our project started with the goal of translation: we aimed at representing research findings into a more accessible, visual and textual form to stimulate discussion and reflection outside academia on moral challenges in family care. This was inspired by comics' hypothesised potential to show complex and embodied experiences, thus enabling more understanding in readers and offering powerful science communication tools. Although this goal of translation was realised in our project, we learnt along the way that the project could have benefited from a more explicit focus on interdisciplinarity from the start and by monitoring the interdisciplinary learning opportunities throughout the project. The following issues are important for any art-research collaboration: (1) an interest in and acknowledgement of each other's (potentially diverging) aims and roles: all parties should-from the start-commit themselves to interdisciplinary collaboration and to exploring the added value of using each other's methods, thereby finding a common methodological ground and language; (2) a continuous discussion of the sometimes contrasting approaches between artists and researchers: differences in using theory and story may result in different criteria for creating good art. When balancing scientific and aesthetic aims, the trustworthiness of the art work should remain an important criterion; (3) an awareness of the potential of interdisciplinary collaboration to offering new perspectives on one's scientific data collection and analysis, for example, providing other conceptualisations or indicating blind spots, provided that artists are involved in the early phases of research., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MH declared that she is coauthor of the graphic novel on which this study was based. The other authors declared no potential conflicts of interest concerning the research, authorship and/or publication of this article., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: to describe researchers' experience in collecting data from families of femicide victims., Methods: this descriptive, qualitative study took the form of an experience report and was conducted in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. It involved documentary consultation, training researchers, scheduling and conducting interviews, and using a field diary to record the researchers' perceptions and experiences., Results: the descriptions and photographs of the crime scene were both distressing and impactful for the researchers. The mementos of the victims (including clothing, objects, and childhood photos) shown by their families were deeply moving. Identifying with these experiences facilitated listening to the stories told by the relatives. It was essential to maintain a non-judgmental attitude, acknowledge the loss, provide support for the suffering, and demonstrate a willingness to help., Final Considerations: the experience encompassed both theoretical and methodological aspects that were planned and executed in data collection, fostering the development of skills and sensitivity towards the cases. Beyond knowledge and preparation, researchers are expected to exhibit ethical conduct and empathetic capacity.

Background: Research dissemination is essential to accelerate the translating of evidence into practice. Little is known about dissemination among Chinese public health researchers. This study aimed to explore the understanding and practices of disseminating research findings and to identify barriers and facilitators that influence dissemination activities to non-research audiences., Methods: This study deployed an exploratory qualitative design with purposive and snowball sampling. One focus group with 5 participants and 12 in-depth interviews were conducted with participants working in diverse fields from universities (n = 10), the National Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (n = 4), the Chinese National Cancer Center (n = 1), the Chinese National Center for Cardiovascular Disease (n = 1), and China office of a global research institute (n = 1) from May to December 2021 to reach saturation. Data were initially analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. The designing for dissemination (D4D) logic model was then used to organize themes and subthemes. Two coders independently coded all transcripts and discussed disparities to reach a consensus., Results: Out of 17 participants, 12 misunderstood the concept of dissemination; 14 had disseminated to non-research audiences: 10 to the public, 10 to practitioners, and 9 to policymakers. We identified multiple barriers to dissemination to non-research audiences across four phases of the D4D logic model, including low priority of dissemination, limited application of D4D strategies, insufficient support from the research organizations, practice settings, and health systems, and overemphasis on academic publications., Conclusions: There was a lack of understanding and experience of dissemination, indicating a lack of emphasis on active dissemination in China. We provide implications for raising awareness, building capacity, facilitating multidisciplinary collaboration, providing incentives and infrastructure, changing climate and culture, establishing communication and executive networks, and accelerating systematic shifts in impact focus., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

As the world around us changes, so too do the bonds that people have with their environment. These environmental bonds, or Senses of Place (SoP), are a key component of social-ecological systems (SESs). SoP has social, psychological and economic value, it impacts how people use and behave in an environment and how they respond to changes such as those caused by anthropogenic pressures. Despite this connection, the consideration and application of SoP in the management of SESs remains relatively under explored. This study takes the first step in addressing that gap by investigating the perceptions of researchers in the field. We achieve this by interviewing SoP researchers from around the globe to elucidate whether they see SoP as valuable for the management of SES. We also identify their perspectives on the barriers to, and enablers of, incorporating SoP into policy and management. Results show while researchers do see the value in incorporating SoP into policy, there are a range of barriers that impact this, most notably, the intangible nature of the phenomena and shortcomings of current governance systems. Results also identify a range of enablers that could improve the incorporation of SoP into policy-particularly through improved engagement and communication between stakeholders. These findings represent a first step in the formal inclusion of this social value into the management of SES., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Duggan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: An embedded single case-study design was used to explore the experiences of men in rural New Zealand accessing mental health services. It is essential for researchers to acknowledge positionality in case study research and the lead author used reflexive practice to acknowledge his values and beliefs., Aim: To explore and demonstrate the reflexive process of the lead author's position as an inside researcher., Discussion: Three groups were involved in the research: men with mental health challenges, their partners, and mental health clinicians. The article presents the initial research through memos and diarying in the context of current literature., Conclusion: Reflexivity is essential for ensuring the research process is complete and biases are identified. Positionality exists on a continuum and it is critical for researchers to be honest with themselves, the topic and the group being investigated, to show respect for the participants and the people they represent, as well as to be committed to revealing the truth., Implications for Practice: Insider research has the potential to bridge the gap between academia and practice. It facilitates the transfer of research knowledge directly to practitioners, leading to more evidence-informed decision-making and practice., Competing Interests: None declared, (© 2024 RCN Publishing Company Ltd. All rights reserved. Not to be copied, transmitted or recorded in any way, in whole or part, without prior permission of the publishers.)

