Curating the Evidence About COVID-19 for Frontline Public Health and Clinical Care: The Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium.

The public health crisis created by the COVID-19 pandemic has spurred a deluge of scientific research aimed at informing the public health and medical response to the pandemic. However, early in the pandemic, those working in frontline public health and clinical care had insufficient time to parse the rapidly evolving evidence and use it for decision-making. Academics in public health and medicine were well-placed to translate the evidence for use by frontline clinicians and public health practitioners. The Novel Coronavirus Research Compendium (NCRC), a group of >60 faculty and trainees across the United States, formed in March 2020 with the goal to quickly triage and review the large volume of preprints and peer-reviewed publications on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 and summarize the most important, novel evidence to inform pandemic response. From April 6 through December 31, 2020, NCRC teams screened 54 192 peer-reviewed articles and preprints, of which 527 were selected for review and uploaded to the NCRC website for public consumption. Most articles were peer-reviewed publications (n = 395, 75.0%), published in 102 journals; 25.1% (n = 132) of articles reviewed were preprints. The NCRC is a successful model of how academics translate scientific knowledge for practitioners and help build capacity for this work among students. This approach could be used for health problems beyond COVID-19, but the effort is resource intensive and may not be sustainable in the long term.

Theoretical Formulation Strategies towards Neutralizing Inter-individual Variability Associated with Tacrolimus Immunosuppressant Therapy: A Case Study on Nextgeneration Personalized Medicine.

Individualizing drug therapy and attaining maximum benefits of a drug devoid of adverse reactions is the benefit of personalized medicine. One of the important factors contributing to inter-individual variability is genetic polymorphism. As of now, dose titration is the only followed golden standard for implementing personalized medicine. Converting the genotypic data into an optimized dose has become easier now due to technology development. However, for many drugs, finding an individualized dose may not be successful, which further leads to a trial and error approach. These dose titration strategies are generally followed at the clinical level, and so industrial involvement and further standardizations are not feasible. On the other side, technologically driven pharmaceutical industries have multiple smart drug delivery systems which are underutilized towards personalized medicine. Transdisciplinary research with drug delivery science can additionally support the personalization by converting the traditional concept of "dose titration towards personalization" with novel "dose-cum-dosage form modification towards next-generation personalized medicine"; the latter approach is useful to overcome gene-based inter-individual variability by either blocking, to downregulate, or bypassing the biological protein generated by the polymorphic gene. This article elaborates an advanced approach to implementing personalized medicine with the support of novel drug delivery systems. As a case study, we further reviewed the genetic polymorphisms associated with tacrolimus and customized novel drug delivery systems to overcome these challenges factored towards personalized medicine for better clinical outcomes, thereby paving a new strategy for implementing personalized medicine for all other drug candidates.

Getting Interdisciplinary Teams into the Field: Institutional Review Board Preapproval and Multi-Institution Authorization Agreements for Rapid Response Disaster Research.

This article describes an interdisciplinary community resilience research project and presents a case study that supports bringing researchers together before a disaster to develop plans, procedures, and preapproved Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocols. In addition, this article explains how researchers from various academic institutions and their federal agency partners can effectively collaborate by creating an IRB Authorization Agreement (IAA). Such preparations can support interdisciplinary rapid response disaster fieldwork that is timely, ethically informed, and scientifically rigorous. This fieldwork preplanning process can also advance interdisciplinary team formation and data collection efforts over the long term.

Building brain capital.

Brains are indispensable drivers of human progress. Why not invest more heavily in them? We seek to place Brain Capital at the center of a new narrative to fuel economic and societal recovery and resilience.

The evolution of personalized healthcare and the pivotal role of European regions in its implementation.

Personalized medicine (PM) moves at the same pace of data and technology and calls for important changes in healthcare. New players are participating, providing impulse to PM. We review the conceptual foundations for PM and personalized healthcare and their evolution through scientific publications where a clear definition and the features of the different formulations are identifiable. We then examined PM policy documents of the International Consortium for Personalised Medicine and related initiatives to understand how PM stakeholders have been changing. Regional authorities and stakeholders have joined the race to deliver personalized care and are driving toward what could be termed as the next personalized healthcare. Their role as a key stakeholder in PM is expected to be pivotal.

Pivoting in Context: Using the Forging Alliances in Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Research Model to Collaborate During COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have been faced with challenges in maintaining interdisciplinary research collaborations. The purpose of this article is to apply and expand a previously introduced model to sustaining new interdisciplinary research collaborations: Forging Alliances in Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Research (FAIRR). FAIRR is a logic model that can be used as a guide to create interdisciplinary rehabilitation research teams. In this article, the authors propose expanding FAIRR by including strategies for sustaining interdisciplinary rehabilitation research collaborations: modifying inputs (resources needed to assemble a team and to conduct research activities), shifting activities (steps taken to move the interdisciplinary collaboration forward), and examining what impacts the fit between inputs and activities. Two examples are used to highlight the application of the FAIRR model to interdisciplinary collaborations during COVID-19.

