scholarly journals How practitioners between bench and bedside evaluate biomedical translation?

Author(s):  
Arno Simons ◽  
Barbara Hendriks ◽  
Martin Reinhart ◽  
Faten Ahmed

Abstract While translational research (TR) aims at changing regulatory and organizational practices in the biomedical field, surprisingly little is known about how practitioners in the lab or the clinic think about translation. Addressing this gap, we present results from a Q-methodological study on the meanings and values associated with translation held by researchers, clinicians, and clinician scientists at two major German biomedical research institutions implementing TR strategies. We identify eight different collective understandings of translation, with respect to both where primary translational problems are located and what the most immediate and effective measures should be. Our findings suggest that there may not be a one-fits-all solution for improving translation and that general regulatory and organizational measures may be less effective than measures addressing specific audiences and their specific viewpoints. TR does, however, work well as an umbrella term in stimulating and orchestrating a productive interaction between various viewpoints, practices, and contexts.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arno Simons ◽  
Barbara Hendriks ◽  
Martin Reinhart ◽  
Faten Ahmed

Given that translational research (TR) aims at changing regulatory and organizational practices in the biomedical field, surprisingly little is known about how those who are actually supposed to practice translation in the lab or the clinic think about it. Addressing this gap, we present results from a q-methodological study on the meanings and values associated with translation held by researchers and clinicians at two major German biomedical research institutions implementing TR strategies. We identify eight different collective understandings of translation in practice, with respect to both where primary translational problems are located and what the most immediate and effective measures should be. Our findings suggest that there may not be a one-fits-all solution for improving translation and that general regulatory and organizational measures may be less effective than measures addressing specific audiences and their specific viewpoints.


ILAR Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cory F Brayton ◽  
Kelli L Boyd ◽  
Jeffrey L Everitt ◽  
David K Meyerholz ◽  
Piper M Treuting ◽  
...  

Abstract This issue of ILAR Journal focusses on pathology and pathologists in biomedical research, more specifically in preclinical translational research involving (nonhuman) animals, emphasizing academic settings. Considerations in study design and planning to maximize benefit from pathologists and pathology resources are reviewed. Adjunctive technologies including molecular techniques, digital pathology, and imaging are highlighted. Additional considerations regarding safety and regulatory concerns, and veterinary clinical trials are reviewed as well. Pathology has been fundamental to understanding clinical disease, remains fundamental to diagnosing disease, and is required in drug and device development. Broader integration of pathology expertise and well-designed pathology investigations have much to offer research rigor and reproducibility, and successful translation from biomedical research.


Author(s):  
Josephine Johnston ◽  
Naomi Scheinerman

This chapter reviews the two main concerns about financial relationships with industry: that they could conflict with research-related obligations leading to biased or flawed research and an incomplete research record, and that they could undermine trust in biomedical research, researchers, and research institutions. We show that these concerns are valid, and that they persist in the U.S., despite a gradual tightening over the past decade of rules and regulations regarding financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. The threat that financial interests can pose to research integrity should be of special interest to psychiatry for two reasons: they are prevalent in this field, and they pose heightened risks due to the nature of psychiatry itself. Finally, we recommend that psychiatry—and individual research psychiatrists—take more seriously the threat posed by financial relationships with industry, and work together to develop additional strategies for avoiding and managing financial conflicts of interest.


F1000Research ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Ballabeni ◽  
Andrea Boggio ◽  
David Hemenway

Basic research in the biomedical field generates both knowledge that has a value per se regardless of its possible practical outcome and knowledge that has the potential to produce more practical benefits. Policies can increase the benefit potential to society of basic biomedical research by offering various kinds of incentives to basic researchers. In this paper we argue that soft incentives or “nudges” are particularly promising. However, to be well designed, these incentives must take into account the motivations, goals and views of the basic scientists. In the paper we present the results of an investigation that involved more than 300 scientists at Harvard Medical School and affiliated institutes. The results of this study suggest that some soft incentives could be valuable tools to increase the transformative value of fundamental investigations without affecting the spirit of the basic research and scientists’ work satisfaction. After discussing the findings, we discuss a few examples of nudges for basic researchers in the biomedical fields.


eLife ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry R Bourne

Biomedical research in the US will become unsustainable unless scientists and research institutions start to question certain assumptions they have long taken for granted.


2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Baum ◽  
Christian R. Bauer ◽  
Thomas Franke ◽  
Harald Kusch ◽  
Marcel Parciak ◽  
...  

AbstractIn this opinion paper we provide an overview of some challenges concerning data provenance in biomedical research. We reflect current literature and depict some examples of existing implicit or explicit provenance aspects in some standard data types in translational research. Furthermore, we assess the need of further data provenance standardization in biomedical informatics. Basic data provenance should provide a recall about the origin of the data, transformation process steps, support replication and presentation of the data. Even though usable concepts for the documentation of data provenance can be found in other fields as early as 2005, the penetration rate in biomedical projects and in the biomedical literature is quite low. The awareness for the necessity of basic data provenance has to be raised, the education of data managers has to be further improved.


Author(s):  
Corinna Klingler ◽  
Magdaléna von Jagwitz-Biegnitz ◽  
Ronny Baber ◽  
Karl-Friedrich Becker ◽  
Edgar Dahl ◽  
...  