We reflect on our fieldwork experience from the Climate Heat Maternal and Neonatal Health Africa (CHAMNHA) project in Kilifi, Kenya, which focused on studying the effects of extreme heat on women during pregnancy, delivery and the post-partum period. We describe the ethical and practical challenges encountered, highlighting valuable lessons learned. We propose potential solutions to address issues concerning the reciprocity of vulnerable participants and the provision of childcare and food for accompanying children. Further, we address challenges related to engaging specific participants, interview cancellations attributed to extreme temperatures and discuss the perpetuation of inequalities by ethics and academic institutions. With the anticipated increase in research at the intersection of climate change-induced heat exposure and its impacts on human populations, research institutions and ethics committees in low- and middle-income countries are responsible for instituting guidelines that account for the risks for the subjects under study and the field researchers., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Aims: To describe a reflexive account of a mental health nurse as researcher undertaking a mixed methods study as part of a doctoral degree, with women in a secure forensic hospital., Design: A discursive paper that draws upon the primary author's experience of dual roles as a mental health nurse and a novice researcher, and relevant literature pertaining to positionality and reflexivity in the context of conducting mixed methods research., Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted within a secure forensic hospital in Australia, to identify factors associated with the frequency and duration of seclusion for women and, to explore their experiences of seclusion. Notes and a reflective diary were used to demonstrate the reflexive approach and strategies used throughout the study design and data collection stages of the research., Results: Women in the secure forensic hospital setting often have complex histories and experiences and are considered a vulnerable group, which can add additional challenges when undertaking research with this population. As a doctoral student with clinical experience in mental health undertaking research in the forensic hospital setting with women, positionality and the connection with reflexivity requires exploration to understand self and the influence on research. This understanding along with identified strategies to enhance reflexivity, supports the management of the dual nurse as researcher roles to enhance all stages of the research process., Conclusion: Doctoral nursing candidates undertaking clinical research in their area of clinical practice and at the location of previous employment, may experience challenges in relation to identity and the dichotomy of roles. Further challenges can be posed when research involves complex populations and/or controversial practices. Support to balance role conflict and maintain reflexivity is critical to understanding the role of self in research and to enhance credibility., Implications for the Profession And/or Clinical Practice: Women are a complex, yet minority population in forensic mental health settings, however the numbers of women being admitted to services is increasing. Future research may consider the use of the strategies explored here to enhance the reflexive process, and support future researchers in this field to conduct research that aims to support an often-misheard population to better support health outcomes., Patient or Public Involvement: There was no patient or public contribution to this paper, however the study in which this paper is based on, is grounded in the experience of patients (women)., (© 2024 The Author(s). Nursing Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Health care workers (HCWs) are often impacted by distressing situations during patient care and can experience the second victim phenomenon (SVP). Addressing an adequate response, training, and increasing awareness of the SVP can increase HCWs' well-being and ultimately improve the quality of care and patient safety., Objective: This study aims to describe and evaluate a multimodal training organized by the European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims to increase knowledge and overall awareness of SVP and second victim programs., Methods: We implemented a multimodal training program, following an iterative approach based on a continuous quality improvement process, to enhance the methodology and materials of the training program over the duration of 2 years. We conducted web-based surveys and group interviews to evaluate the scope and design of the training, self-directed learning materials, and face-to-face activities., Results: Out of 42 accepted candidates, 38 (90%) participants attended the 2 editions of the Training School program. In the second edition, the level of participants' satisfaction increased, particularly when adjusting the allocated time for the case studies' discussion (P<.001). After the multimodal training, participants stated that they had a better awareness and understanding of the SVP, support interventions, and its impact on health care. The main strengths of this Training School were the interdisciplinary approach as well as the contact with multiple cultures, the diversity of learning materials, and the commitment of the trainers and organizing team., Conclusions: This multimodal training is suitable for different stakeholders of the health care community, including HCWs, clinical managers, patient safety and quality-of-care teams, academicians, researchers, and postgraduate students, regardless of their prior experience with SVP. Furthermore, this study represents a pioneering effort in elucidating the materials and methodology essential for extending this training approach to similar contexts., (©Sofia Guerra-Paiva, José Joaquín Mira, Reinhard Strametz, Joana Fernandes, Victoria Klemm, Andrea Madarasova Geckova, Bojana Knezevic, Eva Potura, Sandra Buttigieg, Irene Carrillo, Paulo Sousa. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 30.08.2024.)

