RESUMEN

Sharing research data has great potential to benefit science and society. However, data sharing is still not common practice. Since public research funding agencies have a particular impact on research and researchers, the question arises: Are public funding agencies morally obligated to promote data sharing? We argue from a research ethics perspective that public funding agencies have several pro tanto obligations requiring them to promote data sharing. However, there are also pro tanto obligations that speak against promoting data sharing in general as well as with regard to particular instruments of such promotion. We examine and weigh these obligations and conclude that all things considered funders ought to promote the sharing of data. Even the instrument of mandatory data sharing policies can be justified under certain conditions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Evidence-based health care is gaining prominence since the past many decades. The ultimate goal of evidence-based medicine is providing the best available treatment to patients. The boom in pharmacy sector has seen a rapid rise in randomised controlled clinical trials. Novel medicines or diagnostic tests must be tested before introducing to the target population. Randomised controlled trials are at the top hierarchy of evidence-based health care, especially for testing newly invented drugs. The results obtained from randomised controlled trials cannot be generalised to the entire population. This has led to the evolvement of multi-centre trials in evidence-based research. Multi-centre trials can overcome the barriers associated with single-centre clinical trials. The conduct of multi-centre trials is still in a budding stage in India. Although there are many ongoing multi-centre trials in India, very few trials are conducted among the dental fraternity. The conduct of such trials has its own set of challenges involving funding, ethical committee approval, and logistic requirements. This paper will discuss the growth of multi-centre research, steps involved in conduct of multi-centre trials, and the challenges faced in conducting these trials by the dental specialists in India.

RESUMEN

Bacterial filtration efficiency is the main characteristic of medical face masks effectivity and quality. The testing method is given by European and US, respectively, standard. The method is based on the analysis of biological aerosol with the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus in Andersen cascade impactor. The Andersen impactor contains six stages simulating the different parts of the respiratory tract, from the upper part with the larger droplets to the lungs with the small aerosol particles of the submicron size. The particles are separated depending on the size and sediment on agar medium in Petri dishes filled in the impactor. The use of the glass Petri dishes is recommended for the Andersen impactor, but the most of laboratories prefer the disposable plastic dishes, actually. The evaluation of the use of plastic dishes in Andersen impactor for the determination of the bacterial filtration efficiency of the medical face masks is the aim of this study.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

O'Malley et al. (2009) and Haufe (2013) suggest that the philosophical idea of science as hypothesis testing generates a pernicious bias towards hypothesis-driven research and against exploratory research in the review process of research proposals and the allocation of resources. This paper addresses a conceptual objection to the argument by O'Malley et al. (2009) and Haufe (2013). We argue that the funding agencies' concepts of good science do not belong to epistemological or philosophical contexts but to political and institutional contexts. This means that correcting (potential) biases in research funding does not entail correcting funding agencies' (supposed) philosophies of science. To illustrate this point, we provide an in-depth historical case study: the granting of funds to neuroscientist Pedro Maldonado by the Chilean funding programme FONDECYT. This is a relevant comparison as FONDECYT's guidelines explicitly promote hypothesis-driven research and endorse a view of "good science" as hypothesis testing. However, we will see that the overall influence of the philosophical idea of science as hypothesis testing over this funding programme, the research project, and the actual practice of hypothesis testing is somewhat limited. The concept of science as hypothesis testing seems to play a crucial institutional or political (not philosophical) role in allowing the conceptual articulation of social expectations and researchers' expectations.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A significant gap persists between evidence from research and its use in practice. Research funders, important actors in the health research system, can help reduce this gap by initiating dissemination and implementation (D&I) activities. The specific types of D&I activities funders currently lead have not been explored thoroughly. The Ensuring Value in Research (EViR) Funders' Forum-an international collaboration of health-related research funders-was established in 2017 to address research waste issues and increase the value of research. The Forum surveyed funders to learn about their D&I practices and challenges. METHODS: We distributed a five-item exploratory survey to participating funders in August 2018. The results informed the development of a survey instrument, distributed in June 2019. The survey instrument contained 15 items prompting respondents to categorize and describe their level of effort in six practice areas: release of findings, dissemination, knowledge exchange/partnering, implementation, building capacity, and implementation research. In addition, funders were asked to describe examples of their practices in detail. Thirty-one funders completed the survey instrument, a 58% response rate. RESULTS: Most funders regard D&I as a high priority, but funders vary in levels of activity per practice area. Over half of respondents reported that they have at least some activity in all D&I practice areas surveyed, with the exception of implementation research. The vast majority indicated some or significant activity in release of findings (97%) and dissemination (87%). Nearly one-fifth of funders (19%) indicated that implementation is outside their remit, and 26% indicated that implementation research is outside their remit. Survey respondents shared a broad range of examples of activities in each practice area. Lack of evidence for successful approaches and measuring impact were named frequently as challenges and as potential areas for collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Although models of dissemination and implementation vary across organizations, the majority of funders indicated that D&I of research findings is a priority. Funders indicated a need for evidence on effectiveness of various approaches to D&I. Increased collaboration between funders, including sharing good practices, will increase our collective learning and knowledge development.

