scholarly journals Teaching reproducible research for medical students and postgraduate pharmaceutical scientists

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas D. Meid
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Natural Sciences ◽  
Interdisciplinary Teams ◽  
Reproducible Research ◽  
Pharmaceutical Sciences ◽  
The Public ◽  
Academic Settings ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Good Research

AbstractIn medicine and other academic settings, (doctoral) students often work in interdisciplinary teams together with researchers of pharmaceutical sciences, natural sciences in general, or biostatistics. They should be fundamentally taught good research practices, especially in terms of statistical analysis. This includes reproducibility as a central aspect. Acknowledging that even experienced researchers and supervisors might be unfamiliar with necessary aspects of a perfectly reproducible workflow, a lecture series on reproducible research (RR) was developed for young scientists in clinical pharmacology. The pilot series highlighted definitions of RR, reasons for RR, potential merits of RR, and ways to work accordingly. In trying to actually reproduce a published analysis, several practical obstacles arose. In this article, reproduction of a working example is commented to emphasize the manifold facets of RR, to provide possible explanations for difficulties and solutions, and to argue that harmonized curricula for (quantitative) clinical researchers should include RR principles. These experiences should raise awareness among educators and students, supervisors and young scientists. RR working habits are not only beneficial for ourselves or our students, but also for other researchers within an institution, for scientific partners, for the scientific community, and eventually for the public profiting from research findings.

scholarly journals Validity and reliability in qualitative research

Curationis ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
H. I. L. Brink
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Qualitative Work ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Good Research

Validity and reliability are key aspects of all research. Meticulous attention to these two aspects can make the difference between good research and poor research and can help to assure that fellow scientists accept findings as credible and trustworthy. This is particularly vital in qualitative work, where the researcher’s subjectivity can so readily cloud the interpretation of the data, and where research findings are often questioned or viewed with scepticism by the scientific community.

Policy Considerations for the Design and Use of Web Portals for Researchers, Clinicians, and Patients: A Scoping Literature Review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Lang ◽  
Sébastien Lemieux ◽  
Josée Hébert ◽  
Guy Sauvageau ◽  
Ma'n H. Zawati
Keyword(s):  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Complex Disease ◽  
Patient Empowerment ◽  
Patient Portals ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Online Systems ◽  
The Public ◽  
Online Tools ◽  
Research Findings

BACKGROUND Medical care and health research are jointly undergoing significant changes brought about by the Internet [1,2,3]. New online tools, apps, and programs are helping to facilitate unprecedented levels of data sharing and collaboration, potentially enabling more precisely targeted treatment and rapid research translation [4,5,6]. Patient portals have been a significant part of this emerging online health ecosystem, providing patients a mechanism for accessing electronic health records, managing appointments and prescriptions, even communicating directly with care providers [7]. Much has been written about the technical and ethical challenges associated with the development and integration of patient portals into the clinic [8,9]. But portal technology might also be used to connect health researchers to clinicians, patients, and the public. Online systems could be a useful platform for broadly and rapidly disseminating research results while also promoting patient empowerment. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to assess the potential use of online portals that facilitate the sharing of health research findings among researchers, clinicians, patients, and the public. It will also summarize the potential legal, ethical, and policy implications associated with such tools for public use and in the management of patient care for complex disease. METHODS We systematically consulted three databases, PubMed, Scopus, and WestLaw Next for sources describing online portals for sharing health research findings among clinicians, researchers, and patients and their associated legal, ethical, and policy challenges. raised by the integration of online tools into patient care for complex disease. Of 719 source citations, we retained 22 for review. RESULTS We found a varied and inconsistent treatment of online portals for sharing health research findings among clinicians, researchers, and patients. While the literature supports the view that portals of this kind are potentially highly promising, they remain novel and are not yet being widely adopted. We also found a wide-ranging discussion on the legal, ethical, and policy issues related to the use of online tools for sharing research data. We identified five important policy challenges: privacy & confidentiality, health literacy & patient empowerment, equity, training, and decision making. Each of these, we contend, have meaningful implications for the increased integration of online tools into clinical care. CONCLUSIONS As online tools become increasingly important mechanisms for sharing health research with clinicians, patients, and the public, it is vital that these developments are met with ethical and conceptual scrutiny. Therapeutic portals as they are presented in this paper may become a more widespread feature of precision and translational medicine. Our findings suggest that online portals are already being used to disseminate research results among clinicians, patients, and the public. But much of the ethical and conceptual debate is framed in terms of the patient portal, a concept that does not adequately reflect the potentially broader scope of therapeutic portals. It may be useful to clarify this distinction in future research and to underscore the unique ethical, legal, and policy challenges raised when online systems are used as a platform for disseminating research to as wide an audience as possible. CLINICALTRIAL n/a

The Fight Against Doubt

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inmaculada de Melo-Martín ◽  
Kristen Intemann
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
False Beliefs ◽  
Scientific Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
Scientific Claims