The ethical decision making of researchers has historically been studied from an individualistic perspective. However, researchers rarely work alone, and they typically experience ethical dilemmas in a team context. In this mixed-methods study, 67 scientists and engineers working at a public R1 (very high research activity) university in the United States responded to a survey that asked whether they had experienced or observed an ethical dilemma while working in a research team. Among these, 30 respondents agreed to be interviewed about their experiences using a think-aloud protocol. A total of 40 unique ethical incidents were collected across these interviews. Qualitative data from interview transcripts were then systematically content-analyzed by multiple independent judges to quantify the overall ethicality of team decisions as well as several team characteristics, decision processes, and situational factors. The results demonstrated that team formalistic orientation, ethical championing, and the use of ethical decision strategies were all positively related to the overall ethicality of team decisions. Additionally, the relationship between ethical championing and overall team decision ethicality was moderated by psychological safety and moral intensity. Implications for future research and practice are discussed., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

We move beyond discussing the desirability and feasibility of bridging the research-practice gap to introducing an identity perspective to explore how Chinese management researchers make sense of the research-practice gap and what kinds of career identities are constructed. We conducted a qualitative study among 34 Chinese management researchers working at or studying for a PhD at research-oriented business schools in China. The findings show that management researchers in typical Chinese higher education institutions prefer constructing a single identity (i.e., professional, scholar, or knowledge worker identity) rather than a hybrid identity such as "academic-practitioner" as studies of their Western counterparts suggest. Moreover, before seeking and emulating role models to construct their desired career identities, researchers in China studying management reflexively search for referent groups by identifying either with a narrow disciplinary group (US mainstream management researchers or traditional intellectuals) or a broad group of knowledge workers. Furthermore, this study delineates how researchers with varying career identity narratives adopt corresponding identity work strategies (i.e., redefinition, defense, and distance) suggesting that identity work strategies do not always lead to achieving or preserving positive identity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Liu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM) has become an increasingly popular supportive therapy option for patients with cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate how researchers and clinicians in the oncology field perceive CAIM., Methods: We conducted an online, anonymous, cross-sectional survey for researchers and clinicians who have published their work in oncology journals that are indexed in MEDLINE. The link to the survey was sent to 47, 991 researchers and clinicians whose contact information was extracted from their publications. The survey included various multiple-choice questions, and one open-ended question at the end to allow for any additional comments., Results: 751 respondents completed the survey, and they mostly identified themselves as researchers (n = 329, 45.13%), or as both researchers and clinicians (n = 332, 45.45%) in the field of oncology. Over half of the respondents perceive mind-body therapies (n = 354, 54.97%) to be the most promising CAIM category with regards to the prevention, treatment, and/or management of diseases related to oncology, and many respondents agreed that most CAIM therapies are safe (n = 218, 37.39%), and that clinicians should receive training on CAIM therapies via formal (n = 225, 38.59%) and supplemental education (n = 290, 49.83%). However, many respondents were unsure when asked if most CAIM therapies are effective (n = 202, 34.77%)., Conclusions: The findings from this study demonstrated great current interest in the use of CAIM in oncology. This information can serve as a foundation for conducting additional research and creating customized educational materials for researchers and clinicians in oncology., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Large language models including GPT-4 (OpenAI) have opened new avenues in health care and qualitative research. Traditional qualitative methods are time-consuming and require expertise to capture nuance. Although large language models have demonstrated enhanced contextual understanding and inferencing compared with traditional natural language processing, their performance in qualitative analysis versus that of humans remains unexplored., Objective: We evaluated the effectiveness of GPT-4 versus human researchers in qualitative analysis of interviews with patients with adult-acquired buried penis (AABP)., Methods: Qualitative data were obtained from semistructured interviews with 20 patients with AABP. Human analysis involved a structured 3-stage process-initial observations, line-by-line coding, and consensus discussions to refine themes. In contrast, artificial intelligence (AI) analysis with GPT-4 underwent two phases: (1) a naïve phase, where GPT-4 outputs were independently evaluated by a blinded reviewer to identify themes and subthemes and (2) a comparison phase, where AI-generated themes were compared with human-identified themes to assess agreement. We used a general qualitative description