COVID-19: Opportunities for interdisciplinary research to improve care for older people in Sweden.

The emergence of COVID-19 has changed the world as we know it, arguably none more so than for older people. In Sweden, the majority of COVID-19-related fatalities have been among people aged ⩾70 years, many of whom were receiving health and social care services. The pandemic has illuminated aspects within the care continuum requiring evaluative research, such as decision-making processes, the structure and organisation of care, and interventions within the complex public-health system. This short communication highlights several key areas for future interdisciplinary and multi-sectorial collaboration to improve health and social care services in Sweden. It also underlines that a valid, reliable and experiential evidence base is the sine qua non for evaluative research and effective public-health systems.

A Sharing Meanings Approach for Interdisciplinary Hazards Research.

Hazards researchers frequently examine complex socioenvironmental problems, a difficult undertaking that is further compounded by the challenge of navigating the many disciplinary approaches in the field. This article draws on key insights from studies of the interdisciplinary process and proposes the "sharing meanings approach" for improving interdisciplinary collaboration in hazards research. The sharing meanings approach addresses common challenges to interdisciplinary teamwork and organizes them into four focal areas: (1) worldviews (including ontological, epistemological, and philosophical perspectives), (2) language, (3) research design, and (4) project goals. The approach emphasizes the process of sharing rather than seeking to develop a single set of shared meanings related to the four focal areas. The article identifies common challenges and recommends strategies and actions within each focal area for guiding teams toward sharing their implicit meanings. A hypothetical example is introduced to demonstrate how the approach offers a path for revealing and overcoming the common roadblocks experienced in interdisciplinary hazards research. By making interdisciplinary hazards teams' implicit assumptions explicit, the sharing meanings approach offers an operational process to seize on moments of difference as productive tension and to see such challenges as opportunities-rather than obstacles-for innovating toward hybrid methodological research designs in hazards research.

Stories for Interdisciplinary Disaster Research Collaboration.

What if we used the stories that researchers and practitioners tell each other as tools to advance interdisciplinary disaster research? This article hypothesizes that doing so could foster a new mode of collaborative learning and discovery. People, including researchers, regularly tell stories to relate "what happened" based on their experience, often in ways that augment or contradict existing understandings. These stories provide naturalistic descriptions of context, complexity, and dynamic relationships in ways that formal theories, static data, and interpretations of findings can miss. They often do so memorably and engagingly, which makes them beneficial to researchers across disciplines and allows them to be integrated into their own work. Seeking out, actively inviting, sharing, and discussing these stories in interdisciplinary teams that have developed a strong sense of trust can therefore provide partial escape from discipline-specific reasoning and frameworks that are so often unconsciously employed. To develop and test this possibility, this article argues that the diverse and rapidly growing hazards and disaster field needs to incorporate a basic theoretical understanding of stories, building from folkloristics and other sources. It would also need strategies to draw out and build from stories in suitable interdisciplinary research forums and, in turn, to find ways to incorporate the discussions that emanate from stories into ongoing analyses, interpretations, and future lines of interdisciplinary inquiry.

Interdisciplinary Approaches to Examining Postdisaster School Recovery.

This perspectives article uses a postdisaster school recovery research domain to examine two tenets of interdisciplinary research (IDR): integrative problem formulation and synthesis. Advancing interdisciplinary knowledge requires a "roadmap" of commonalities between disciplinary domains and outcomes of interest. Four school recovery domains-child trauma, educational learning outcomes, school safety, and household and community recovery-are presented to highlight common frameworks for IDR. A case study is also used to illustrate the value of interdisciplinary research and mixed-methods approaches, including statistics, geospatial analysis, and spatial statistics, for answering questions regarding how school contexts and location influence school recovery patterns.

Lost in Translation? Integrating Interdisciplinary Disaster Research with Policy Praxis.

Interdisciplinary research can help address complex issues such as community resilience and climate change. However, transcending disciplinary borders to provide better understandings of these cross-cutting issues is not an easy task. While there has been a greater focus on improving integration across disciplines, less attention has been paid to the particular challenges in the inclusion and integration of policy praxis into interdisciplinary research. This article argues that to effectively integrate policy-relevant goals, researchers need to understand the obstacles to transcending disciplinary borders to incorporate the perspectives of policy practitioners. Researchers also need to understand problems in integration when it takes place within research groups or entities comprised of a variety of scholars from diverse disciplines working with a set of practitioners from different agencies or levels of government. Impediments to integration include epistemological, disciplinary, and attitudinal barriers, differences in terminologies and timescales, the role of organizational culture, institutional barriers, data issues, and issues related to risk communication and liability. This article explores these challenges and how they affect the translation of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. It concludes with recommendations to help overcome challenges in synthesizing disaster research and policy practices and to enrich interdisciplinary disaster research approaches and designs.