Current debates about climate change or vaccine safety provide an alarming illustration of the potential impacts of dissent about scientific claims. False beliefs about evidence and the conclusions that can be drawn from it are commonplace, as is corrosive doubt about the existence of widespread scientific consensus. Deployed aggressively and to political ends, ill-founded dissent can intimidate scientists, stymie research, and lead both the public and policymakers to oppose important policies firmly rooted in science. To criticize dissent is, however, a fraught exercise. Skepticism and fearless debate are key to the scientific process, making it both vital and incredibly difficult to characterize and identify dissent that is problematic in its approach and consequences. Indeed, as de Melo-Martín and Intemann show, the criteria commonly proposed as means of identifying inappropriate dissent are flawed, and the strategies generally recommended to tackle such dissent are not only ineffective but could even make the situation worse. The Fight against Doubt proposes that progress on this front can best be achieved by enhancing the trustworthiness of the scientific community and being more realistic about the limits of science when it comes to policymaking. It shows that a richer understanding is needed of the context in which science operates so as to disarm problematic dissent and those who deploy it in the pursuit of their goals.

scholarly journals Confidence in Local, National, and International Scientists on Climate Change

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 272
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Sparks ◽  
Heather Hodges ◽  
Sarah Oliver ◽  
Eric R. A. N. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
News Media ◽  
Internet Survey ◽  
Party Affiliation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Scientific Report ◽  
Media Reports ◽  
Change Beliefs

In many public policy areas, such as climate change, news media reports about scientific research play an important role. In presenting their research, scientists are providing guidance to the public regarding public policy choices. How do people decide which scientists and scientific claims to believe? This is a question we address by drawing on the psychology of persuasion. We propose the hypothesis that people are more likely to believe local scientists than national or international scientists. We test this hypothesis with an experiment embedded in a national Internet survey. Our experiment yielded null findings, showing that people do not discount or ignore research findings on climate change if they come from Europe instead of Washington-based scientists or a leading university in a respondent’s home state. This reinforces evidence that climate change beliefs are relatively stable, based on party affiliation, and not malleable based on the source of the scientific report.

scholarly journals The OpenRadiation project: monitoring radioactivity in the environment by and for the citizens

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 241-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.F. Bottollier-Depois ◽  
E. Allain ◽  
G. Baumont ◽  
N. Berthelot ◽  
G. Darley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Management ◽  
Dose Rate ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Emergency Situation ◽  
Collaborative Approach ◽  
Fukushima Accident ◽  
The Public ◽  
Collaborative Tools ◽  
Share Data ◽  
Project Monitoring

After the Fukushima accident, initiatives emerged offering the public the possibility to realise measurements of the radioactivity in the environment with various devices and to share data and experiences through collaborative tools. The objective of the OpenRadiation project is to offer the public the opportunity to perform measurements of the radioactivity using connected dosimeters on smartphones. The challenge is to operate such a system on a sustainable basis in normal situations and in order to be useful in an emergency situation. In normal situations, this project is based on a collaborative approach including pedagogical activities. In case of emergency situation, data from the field will be available in “real time” providing an opportunity for the emergency management and the communication with the public. The practical objectives are to develop i) a website centralising measurements using various dosimeters, providing dose rate maps with raw and filtered data and offering dedicated areas for specific projects and exchanges about data and ii) a dosimetric app using a connected dosimeter. This project is conducted within a partnership between organisms’ representative of the scientific community and associations to create links with the public.

scholarly journals A Risk-Based Strategy for Evaluating Mitigation Options for Process-Formed Compounds in Food

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Hanlon ◽  
Gregory P. Brorby ◽  
Mansi Krishan
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Decision Tree ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Technical Committee ◽  
Global Approach ◽  
Chemical Safety ◽  
The Public ◽  
The North ◽  
The Impact

Processing (eg, cooking, grinding, drying) has changed the composition of food throughout the course of human history; however, awareness of process-formed compounds, and the potential need to mitigate exposure to those compounds, is a relatively recent phenomenon. In May 2015, the North American Branch of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI North America) Technical Committee on Food and Chemical Safety held a workshop on the risk-based process for mitigation of process-formed compounds. This workshop aimed to gain alignment from academia, government, and industry on a risk-based process for proactively assessing the need for and benefit of mitigation of process-formed compounds, including criteria to objectively assess the impact of mitigation as well as research needed to support this process. Workshop participants provided real-time feedback on a draft framework in the form of a decision tree developed by the ILSI North America Technical Committee on Food and Chemical Safety to a panel of experts, and they discussed the importance of communicating the value of such a process to the larger scientific community and, ultimately, the public. The outcome of the workshop was a decision tree that can be used by the scientific community and could form the basis of a global approach to assessing the risks associated with mitigation of process-formed compounds.

scholarly journals Conservation of white uacaries in Amazonian várzea

Oryx ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Márcio Ayres ◽  
Andrew D. Johns
Keyword(s):  
Field Study ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
The Public ◽  
Reserve Area ◽  
The Creation

Until two decades ago, the only reference to the white uacari of the upper Amazon, known locally as the ‘English monkey’, had been provided by the British naturalist Henry Walter Bates, who saw captured animals during his sojourn in Amazonia in the 1850s. A major Brazilian initiative led us to the first intensive field study of the species, which was carried out in 1983 and 1984 by one of the authors, J. M. Ayres, with the participation of a large number of Brazilian scientists and a few from overseas. The study illustrated the uniqueness of the várzea habitat in which the animals live and the threats it currently faces. It also captured the attention of both the Brazilian scientific community and the public. Possibilities for the creation of a reserve area within the várzea are now being implemented.