approach., Results: The study population (N=20) comprised predominantly White (17/20, 85%), married (12/20, 60%), heterosexual (19/20, 95%) men, with a mean age of 58.8 years and BMI of 41.1 kg/m 2 . Human qualitative analysis identified "urinary issues" in 95% (19/20) and GPT-4 in 75% (15/20) of interviews, with the subtheme "spray or stream" noted in 60% (12/20) and 35% (7/20), respectively. "Sexual issues" were prominent (19/20, 95% humans vs 16/20, 80% GPT-4), although humans identified a wider range of subthemes, including "pain with sex or masturbation" (7/20, 35%) and "difficulty with sex or masturbation" (4/20, 20%). Both analyses similarly highlighted "mental health issues" (11/20, 55%, both), although humans coded "depression" more frequently (10/20, 50% humans vs 4/20, 20% GPT-4). Humans frequently cited "issues using public restrooms" (12/20, 60%) as impacting social life, whereas GPT-4 emphasized "struggles with romantic relationships" (9/20, 45%). "Hygiene issues" were consistently recognized (14/20, 70% humans vs 13/20, 65% GPT-4). Humans uniquely identified "contributing factors" as a theme in all interviews. There was moderate agreement between human and GPT-4 coding (κ=0.401). Reliability assessments of GPT-4's analyses showed consistent coding for themes including "body image struggles," "chronic pain" (10/10, 100%), and "depression" (9/10, 90%). Other themes like "motivation for surgery" and "weight challenges" were reliably coded (8/10, 80%), while less frequent themes were variably identified across multiple iterations., Conclusions: Large language models including GPT-4 can effectively identify key themes in analyzing qualitative health care data, showing moderate agreement with human analysis. While human analysis provided a richer diversity of subthemes, the consistency of AI suggests its use as a complementary tool in qualitative research. With AI rapidly advancing, future studies should iterate analyses and circumvent token limitations by segmenting data, furthering the breadth and depth of large language model-driven qualitative analyses., (©Kevin Danis Li, Adrian M Fernandez, Rachel Schwartz, Natalie Rios, Marvin Nathaniel Carlisle, Gregory M Amend, Hiren V Patel, Benjamin N Breyer. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 21.08.2024.)

Scientific research requires taking risks, as the most cautious approaches are unlikely to lead to the most rapid progress. Yet, much funded scientific research plays it safe and funding agencies bemoan the difficulty of attracting high-risk, high-return research projects. Why don't the incentives for scientific discovery adequately impel researchers toward such projects? Here, we adapt an economic contracting model to explore how the unobservability of risk and effort discourages risky research. The model considers a hidden-action problem, in which the scientific community must reward discoveries in a way that encourages effort and risk-taking while simultaneously protecting researchers' livelihoods against the vicissitudes of scientific chance. Its challenge when doing so is that incentives to motivate effort clash with incentives to motivate risk-taking, because a failed project may be evidence of a risky undertaking but could also be the result of simple sloth. As a result, the incentives needed to encourage effort actively discourage risk-taking. Scientists respond by working on safe projects that generate evidence of effort but that don't move science forward as rapidly as riskier projects would. A social planner who prizes scientific productivity above researchers' well-being could remedy the problem by rewarding major discoveries richly enough to induce high-risk research, but in doing so would expose scientists to a degree of livelihood risk that ultimately leaves them worse off. Because the scientific community is approximately self-governing and constructs its own reward schedule, the incentives that researchers are willing to impose on themselves are inadequate to motivate the scientific risks that would best expedite scientific progress., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Gross, Bergstrom. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: People with disabilities are underrepresented in higher education, facing systematic obstacles such as inaccessible communication and physical environments and difficulties obtaining accommodations. This study aims to shed light on barriers to accessibility and disability inclusion in research institutions through confidential qualitative interviews with researchers with disabilities., Methods: We recruited participants via virtual flyers. Eligibility criteria included working in the United States (U.S.) as researchers that had applied for grant funding (last five years), and self-identifying as having a disability. We offered participants (total n = 35) the option of either semi-structured one-on-one live or written interviews based on their preference. Two study team members analyzed written and live responses using thematic analysis to identify themes., Results: Themes included identity/visibility, career trajectories, accessibility, accommodations, bias, representation, and inclusion. Some participants reported not disclosing their disabilities at work or during hiring processes due to fear of negative perceptions from peers or potential employers. Experiences around stigma and bias were noted both in professional relationships and when interacting with disability service offices, underscoring difficulties and delays in processes to secure accommodations. Respondents highlighted the lack of disability inclusion and low representation of people with disabilities in academia and elevated the importance of self-advocacy and of role models and mentors in