scholarly journals Rapid Evidence Review 1 on the Critical Appraisal of Third-Party Evidence

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Thomas ◽  
Peter Gregory ◽  
Sarah O’Brien ◽  
Catriona McCallion ◽  
Ben Goodall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Communication ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Food Standards ◽  
Scientific Principles ◽  
Evidence Review ◽  
Proper Context

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) always seeks to ensure that itsrecommendations are made on the best-available evidence. Following a request from the FSA Chair, the Science Council have sought to provide a framework that can guide those seeking to submit uncommissioned evidence to the FSA on its scientific principles and standards.The Science Councils proposed framework is based on the principles of quality, trustand robustness. By being transparent about the FSA’s minimal expectations, we aim to help those who wish to submit evidence, typically in an effort to fill a perceived evidence gap orchange a relevant policy or legislation. The framework also seeks to provides assurance to others on the processes in place within the FSA to assess evidence it receives.When the FSA receives evidence, it will: be transparent about how the evidence is assessed and used to develop its evidence base, policy recommendations and risk communication; assess evidence in its proper context using the principles of quality, trust and robustness; seek to minimise bias in its assessments of evidence by using professional protocols, its SACs, peer review and/or multi-disciplinary teams be open and transparent about the conclusions it has reached about any evidence submitted to it.

Where Are The Self-Correcting Mechanisms In Science?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simine Vazire ◽  
Alex O. Holcombe
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Scientific Field ◽  
The Self ◽  
Replication Crisis

It is often said that science is self-correcting, but the replication crisis suggests that, at least in some fields, self-correction mechanisms have fallen short of what we might hope for. How can we know whether a particular scientific field has effective self-correction mechanisms, that is, whether its findings are credible? The usual processes that supposedly provide mechanisms for scientific self-correction – mainly peer review and disciplinary committees – have been inadequate. We argue for more verifiable indicators of a field’s commitment to self-correction. These include transparency, which is already a target of many reform efforts, and critical appraisal, which has received less attention. Only by obtaining Measurements of Observable Self-Correction (MOSCs) can we begin to evaluate the claim that “science is self-correcting.” We expect the validity of this claim to vary across fields and subfields, and suggest that some fields, such as psychology and biomedicine, fall far short of an appropriate level of transparency and, especially, critical appraisal. Fields without robust, verifiable mechanisms for transparency and critical appraisal cannot reasonably be said to be self-correcting, and thus do not warrant the credibility often imputed to science as a whole.

scholarly journals Democracy and Political Violence in Nigeria Since Multi -Party Politics in 1999: A Critical Appraisal

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-119
Author(s):  
Prince Ikechukwu Igwe ◽  
Luke Amadi
Keyword(s):  
Political Violence ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Party Politics ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Group Violence ◽  
Vested Interests ◽  
Universal Pattern

Abstract The return to democracy in Nigeria in 1999 ushered in some form of political reforms, particularly in the conduct of multi- party elections however political violence appears perverse. The objective of this study is to explore how the prevalence of political violence has undermined Nigeria’s democracy. The analysis follows survey data to address the questions regarding democracy and political violence. The study draws from the frustration-aggression and group violence theories and provides a deepened analytic exploration. Based on some of the assumptions of democracy understood as freedom, equality, accountability, rule of law etc, the study argues that these assumptions obviously constitute a ‘universal pattern’ in democratic practice, which makes a critical evaluation of the Nigerian experience important. Consequently, our findings suggest that the prevalence of political violence is fundamentally an attribute of vested interests of the political elite. Some policy recommendations follow.

scholarly journals Community Pharmacy Response in the Aftermath of Natural Disasters: Time-Sensitive Opportunity for Research and Evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 215013271881349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Melin ◽  
Carlos E. Rodríguez-Díaz
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Puerto Rico ◽  
Community Pharmacy ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Community Pharmacists ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Prescription Medications ◽  
Collaborative Practice Agreement