Scenarios as Tools of the Scientific Imagination: The Case of Climate Projections

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-61
Author(s):  
Michael Poznic ◽  
Rafaela Hillerbrand
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
The Other ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Public Realm ◽  
The Public ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
Scientific Imagination

Climatologists have recently introduced a distinction between projections as scenario-based model results on the one hand and predictions on the other hand. The interpretation and usage of both terms is, however, not univocal. It is stated that the ambiguities of the interpretations may cause problems in the communication of climate science within the scientific community and to the public realm. This paper suggests an account of scenarios as props in games of make-belive. With this account, we explain the difference between projections that should be make-believed and other model results that should be believed.

scholarly journals Challenging Pedagogy: Emotional Disruptions, Young Girls, Parents and Schools

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalyn George ◽  
John Clay
Keyword(s):  
Initial Study ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Engaged Pedagogy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Young Girls ◽  
Friendship Groups ◽  
Everyday Practices ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The Uk

This paper follows on from a research project which explored the inclusionary and exclusionary dynamics of young girls’ friendship groups. This initial study received considerable media attention in the UK, Europe and Australia and consequently came to the attention of a wider audience beyond the academy who were thus given an opportunity to engage with the research findings. Having previously explored and analysed the emotionally disabling everyday practices experienced by the girls in the initial research project, the voices of these other adults offered a possibility to explore, examine and analyse the experiences of their daughters and themselves and as a result offered insights that challenge the day to day practices in the classroom. The focus of this paper therefore, is to explore the emotionally raw moments as articulated through the stories told by these adults and to examine what meaning and sense is conveyed about the prevailing norms and values of the school underpinning their pedagogy and practice. We contextualise emotions within a theoretical framework of Sara Ahmed and bell hooks that views emotions in terms of power and culture. The data analysed include contributions from the public to a radio phone-in as well as email responses. The analysis makes explicit the dynamics of power in girls’ friendship groups revealing action/inaction by parents and their accounts about teachers which either disrupt or reinforce dominant practices that pertain. We advocate hooks’ concept of engaged pedagogy to challenge current practices underpinned by neo-liberal assumptions.

scholarly journals Knowledge Mobilization, Collaboration, and Social Innovation: Leveraging Investments in Higher Education

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi Nichols ◽  
David Phipps ◽  
Johanne Provencal ◽  
Allyson Hewitt
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Social Innovation ◽  
Public Institutions ◽  
Knowledge Mobilization ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
The Public ◽  
Literature Synthesis ◽  
Academic Settings ◽  
Qualitative Literature

ABSTRACT This article is a qualitative literature synthesis in the areas of community-campus collaborations, knowledge mobilization and social innovation. The article aims to be useful to people who work in academic settings, community organizations, public institutions, and government. The authors utilized a purposive sampling methodology to explore the following questions: 1. How can university-based knowledge mobilization leverage investments in higher education research and development (R&D) through community-campus collaboration and social innovation? 2. What is the role of university-wide knowledge mobilization projects in supporting community-campus connections and ultimately social innovation strategies that contribute to the public good? Our review indicates considerable interplay between community-campus collaborations, knowledge mobilization and social innovation given that knowledge mobilization facilitates – and is facilitated by – collaboration. With sufficient knowledge mobilization, community-campus collaborations stimulate social innovation. The article concludes with recommendations based on our review of the literature. RÉSUMÉ Cet article se fonde sur une synthèse littéraire qualitative portant sur les collaborations communautaires/académiques, la mobilisation du savoir et l’innovation sociale. Il se veut utile pour toute personne travaillant dans un milieu académique, un organisme communautaire ou une institution publique. Les auteurs ont recours à une méthode d’échantillonnage raisonné pour répondre aux questions suivantes : 1. Comment la mobilisation du savoir universitaire – au moyen de la collaboration communautaire/académique et de l’innovation sociale – peut-elle faire augmenter les investissements en recherche et développement dans l’enseignement supérieur? 2. Comment les projets de mobilisation du savoir universitaire peuvent-ils resserrer les liens entre campus et communauté et, en fin de compte, appuyer des stratégies d’innovation sociale qui contribuent au bien commun? Notre évaluation indique qu’il y a beaucoup d’influences réciproques entre les collaborations communautaires/académiques, la mobilisation du savoir et l’innovation sociale, surtout que la mobilisation du savoir facilite la collaboration et vice versa. En effet, avec une mobilisation du savoir suffisante, les collaborations communautaires/académiques stimulent l’innovation sociale. Cet article se termine par des recommandations provenant de notre analyse documentaire.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document