AbstractBiobanks are important infrastructures facilitating biomedical research. After a decade of rolling out such infrastructures, a shift in attention to the sustainability of biobanks could be observed in recent years. In this regard, an increase in the as yet relatively low utilisation rates of biobanks has been formulated as a goal. Higher utilisation rates can only be achieved if the perspectives of potential users of biobanks—particularly researchers not yet collaborating with biobanks—are adequately considered. To better understand their perspectives, a survey was conducted at ten different research institutions in Germany hosting a centralised biobank. The survey targeted potential users of biobank services, i.e. researchers working with biosamples. It addressed the general demand for biosamples, strategies for biosample acquisition/storage and reasons for/against collaborating with biobanks. In total, 354 researchers filled out the survey. Most interestingly, only a minority of researchers (12%) acquired their biosamples via biobanks. Of the respondents not collaborating with biobanks on sample acquisition, around half were not aware of the (services of the) respective local biobank. Those who actively decided against acquiring biosamples via a biobank provided different reasons. Most commonly, respondents stated that the biosamples required were not available, the costs were too high and information about the available biosamples was not readily accessible. Biobanks can draw many lessons from the results of the survey. Particularly, external communication and outreach should be improved. Additionally, biobanks might have to reassess whether their particular collection strategies are adequately aligned with local researchers’ needs.


2018 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 1032-1042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Dzięgiel ◽  
Paulina Szczurek ◽  
Jacek Jura ◽  
Marek Pieszka

The advances in translational biomedical research, especially in genetic engineering, created new opportunities to trace the courses of human diseases and develop effective therapeutic methods. There remains, however, a growing demand for appropriate animal models for the precise evaluation of the efficacy and safety of new drugs or therapeutic concepts. Thus far, rodent models have been most widely used in translational research; however, since they do not perfectly reflect the human disease phenotype, transgenic pigs are increasingly being utilized as animal models. Thanks to the anatomical and physiological similarities between pigs and humans, swine are considered to be one of the most valuable animal models used in preclinical studies, including nutritional, metabolic and cardiovascular research. The resemblances involve the gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, urinary, respiratory, skeletal muscle and immune systems, as wells as body size, body composition and the omnivorous food choice. In addition, pigs are characterized by high fertility and fecundity, as well as the ease of use and low maintenance costs. Importantly, the existing efficient genetic engineering techniques enable relatively easy generation of tailored porcine models of human disease. One should be aware, however, of some physiological differences between humans and pigs to correctly interpret induced toxicological changes. The article provides an overview of current techniques for genetic modification of pigs, as well as the use of swine models in translational research exemplified by xenotransplantation, metabolic and coronary heart disease, and the gastrointestinal motility studies.


10.2196/25379 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. e25379
Author(s):  
Goran Muric ◽  
Kristina Lerman ◽  
Emilio Ferrara

Background Gender imbalances in academia have been evident historically and persist today. For the past 60 years, we have witnessed the increase of participation of women in biomedical disciplines, showing that the gender gap is shrinking. However, preliminary evidence suggests that women, including female researchers, are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of unequal distribution of childcare, elderly care, and other kinds of domestic and emotional labor. Sudden lockdowns and abrupt shifts in daily routines have had disproportionate consequences on their productivity, which is reflected by a sudden drop in research output in biomedical research, consequently affecting the number of female authors of scientific publications. Objective The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate adverse effect on the productivity of female researchers in the biomedical field in terms of authorship of scientific publications. Methods This is a retrospective observational bibliometric study. We investigated the proportion of male and female researchers who published scientific papers during the COVID-19 pandemic, using bibliometric data from biomedical preprint servers and selected Springer-Nature journals. We used the ordinary least squares regression model to estimate the expected proportions over time by correcting for temporal trends. We also used a set of statistical methods, such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and regression discontinuity design, to test the validity of the results. Results A total of 78,950 papers from the bioRxiv and medRxiv repositories and from 62 selected Springer-Nature journals by 346,354 unique authors were analyzed. The acquired data set consisted of papers that were published between January 1, 2019, and August 2, 2020. The proportion of female first authors publishing in the biomedical field during the pandemic dropped by 9.1%, on average, across disciplines (expected arithmetic mean yest=0.39; observed arithmetic mean y=0.35; standard error of the estimate, Sest=0.007; standard error of the observation, σx=0.004). The impact was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19 research, where the proportion of female scientists in the first author position dropped by 28% (yest=0.39; y=0.28; Sest=0.007; σx=0.007). When looking at the last authors, the proportion of women dropped by 7.9%, on average (yest=0.25; y=0.23; Sest=0.005; σx=0.003), while the proportion of women writing about COVID-19 as the last author decreased by 18.8% (yest=0.25; y=0.21; Sest=0.005; σx=0.007). Further, by geocoding authors’ affiliations, we showed that the gender disparities became even more apparent when disaggregated by country, up to 35% in some cases. Conclusions Our findings document a decrease in the number of publications by female authors in the biomedical field during the global pandemic. This effect was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19, indicating that women are producing fewer publications related to COVID-19 research. This sudden increase in the gender gap was persistent across the 10 countries with the highest number of researchers. These results should be used to inform the scientific community of this worrying trend in COVID-19 research and the disproportionate effect that the pandemic has had on female academics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document