RESUMEN

To improve the outcomes of research and medicine, government-based international research funding agencies have implemented various types of policies and mechanisms with respect to sex as a biological variable and gender as a sociocultural factor. After the 1990s, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the European Commission (EC) began requesting that applicants address sex and gender considerations in grant proposals, and offering resources to help the scientific community integrate sex and gender into biomedical research. Although it is too early to analyze data on the success of all of the policies and mechanisms implemented, here we review the use both of carrots (incentives) and sticks (requirements) developed to motivate researchers and the entire scientific research enterprise to consider sex and gender influences on health and in science. The NIH focused on sex as a biological variable (SABV) aligned with an initiative to enhance reproducibility through rigor and transparency; CIHR instituted a sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) policy; and the EC required the integration of the "gender dimension," which incorporates sex, gender, and intersectional analysis into research and innovation. Other global efforts are briefly summarized. Although we are still learning what works, we share lessons learned to improve the integration of sex and gender considerations into research. In conjunction with refining and expanding the policies of funding agencies and mechanisms, private funders/philanthropic groups, editors of peer-reviewed journals, academic institutions, professional organizations, ethics boards, health care systems, and industry also need to make concerted efforts to integrate sex and gender into research, and we all must bridge across silos to promote systemwide solutions throughout the biomedical enterprise. For example, policies that encourage researchers to disaggregate data by sex and gender, the development of tools to better measure gender effects, or policies similar to SABV and/or SGBA adopted by private funders would accelerate progress. Uptake, accountability for, and a critical appraisal of sex and gender throughout the biomedical enterprise will be crucial to achieving the goal of relevant, reproducible, replicable, and responsible science that will lead to better evidence-based, personalized care for all, but especially for women.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Our work analyzes the artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) research portfolios of six large research funding organizations from the United States [National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF)]; Europe [European Commission (EC) and European Research Council (ERC)]; China [National Natural Science Foundation of China (NNSFC)]; and Japan [Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)]. The data for this analysis is based on 127,000 research clusters (RCs) that are derived from 1.4 billion citation links between 104.8 million documents from four databases (Dimensions, Microsoft Academic Graph, Web of Science, and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure). Of these RCs, 600 large clusters are associated with AI/ML topics, and 161 of these AI/ML RCs are expected to experience extreme growth between May 2020 and May 2023. Funding acknowledgments (in the corpus of the 104.9 million documents) are used to characterize the overall AI/ML research portfolios of each organization. NNSFC is the largest funder of AI/ML research and disproportionately funds computer vision. The EC, RC, and JSPS focus more efforts on natural language processing and robotics. The NSF and ERC are more focused on fundamental advancement of AI/ML rather than on applications. They are more likely to participate in the RCs that are expected to have extreme growth. NIH funds the largest relative share of general AI/ML research papers (meaning in areas other than computer vision, natural language processing, and robotics). We briefly describe how insights such as these could be applied to portfolio management decision-making.

