The Production of Metabolites by Saccharomyces Cerevisiae and its Application in Biotechnological Processes

Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeasts are widely known and used in biotechnological processes, as they have an excellent metabolic capacity that results in the formation of natural products with high added value. Thus, this study aims to present a view on the production of metabolites by Saccharomyces cerevisiae and their application in biotechnological processes. For this, a bibliometric analysis was carried out on the scientific production regarding the use of yeasts in biotechnological tests for the production of substances by activating their metabolic pathways. The articles found in the range between the years 2014 to 2019 are mostly research articles 57% and the rest 43% review. The analysis of the production of articles per year showed an oscillation for both research and review articles, and the countries with the highest publication rate are the United States and China. The data demonstrate a growing interest in secondary metabolic pathways of S. cerevisiae. These microorganisms can be used for the production of different metabolites that are of industrial interest, as they have a purity content that results in high commercial value.

How Are the Mealtime Experiences of People in Residential Aged Care Facilities Informed by Policy and Best Practice Guidelines? A Scoping Review

Background. Mealtimes are embedded routines of residents living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) that directly impacts their health and quality of life. Little is known about how mealtime experiences are informed and affected by structures such as government and organisational policies and processes. This scoping review used Gidden’s (1984) Structuration Theory to investigate how governance structures related to mealtime practices inform residents’ mealtime experiences. Methods. Using Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) scoping review framework, a systematic database, grey literature and policy search was completed in May 2020 and updated in July 2021. From 2725 identified articles, 137 articles were included for in data charting and deductive analysis, and 76 additional Australian government policy papers were used interpretatively. Results. Data charting identified that the included studies were prominently situated in Western countries, with a progressive increase in publication rate over the past two decades. Qualitative findings captured structures that guide RACF mealtimes, how these relate to person-centred mealtime practices, and how these facilitate residents to enact choice and control. Conclusions. Current policies lack specificity to inform the specific structures and practices of RACF mealtimes. Staff, residents, organisational and governance representatives possess different signification, legitimation and domination structures, and lack a shared understanding of policy, and how this influences processes and practices that comprise mealtimes.

How Failure to Falsify contributes to the Replication Crisis in the Clinical Neurosciences

This critical review discusses evidence for the replication crisis in the clinical neuroscience literature with focus on the size of the literature and how scientific hypotheses are framed and tested. We aim to reinvigorate discussions born from philosophy of science regarding falsification (see Popper, 1959;1962) but with hope to bring pragmatic application that might give real leverage to attempts to address scientific reproducibility. The surging publication rate has not translated to unparalleled scientific progress so the current “science-by-volume” approach requires new perspective for determining scientific ground truths. We describe an example from the network neurosciences in the study of traumatic brain injury where there has been little effort to refute two prominent hypotheses leading to a literature without resolution. Based upon this example, we discuss how building strong hypotheses and then designing efforts to falsify them can bring greater precision to the clinical neurosciences. With falsification as the goal, we can harness big data and computational power to identify the fitness of each theory to advance the neurosciences.

Publication and Impact of Preprints Included in the First 100 Editions of the CDC COVID-19 Science Update (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Preprints are publicly available manuscripts posted to various servers that have not been peer-reviewed. Although preprints have existed since 1961, they have gained increased popularity and credibility during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the need for immediate, relevant information. OBJECTIVE The inclusion of preprints in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update, a weekly publication that provides brief summaries of new COVID-19-related studies, is an opportunity to evaluate the publication rate and impact (Altmetric Attention Score and citation count) of selected preprints and assess the performance of the Science Update to select impactful preprints. METHODS All preprints in the first 100 editions (April 1, 2020 – July 30, 2021) of the Science Update were included in the study. Preprints that were not published were categorized as “unpublished preprints”. Preprints that were subsequently published exist in two versions (in a peer-reviewed journal and on the original preprint server) which were analyzed separately and referred to as “peer-reviewed preprint” and “original preprint”, respectively. Time-to-publish was the time interval between the date on which a preprint was first posted to the date on which it was first available as a peer-reviewed article. Impact was quantified by Altmetric Attention Score and citation count for all available manuscripts on August 6, 2021. Preprints were analyzed by publication status, rate, and time to publication. RESULTS Among 275 preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update during the study period, most came from three servers: medRxiv (n=201), bioRxiv (n=41), and SSRN (n=25), with eight coming from other sources. More than half (55.3%) were eventually published. The median time-to-publish was 2.31 months (IQR 1.38-3.73). When preprints posted in the last 2.31 months were excluded (to account for the time-to-publish), the publication rate was to 67.8%. Seventy-six journals published at least one preprint from the CDC COVID-19 Science Update and 18 journals published at least three. The median Altmetric Attention Score for unpublished preprints (n=123) was 146 (IQR 22-552) and median citation count of 2 (IQR 0-8); for original preprints (n=152) these values were 212 (IQR 22-1164) and 14 (IQR 2-40), respectively. For peer-review preprints, these values were 265 (IQR 29-1896) 19 (IQR 3-101), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Prior studies of COVID-19 preprints found publication rates between 5.4% and 21.1%. Preprints included in the CDC COVID-19 Science Update were published at a higher rate than overall COVID-19 preprints, and those that were ultimately published were published within months and received higher attention scores than unpublished preprints. These findings indicate that the Science Update process for selecting preprints appears have done so with high fidelity in terms of their likelihood to be published and impactful. Incorporation of high-quality preprints into the CDC COVID-19 Science Update improves this activity’s capacity to inform meaningful public health decision making.