One year ago, Hurricane Maria passed over the archipelago of Puerto Rico, leaving widespread disruption of nearly all human services, including the health care sector. In the aftermath of the hurricane, limited access to medical care and prescription medications presented a serious challenge to maintaining control of preexisting chronic diseases. Many patients did not have access to refrigeration for heat-sensitive medications. Significant dietary changes due to the limited availability of shelf-stable foods further exacerbated chronic conditions such as heart failure and diabetes. The role of community pharmacists following a natural disaster has previously been documented, and may include the triage of evacuees, assessment of immunization needs, and provision of prescription medications under a collaborative practice agreement. However, our experience in Puerto Rico demonstrated a variety of barriers limited pharmacists’ ability to adequately respond to the magnitude of this disaster. These included medication shortages, extended loss of power, and limited telecommunications for contacting prescribers, disaster relief agencies, and third-party payers. Ultimately, the lack of preexisting emergency protocols made overcoming such barriers difficult. As the first and sometimes only accessible health care provider to many patients following a natural disaster, we must build a solid evidence base and better understanding of the individual, interpersonal, and environmental factors that contribute to the community pharmacist response. To date, however, a paucity of data exists on both the pharmacist and patient factors, which may contribute to an effective immediate response to patient needs at the community pharmacy following a natural disaster. Future research must focus on these multi-level factors to better inform public policy and effective disaster planning. Ultimately, such research and planning will lead to increased resiliency in our primary health care systems in the face of future disasters.

Integrating research and evidence-based guidance into prescribing practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 120-123
Author(s):  
Adam Bedson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Prescribing Practice ◽  
Critical Appraisal Skills

The College of Paramedics and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society are clear that they require advanced paramedics, as non-medical prescribers, to review and critically appraise the evidence base underpinning their prescribing practice. Evidence-based clinical guidance such as that published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is recommended as the primary source of evidence on which paramedics should base their prescribing decisions. NICE guidance reflects the best available evidence on which to base clinical decision-making. However, paramedics still need to critically appraise the evidence underpinning their prescribing, applying expertise and decision-making skills to inform their clinical reasoning. This is achieved by synthesising information from multiple sources to make appropriate, evidence-based judgments and diagnoses. This first article in the prescribing paramedic pharmacology series considers the importance of evidence-based paramedic prescribing, alongside a range of tools that can be used to develop and apply critical appraisal skills to support prescribing decision-making. These include critical appraisal check lists and research reporting tools

scholarly journals Will Third-Party Treatment Effectively Solve Issues Related to Industrial Pollution in China?

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (18) ◽  
pp. 7685
Author(s):  
Qiao Peng ◽  
Yao Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Industrial Pollution ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Replicator Dynamics ◽  
Evolutionary Game ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Environmental Services ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Trial Basis ◽  
Local Levels

China expanded the application of the third-party treatment model (TPTM) in 2017 for effectively tackling the issues related to industrial pollution on a trial basis, and the model could diversify the government’s toolbox for addressing industrial pollution. With multiple players such as local governments, polluters, and environmental services providers (ESP) involved in the TPTM, appropriate guidance and coordination among the three players are critical to the success of the TPTM. This study constructs an evolutionary game model for the three players to capture their interaction mechanisms and simulates the three-player evolutionary game dynamics with the replicator dynamics equation. The simulation results show that heavier penalties for pollution and lower regulatory costs incurred by local governments could effectively improve the performance of the TPTM. Moreover, although environmental incentives provided by the central government to local levels do not affect the ultimate performance of the TPTM, they do shorten the time needed for the effect of the TPTM to emerge. The study concludes by proposing policy recommendations based on these results.

scholarly journals Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review

2015 ◽  
Vol 97 (7) ◽  
pp. 487-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
PJ Benson
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Electronic Publishing ◽  
Scientific Journal ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Public Library ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Review Journal ◽  
Peer Review Journal