RESUMEN

We evaluated the agreement between oscillometric and direct blood pressure monitors in anesthetized dogs and evaluated the ability of the oscillometric method to detect MAP <60 mmHg. Forty client-owned dogs, three months to 14 years old, 4.6-50.2 kg, under general anesthesia were studied. Systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressures were measured directly via an arterial catheter and with an oscillometric cuff (Cardell Touch monitor). Paired values were compared with mixed effect models. Bias and limits of agreement (LOA) were calculated. The sensitivity and false negative rate to detect hypotension (invasive MAP <60 mmHg) using an oscillometric MAP <60 and < 70 mmHg were calculated. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was constructed and the area under the curve calculated. SAP and DAP differed between methods (both P < 0.001), but MAP did not (P = 0.5). Bland-Altman plots showed small biases but wide LOA for all variables. The sensitivity to detect hypotension was 40% with a false negative rate of 60% when using an oscillometric MAP <60 mmHg, and 68% and 32%, respectively, with a MAP <70 mmHg. The area under the ROC curve for MAP was 0.82. While the oscillometric MAP did not differ from invasive values, the device failed to recognize hypotensive events when 60 mmHg was used as the threshold to detect hypotension. Higher MAP values increased the ability to correctly recognize hypotension, but at the expense of a higher incidence of false positives.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Funding agencies, both public and private, do not adequately meet the needs of Canadian amputees. This often leaves amputees without access to appropriate prosthetic care due to outstanding balances that are to be paid out of pocket, or by charitable organizations. There are several factors that result in these inadequacies. As healthcare is a provincial responsibility in Canada, provinces and territories have the authority to create individual public regimes, each with their own weaknesses. In fact, there are a few provincial regimes which do not include prosthetic funding at all. Private healthcare is meant to offset the remaining balance; however, their lack of knowledge regarding amputation has resulted in the creation of policies with ambiguous language, limiting the funding available for prosthetic care. Attitudinal barriers and missed legislative opportunities further exacerbate the shortcomings of prosthetic funding provided by public and private funding agencies, requiring action.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patient participation in decision-making on health-related research has gained ground. Nineteen Dutch health-related research-funding organisations (HFs) have taken up the challenge to include patients in their funding process. A 'Patient participation (PP) advisory team' was set-up, with HF-representatives and patient advocates, who together initiated this study. We provide an overview of when, why, and how PP activities take place in HFs' funding processes, share main challenges and identify possible solutions. METHODS: A qualitative research design was used. Data was gathered by questionnaires (n = 14) and semi-structured interviews (n = 18) with HF employees responsible for patient participation, followed by a workshop (n = 27) with involved employees of HFs and key players in PP from national patient organisations and research organisations. A descriptive analysis was used for the questionnaire. A semi-directed content analysis was used for the interviews and the workshop. RESULTS: Three stages can be identified in the funding process in which HFs carry out PP activities: (1) strategic decision-making about focus of research (e.g. shared research agendas); (2) call for and receipt of research proposals (e.g. mandatory inclusion of letter of recommendation from patient organisation); (3) decision-making about the funding of research proposals (e.g. patients reside in a patient panel to co-review research proposals). Main challenges identified to carry out PP activities include: how to accommodate diversity of the patient body (mainly encountered in stage 1 and 3); to what extent should patients receive training to successfully participate (mainly encountered in stage 1 and 3); and who is responsible for patient-researcher dialogues (mainly encountered in stage 1 and 2). All nineteen HFs agree that patients should be included in at least one stage of the funding process for health-related research. CONCLUSION: Further broadening and optimising patient involvement is still needed. The proposed solutions to the identified challenges could serve as inspiration for national and international research funding foundations that aim to structurally include patients in their funding process.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The biceps brachii lesion needs to be treated surgically. A modified two incisions technique is proposed and reviewed. Material and Methods: All patients were treated with the same technique. The outcomes were measured with the Quick-DASH Score (QDS), and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). Postoperative complications and distal biceps tendon strength were registered also. RESULTS: At one year from the trauma, the QDS and the MEPS were excellent in all patients. 72.97% fully recovered and returned to work after 6 months from the trauma. DISCUSSION: This technique, thanks to its preservation of anatomical structures, provides great outcomes.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Research shows a significant gap between healthcare research and evidence-based healthcare policy and practice. Knowledge translation (KT) has an important role in addressing this gap by bolstering evidence-informed healthcare. Canada's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) is a nationally mandated and supported initiative developed to respond to the gap between research and practice. One aspect of SPOR is the provincial/territorial SUpport for People and Patient-Oriented Research and Trials (SUPPORT) Units, intended to assist local health researchers and systems to reach the goal of improving the quality and quantity of patient-oriented research in Canada. This article presents the programme theory development and a formative evaluation of the KT Platform in Alberta's SPOR SUPPORT Unit. METHODS: We used a mixed-methods approach to develop the KT Platform's programme theory and subsequently conducted the formative evaluation. An extensive needs assessment, comprised of 59 qualitative interviews with researchers and health systems employees in Canada with an interest in KT, served as the basis for our programme theory design. Three years after launching the KT Platform, we hired an evaluation consultant to conduct a formative evaluation of the Platform's programme theory and operations. The evaluation was performed by conducting nine interviews with KT Platform service users (n = 6) and KT experts acting in advisory capacities to the KT Platform (n = 3). RESULTS: The KT Platform developed a '4C Model' as a summary of the Platform's programme theory. This model is designed to meet local needs for capacity-building, a community of practice, consultation services, and contributions to KT science. This suite of services was found to help the local health system implement health evidence with measurable positive health outcomes. However, the community remains hesitant about their capacity as individuals to design and perform important KT activities independently. CONCLUSIONS: With the mandate and support provided by SPOR, the KT Platform was able to design a strong programme theory based on evidence from an extensive needs assessment of the local community. The resulting 4C Model has provided a framework for KT work to assist in improving local health outcomes and can be considered by others designing KT programmes as a useful model to follow. Ongoing monitoring and assessment are required to continue to identify and respond to local needs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Understanding sex and gender in health research can improve the quality of scholarship and enhance health outcomes. Funding agencies and academic journals are two key gatekeepers of knowledge production and dissemination, including whether and how sex/gender is incorporated into health research. Though attention has been paid to key issues and practices in accounting for sex/gender in health funding agencies and academic journals, to date, there has been no systematic analysis documenting whether and how agencies and journals require attention to sex/gender, what conceptual explanations and practical guidance are given for such inclusion, and whether existing practices reflect the reality that sex/gender cannot be separated from other axes of inequality. METHODS: Our research systematically examines official statements about sex/gender inclusion from 45 national-level funding agencies that fund health research across 36 countries (covering the regions of the EU and associated countries, North America, and Australia) and from ten top-ranking general health (the top five in "science" and the top five in "social science") and ten sex- and/or gender-related health journals. We explore the extent to which agencies and journals require inclusion of sex/gender considerations and to what extent existing strategies reflect state of the art understandings of sex/gender, including intersectional perspectives. RESULTS: The research highlights the following: (a) there is no consistency in whether sex/gender are mentioned in funding and publishing guidelines; (b) there is wide variation in how sex/gender are conceptualized and how researchers are asked to address the inclusion/exclusion of sex/gender in research; (c) funding agencies tend to prioritize male/female equality in research teams and funding outcomes over considerations of sex/gender in research content and knowledge production; and (d) with very few exceptions, agency and journal criteria fail to recognize the complexity of sex/gender, including the intersection of sex/gender with other key factors that shape health. CONCLUSIONS: The conceptualization and integration of sex/gender needs to better capture the interacting and complex factors that shape health-an imperative that can be informed by an intersectional approach. This can strengthen current efforts to advance scientific excellence in the production and reporting of research. We provide recommendations and supporting questions to strengthen consideration of sex/gender in policies and practices of health journals and funding agencies.