Implementing Implementation Science; A Bibliometric Study of Qualitative Research in Clinical Artificial Intelligence

Background Implementation science is a pragmatic and multidisciplinary field, centred on the application of a wide range of theoretical approaches to close ‘know-do’ gaps in healthcare. The implementation science community is made of individuals on a continuum between academia and practice, but it is unclear to what extent the theoretical deliberations of implementation academics are translated into the work of implementation practitioners and on to patient benefit. This bibliometric study aims to use the field of clinical artificial intelligence(AI) implementation to sample the prevalence and character of theoretically informed implementation practices. Methods Qualitative research of key stakeholder perspectives on clinical AI published between 2014-2021 was systematically identified. Following title, abstract and full-text screening eligible articles were characterised in terms of their publication, AI tool and context studied, the theoretical approach if any and the research methods and quality. Descriptive, comparative and regression statistics were applied. Results One-hundred-and-eleven studies met the eligibility criteria, with monthly eligible publication rate increasing from 0.7-4.0 between 2014-2021. Eligible studies represented 23 different nations and 25 different clinical specialities. A theoretical approach was explicitly employed in 39(35.1%) studies though 6 of these described novel theoretical approaches(15.1%) and the most frequently used theoretical approach was only used 3 times. There was no statistically significant trend in the prevalence of theoretically informed research within the study period. Of the 25 theoretically informed studies conducted in Europe or North America 19(76%) used theories that originated in the same continent. Conclusions The theoretical approaches which characterise implementation science are not being put to use as often as they could, and the means by which they are selected also seems suboptimal. The field may facilitate a greater synergy between theory and practice if the focus shifts from unifying implementation theories on to unifying and expanding the implementation community. By making more theoretical approaches accessible to practitioners and supporting their selection and application, theory could be more effectively harnessed to close healthcare’s ‘know-do gaps’. Protocol registration PROSPERO ID 248025

The publication fate of abstracts presented at the Medical Library Association conferences

Objective: We sought to determine how many abstracts presented at the 2012 and 2014 Medical Library Association (MLA) annual conferences were later published as full-text journal articles and which features of the abstract and first author influence the likelihood of future publication. To do so, we replicated a previous study on MLA conference abstracts presented in 2002 and 2003. The secondary objective was to compare the publication rates between the prior and current study.Methods: Presentations and posters delivered at the 2012 and 2014 MLA meetings were coded to identify factors associated with publication. Postconference publication of abstracts as journal articles was determined using a literature search and survey sent to first authors. Chi-squared tests were used to assess differences in the publication rate, and logistic regression was used to assess the influence of abstract factors on publication.Results: The combined publication rate for the 2012 and 2014 meetings was 21.8% (137/628 abstracts), which is a statistically significant decrease compared to the previously reported rate for 2002 and 2003 (27.6%, 122/442 abstracts). The odds that an abstract would later be published as a journal article increased if the abstract was multi-institutional or if it was research, specifically surveys or mixed methods research.Conclusions: The lower publication rate of MLA conference abstracts may be due to an increased number of program or nonresearch abstracts that were accepted or a more competitive peer review process for journals. MLA could increase the publication rate by encouraging and enabling multi-institutional research projects among its members.

RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY OF BI-MONTHLY JOURNAL OF ANIMAL RESEARCH DURING 2013 – 2020: A SCIENTOMETRIC APPRAISED

Animal research from the bimonthly Journal of Animal Research was collected using scientometric analysis from 2013 to 2020. According to the study, 1057 publications were written between 2013 and 2020, with 48 of them having a high publication rate in 2015. As a result, animal research is the most popular topic among veterinary researchers, with 1164 papers published out of 1057 submitted. During the years, author R.K.Sharma published 22 articles, while other authors published (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,17,19,21) articles (2013 to 2020).

The company you keep: How network disciplinary diversity enhances the productivity of researchers

The Covid-19 pandemic has affected most organizations' working environment and productivity. Organizations have had to make provision for staff to operate remotely following the implementation of lockdown regulations around the world, because the pandemic has led to restrictions on movement and the temporary closure of workplace premises. The purpose of this paper is to gain a deeper understanding of the effect of this transition on the productivity of work during the pandemic, by studying a distributed network of research who collaborate remotely. We examine how the productivity of researchers is affected by the distributed collaborative networks in which they are embedded. Our goal is to understand the effects of brokerage and closure on the researchers’ publication rate, which is interpreted as an indicator of their productivity. We analyze researchers’ communication networks, focusing on structural holes and diversity, and we take into account the personal qualities of the focal researcher such as seniority. We find that disciplinary diversity among researchers' peers' increases the researchers’ productivity, lending support to the brokerage argument. In addition, we find support for two statistical interaction effects. First, structural holes moderate diversity so that researchers with diverse networks are more productive when their networks also have a less redundant structure. Diversity and structural holes, when combined, further researchers’ productivity. Second, seniority moderates diversity; so that senior researchers are more productive than junior researchers in less diverse networks. In more diverse networks, junior researchers perform as well as senior researchers. Social capital and human capital are complementary. We conclude that the benefits of diversity on researchers’ productivity are contingent on the personal qualities of the researchers and on network structure. The brokerage / closure debate needs a more nuanced understanding of causal relationships.