The Australian National University, National Health and Medical Research Council, Social Psychiatry Research Unit: Annual Report for 1986: World Health Organization: Collaborating Centre for the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders. Pp 34

1987 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 178-178
Author(s):  
J. Leff
1991 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 245-254
Author(s):  
A. S. Henderson

In 1974, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NH & MRC) in Australia reviewed what initiatives might be undertaken to promote medical research relevant to the needs of the population. It noted that Australia had contributed with distinction in some areas, such as the neurosciences and immunology, whereas fields such as epidemiology and psychiatry were much less developed scientifically. As the principal source of funding for medical research, the NH & MRC had hitherto supported projects, individuals and a small number of institutions (e.g. the Walter and Eliza Hall, the Florey and the Baker Institutes). The initiative adopted in 1974, as an additional commitment, was to establish some research units in areas of major relevance for public health. These were intended to become centres of excellence in fields where more expertise was needed at a national level.


1971 ◽  
Vol 118 (545) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Carter ◽  
C. A. H. Watts

There is good evidence that genetic factors are necessary, though by no means sufficient, for the development of schizophrenia. Several studies have compared the incidence of schizophrenia in identical and in fraternal twin pairs: these studies are discussed, for example, in the Medical Research Council Annual Report 1965–66 (pp. 54–61), where Essen-Möller's (1963) cumulative figures are quoted: Identical (MZ) pairs: 69 per cent concordant for schizophrenia (both schizophrenic) (194/280 pairs). Fraternal (DZ) pairs: 13 per cent concordant for schizophrenia (both schizophrenic) (59/448 pairs).


Author(s):  
Ken Hyland ◽  
Feng (Kevin) Jiang

Abstract Covid-19, the greatest global health crisis for a century, brought a new immediacy and urgency to international bio-medical research. The pandemic generated intense competition to produce a vaccine and contain the virus, creating what the World Health Organization referred to as an ‘infodemic’ of published output. In this frantic atmosphere, researchers were keen to get their research noticed. In this paper, we explore whether this enthusiasm influenced the rhetorical presentation of research and encouraged scientists to “sell” their studies. Examining a corpus of the most highly cited SCI articles on the virus published in the first seven months of 2020, we explore authors’ use of hyperbolic and promotional language to boost aspects of their research. Our results show a significant increase in hype to stress certainty, contribution, novelty and potential, especially regarding research methods, outcomes and primacy. Our study sheds light on scientific persuasion at a time of intense social anxiety.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document