RESUMEN

Tackling unconscious bias is a major challenge for journals and the rest of the scientific community.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Journals are exploring new approaches to peer review in order to reduce bias, increase transparency and respond to author preferences. Funders are also getting involved.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Funding agencies use many different criteria and peer review strategies to assess grant proposals.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Health research funding agencies are placing a growing focus on knowledge translation (KT) plans, also known as dissemination and implementation (D&I) plans, in grant applications to decrease the gap between what we know from research and what we do in practice, policy, and further research. Historically, review panels have focused on the scientific excellence of applications to determine which should be funded; however, relevance to societal health priorities, the facilitation of evidence-informed practice and policy, or realizing commercialization opportunities all require a different lens. DISCUSSION: While experts in their respective fields, grant reviewers may lack the competencies to rigorously assess the KT components of applications. Funders of health research-including health charities, non-profit agencies, governments, and foundations-have an obligation to ensure that these components of funding applications are as rigorously evaluated as the scientific components. In this paper, we discuss the need for a more rigorous evaluation of knowledge translation potential by review panels and propose how this may be addressed. CONCLUSION: We propose that reviewer training supported in various ways including guidelines and KT expertise on review panels and modalities such as online and face-to-face training will result in the rigorous assessment of all components of funding applications, thus increasing the relevance and use of funded research evidence. An unintended but highly welcome consequence of such training could be higher quality D&I or KT plans in subsequent funding applications from trained reviewers.

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Research methodology in traditional Indian system of medicine. AIM: To determine the knowledge level of investigators conducting clinical trials in traditional medicines (TMs) including Ayurveda. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a questionnaire survey conducted for selected researchers trained in any specialty and working in TM. 2087 researchers were selected based on selection criteria. A validated and pretested questionnaire containing the questions regarding regulatory issues, literature search, evidence-based medicine, clinical trial design, patient selection, and study reporting were sent either through E-mail or post. The answered questionnaires were analyzed. The parameters were analyzed based on median and interquartile range (IQR). RESULTS: Forty two responses were received through E-mail and 21 researchers responded through post. Out of 63, six researchers sent incomplete responses. Among the remaining 57 respondents; 34 (59.6%) investigators had postdoctoral degree, 43 investigators (75.4%) did not receive any structured training on research methodology, 23 (40.4%) had two decades of research experience. Thirty three (74%) of investigators who received government funding didn't have any training on research methodology. Ayurveda experts group had better knowledge compared to pharmaceutical sciences and basic science group although they had a dilemma about conducting clinical evaluation of TM within the specific framework of rigorous clinical pharmacological principles without ignoring the Ayurvedic concepts such as Dosha, Prakruti etc., Investigators below 30 years possessed higher knowledge of research methodology when analyzed based on the age. The respondents working in research organizations, government organizations, and academic institutions had lower knowledge compared to those who were in private organizations/practice. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommend that investigators, peer reviewers, and fund managers involved in traditional medicine research need training especially in research methodology.