Search

In a collaborative research process, the participation of interdisciplinary researchers and multi-sectoral stakeholders supports the co-creation, translation, and exchange of new knowledge. Following a scoping review methodology, we explored the collaborative research processes in the specific context of environment and human health research. Initially, our literature search strategy identified 1,328 publications. After several phases of reviewing and applying screening criteria to titles, abstracts, and full text, 45 publications were selected for final review. Data were charted by different topics and then collated, summarized, and analyzed thematically. From the different experiences and research approaches analyzed, we identified comprehensive details of the key components, facilitators, challenges, and best practices that impact the collaborative research process. Specifically, we identified the following seven emerging themes: (a) allocating time and resources, (b) addressing disciplinary and sectoral issues, (c) building relationships, (d) ensuring representation, (e) embedding participation in the research, (f) supporting ongoing collaboration, and (g) developing knowledge translation and exchange. [This article was co-written with the DoMiNO Team.]

Background: Evidence from new health technologies is growing, along with demands for evidence to inform policy decisions, creating challenges in completing health technology assessments (HTAs)/systematic reviews (SRs) in a timely manner. Software can decrease the time and burden by automating the process, but evidence validating such software is limited. We tested the accuracy of RobotReviewer, a semi-autonomous risk of bias (RoB) assessment tool, and its agreement with human reviewers. Methods: Two reviewers independently conducted RoB assessments on a sample of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and their consensus ratings were compared with those generated by RobotReviewer. Agreement with the human reviewers was assessed using percent agreement and weighted kappa (K). The accuracy of RobotReviewer was also assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve in comparison to the consensus agreement of the human reviewers. Results: The study included 372 RCTs. Inter-rater reliability ranged from K = -0.06 (no agreement) for blinding of participants and personnel to K = 0.62 (good agreement) for random sequence generation (excluding overall RoB). RobotReviewer was found to use a high percentage of "irrelevant supporting quotations" to complement RoB assessments for blinding of participants and personnel (72.6%), blinding of outcome assessment (70.4%), and allocation concealment (54.3%). Conclusion: RobotReviewer can help with risk of bias assessment of RCTs but cannot replace human evaluations. Thus, reviewers should check and validate RoB assessments from RobotReviewer by consulting the original article when not relevant supporting quotations are provided by RobotReviewer. This consultation is in line with the recommendation provided by the developers.

Pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs) collect and provide information on chemicals released to the environment or otherwise managed as waste. They support the public's right-to-know and provide useful information in gauging performance of facilities, sectors, and governments. The extent to which these data have been used in research, particularly in relation to human health, has not been documented. In this scoping review our objective was to learn from scholarly literature the extent and nature of the use of PRTR data in human health research. We performed literature searches (1994-2011) using various search engines and (or) key words. Articles selected for review were chosen following predefined criteria, to extract and analyze data. One hundred and eighty four papers were identified. Forty investigated possible relations with health outcomes: 33 of them identified positive associations. The rest explored other uses of PRTR data. Papers identified challenges, some imputable to the PRTR. We conclude that PRTR data are useful for research, including health-related studies, and have significant potential for prioritizing research needs that can influence policy, management, and ultimately human health. In spite of their inherent limitations, PRTRs represent a perfectible, unique useful source, whose application to human health research appears to be underutilized. Developing strategies to overcome these limitations could improve data quality and increase its utility in future environmental health research and policy applications. Key words: pollutant release and transfer registries, PRTR, human health, industrial emissions, toxic chemical releases. Les registres sur le relachement et le transfert des polluants (RRTPs) rassemblent et fournissent des informations sur les substances chimiques relachees dans l'environnement ou traites autrement comme dechets. Ils supportent le droit public a l'information et fournissent de l'information utile pour etablir la performance des installations, des secteurs et des gouvernements. On n'a jamais documente la frequence avec laquelle ces donnees ont ete utilisees en recherche, surtout en relation avec la sante humaine. Dans cette revue exploratoire, l'objectif des auteurs vise a apprendre a partir de la litterature scientifique, l'etendue et la nature de l'utilisation des donnees du RRTP dans les recherches sur la sante humaine. Il ont effectue une revue de la litterature (1994-2011) en utilisant divers moteurs de recherche et mots cles. Ils ont choisi les articles a selectionner selon des criteres predefinis, afin d'extraire et analyser les donnees. Ils ont identifie 184 publications. Quarante d'entre elles portent sur les relations possibles avec des questions de sante, dont 33 comportent des associations positives. Les autres explorent d'autres usages des donnees RRTP. Les auteurs concluent que les donnees RRTP sont utiles en recherche, incluant des etudes reliees a la sante et montrent un potentiel significatif pour etablir des priorites de besoins en recherche pouvant influencer les politiques, l'amenagement et ultimement la sante humaine. En depit de leurs limitations, les RRTP representent une source unique et perfectible d'information, dont les applications a la recherche en sante humaine semblent sous-utilisees. La mise en place de strategies pouvant surmonter ces limitations pourrait ameliorer la qualite des donnees et augmenter leur utilite dans les recherches futures sur la sante et l'environnement ainsi que les applications des politiques. [Traduit par la Redaction] Mots-cles: registres sur le relachement et le transfert des polluants, RRTP, sante humaine, emissions industrielles, relachement de substances chimiques toxiques., Introduction Pollutant release and transfer register (PRTR) is the generic term used to describe a type of publically available database that contains information on the quantities of toxic chemicals or [...]