shaping career pathways for future researchers with disabilities., Conclusion: Researchers with disabilities encounter systematic barriers at academic institutions, and lack of acknowledgement and research on these experiences has held back institutional and policy changes. To reduce disparities for researchers with disabilities, academic leadership must allocate resources to address ableism, create more inclusive environments, and raise standards beyond compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Castro et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Questionable research practices (QRP) are believed to be widespread, but empirical assessments are generally restricted to a few types of practices. Furthermore, conceptual confusion is rife with use and prevalence of QRPs often being confused as the same quantity. We present the hitherto most comprehensive study examining QRPs across scholarly fields and knowledge production modes. We survey perception, use, prevalence and predictors of QRPs among 3,402 researchers in Denmark and 1,307 in the UK, USA, Croatia and Austria. Results reveal remarkably similar response patterns among Danish and international respondents (τ = 0.85). Self-reported use indicates whether respondents have used a QRP in recent publications. 9 out of 10 respondents admitted using at least one QRP. Median use is three out of nine QRP items. Self-reported prevalence reflects the frequency of use. On average, prevalence rates were roughly three times lower compared to self-reported use. Findings indicated that the perceived social acceptability of QRPs influenced self-report patterns. Results suggest that most researchers use different types of QRPs within a restricted time period. The prevalence estimates, however, do not suggest outright systematic use of specific QRPs. Perceived pressure was the strongest systemic predictor for prevalence. Conversely, more local attention to research cultures and academic age was negatively related to prevalence. Finally, the personality traits conscientiousness and, to a lesser degree, agreeableness were also inversely associated with self-reported prevalence. Findings suggest that explanations for engagement with QRPs are not only attributable to systemic factors, as hitherto suggested, but a complicated mixture of experience, systemic and individual factors, and motivated reasoning., Competing Interests: NO authors have competing interests., (Copyright: © 2024 Schneider et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Researchers, who play a crucial role in knowledge production, deal with various emotions in their challenging work environment. Their personality might affect how well they manage their emotions, but their moods could help counteract these effects. This study aims to investigate whether researchers' moods influence the connection between their personality and emotional intelligence. 7,463 Spanish researchers replied to an online survey. Responses analysed through partial least squares structural equation modelling show significant positive relationships between the big five personality traits (openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and emotional stability) and emotional intelligence. In addition, positive affect positively mediates the relationships between each of the personality traits and emotional intelligence, and negative affect mediates the same relationships but negatively. The importance of managing emotional states to regulate emotional experiences in the work of researchers is discussed., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Hernando-Jorge et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Community engagement (CE) is pertinent to ethically and scientifically rigorous infectious disease clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, there are critiques that CE is not properly embedded in research processes and that there is uncertainty about what CE entails. The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of CE in infectious disease clinical trials in SSA, specifically factors affecting CE and existing strategies for engaging with communities., Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 20 community and clinical trial (CT) stakeholders who worked in SSA. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis., Results: Themes are as follows: 1) Communities are abandoned research-entities-a disconnect between scientific teams and communities was observed and knowledge translation was not prioritised at the community-level. 2) Us and them: community engagement teams vs investigators-CE teams expressed that researchers did not account for CE processes and often did not involve CE staff in their planning, and felt that their roles were not valued. 3) Ethical considerations: concerns and gaps-there were concerns that procedures were not standardised and that ethics processes were not adhered to. 4) Opportunities for improved CE practices-training needs were expressed, including for standardised practices, ethics, and for developing a holistic understanding of collaborating with communities., Conclusion: CE role players require intensive training to ensure ethical CE and that communities are treated with dignity. This includes 1) using collaborative strategies involving research and CE staff, 2) protocol-adherence that recognises CE as pertinent, 3) viewing communities as complex and building relationships that are sustainable, and 4) ensuring that knowledge translation is considered at a community-level. Further research is necessary to investigate potential training programmes that integrate these elements., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Späth, Schmidt. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)