‘Medical science can only flourish in a free society and dies under totalitarian repression.’ 1 Peer review post-publication is relatively easy to define: when the world decides the importance of publication. Peer review pre-publication is what the scientific community frequently means when using the term ‘peer review’. But what it is it? Few will agree on an exact definition; generally speaking, it refers to an independent, third party scrutiny of a manuscript by scientific experts (called peers) who advise on its suitability for publication. Peer review is expensive; although reviewers are unpaid, the cost in time is enormous and it is slow. There is often little agreement among reviewers about whether an article should be published and peer review can be a lottery. Often referred to as a quality assurance process, there are many examples of when peer review failed. Many will be aware of Woo-Suk Hwang’s shocking stem cell research misconduct at Seoul National University. 2 Science famously published two breakthrough articles that were found subsequently to be completely fabricated and this happened in spite of peer review. Science is not unique in making this error. However, love it or hate it, peer review, for the present time at least, is here to stay. In this article, Philippa Benson, Managing Editor of Science Advances (the first open access journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), discusses the merits of peer review. Dr Benson has extensive experience in the publishing world and was Executive Director of PJB Consulting, a not-for-profit organisation supporting clients on issues related to converting to full electronic publishing workflows as well as challenges working with international authors and publishers. Her clients included the Public Library of Science journals, the American Society for Nutrition and the de Beaumont Foundation. She recently co-authored a book, What Editors Want: An Author’s Guide to Scientific Journal Publishing (University of Chicago Press), which helps readers understand and navigate the publishing process in high impact science and technical journals. Her master’s and doctorate degrees are from Carnegie Mellon University. JYOTI SHAH Commissioning Editor References 1. Eaton KK . Editorial: when is a peer review journal not a peer review journal? J Nutr Environ Med 1997 ; 7 : 139 – 144 . 2. van der Heyden MA , van de Ven T , Opthof T . Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction . Neth Heart J 2009 ; 17 : 25 – 29 .

Government subsidies in the power battery recycling industry

2020 ◽  
Vol 120 (6) ◽  
pp. 1059-1083 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peiqi Ding ◽  
Zhiying Zhao ◽  
Xiang Li
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Raw Material ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Recycling Industry ◽  
Power Battery ◽  
New Energy ◽  
New Energy Vehicle ◽  
Collection Strategies

PurposeThe power battery is the core of a new energy vehicle and plays a vital role in the rise of the new energy vehicle industry. As the number of waste batteries increases, firms involved in the industry need to properly dispose them, but what party is responsible remains unclear. To reduce environmental impacts, governments introduce two subsidy policies, i.e. collection subsidies, which are provided to the collecting firms, and dismantling subsidies, which are provided to the dismantling firms.Design/methodology/approachBased on the different characteristics of the subsidies, we develop a stylized model to examine the collection strategies and the preferences over the subsidies.FindingsWe derive several insights from analysis. First, the collection strategies depend on the fixed collection cost. Second, the key factor determining the firm's subsidy preference is the efficiency of dismantling. Finally, if the primary target is the collection rate, governments prefer to provide collection subsidies. If consider the environmental impact, the choice of subsidies has to do with the efficiency of dismantling. Moreover, from a social welfare perspective, the raw material cost and the efficiency of dismantling are core indicators of decision.Originality/valueThis work develops the first analytical model to study two power battery subsidies and investigate the optimal collecting strategies and subsidy preferences. The insights are compelling not only for the manufacturer and the third party but also for policymakers.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IMDS-08-2019-0450

scholarly journals Reality versus rhetoric: Assessing the efficacy of third-party hate crime reporting centres

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Wong ◽  
Kris Christmann ◽  
Michelle Rogerson ◽  
Neil Monk
Keyword(s):  
Hate Crime ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Diagnostic Facility ◽  
The Uk

The underreporting of hate crime is recognised as problematic for jurisdictions across Europe and beyond. Within the UK, the landmark inquiry report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence 25 years ago has seen governments faithfully adhering to a policy of promoting the increased reporting of hate crime. An enduring legacy of the inquiry, third-party reporting centres (TPRCs) have been equally faithfully promoted as the primary vehicle for achieving such increases. While the nations of the United Kingdom have pioneered the development of TPRCs, their function and form have been adopted in other jurisdictions, including Victoria, Australia. Nevertheless, despite their reliance on TPRCs, policymakers have given limited attention to their efficacy. The evidence from a plethora of small scale studies has consistently found that TPRCs have been limited by public awareness, capability, capacity and poor oversight difficulties. Responding to these long-standing problems, the authors have developed the first ‘TPRC assessment tool’ which offers a diagnostic facility to improve effectiveness. This paper describes the development and piloting of this tool and highlights its potential to inform policy and practice both in the UK and internationally, providing an original contribution to the limited evidence base around third-party reporting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document