Addressing Challenges to Building Resilience Through Interdisciplinary Research and Engagement.

Resilient communities are less affected by, and recover faster from, natural disasters. To be resilient in rapidly changing contemporary environments subject to the effects of complex factors such as climate change and urbanization, communities must effectively and efficiently adapt to new conditions to minimize future risks. To develop resilience, the hazards to which the community is exposed and vulnerable (i.e., future hurricanes, subsidence, salt water intrusion) must be accurately assessed, the systems (i.e., natural, built, and social) must be well understood, and the community must be engaged in the proactive planning and priority setting process. An approach to building resilience that utilizes the adaptive capacity of planning highlights opportunities to work collaboratively across disciplines to incorporate models and data from different disciplines to reduce uncertainty. We present one interdisciplinary group's approach to addressing challenges to building resilience through proactive planning, including: (1) characterizing hazards more accurately; (2) improving understanding of the vulnerability of natural (e.g., climate and infrastructure) systems subject to hazards; and (3) capturing potential synergies from interactions between planning and policies that govern decisions about the design of human settlements in hazardous areas.

Expertise Across Disciplines: Establishing Common Ground in Interdisciplinary Disaster Research Teams.

Hazards and disasters arise from interactions between environmental and social processes, so interdisciplinary research is crucial in understanding and effectively managing them. Despite support and encouragement from funding agencies, universities, and journals and growing interest from researchers, interdisciplinary disaster research teams face significant obstacles, such as the difficulty of establishing effective communication and understanding across disciplines. Better understanding of interdisciplinary teamwork can also have important practical benefits for operational disaster planning and response. Social studies of science distinguish different kinds of expertise and different modes of communication. Understanding these differences can help interdisciplinary research teams communicate more clearly and work together more effectively. The primary role of a researcher is in contributory expertise (the ability to make original contributions to a discipline); but interactional expertise in other disciplines (the ability to understand their literature and communicate with their practitioners) can play an important role in interdisciplinary collaborations. Developing interactional expertise requires time and effort, which can be challenging for a busy researcher, and also requires a foundation of trust and communication among team members. Three distinct aspects of communication play important roles in effective interdisciplinary communication: dialects, metaphors, and articulation. There are different ways to develop interactional expertise and effective communication, so researchers can pursue approaches that suit their circumstances. It will be important for future research on interdisciplinary disaster research to identify best practices for building trust, facilitating communication, and developing interactional expertise.

The "Inter" Within Interdisciplinary Research: Strategies for Building Integration Across Fields.

As emphasis on interdisciplinary and convergent research grows, researchers and institutions can benefit from additional insights into how to build interdisciplinary integration within the research process. This article presents signs of successful interdisciplinary research and proposes strategies that researchers can implement to help create and sustain integration across fields. Drawing on the authors' experiences, other examples from hazards research, and the literature on interdisciplinarity, the article asserts that successful interdisciplinary research incorporates full intellectual participation by each contributing field, forming a multiway partnership. Such work can frame new research questions, develop novel approaches, and generate innovative insights across and within disciplines. It can also address complex questions at the intersections of established fields, beyond what the collection of contributing fields can produce on their own. To build integration across fields, researchers can use strategies such as interweaving perspectives in the research foci, interacting regularly at the working level, and interconnecting knowledge and ideas throughout the research process. Another strategy is leadership that enables contributions from multiple fields and empowers interdisciplinary synthesis. During the research process, researcher commitment, curiosity, willingness to take risks, and flexibility are also important, along with patience and persistence as challenges arise.

Trends in Multidisciplinary Hazard and Disaster Research: A 1982-2017 Case Study.

From 1982 to 2017, 539 unique awards studying extreme events and natural disasters have been funded by the Infrastructure Management and Extreme Events (IMEE), Decision, Risk and Management Science (DRMS), Humans, Disasters, and the Built Environment (HDBE), and Hazard Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (Hazard SEES) programs under the National Science Foundation, totaling approximately $450 million. The relationships between discipline, topic, and funding are explored through review of the data on each award's active dates, amount of funding received, specific hazards and disasters studied, and principal investigator (PI) and co-PI affiliations. A positive correlation between award funding and increasingly larger multidisciplinary teams of PIs on projects is observed. However, these teams of four or more PIs only account for about 18% of the total number of awards. In terms of topic, projects applicable to general hazard/disaster research encompass the largest portion of awards, but not the greatest funding per award on average. Additionally, both the number of awards per year and the total funds allotted per year show an increasing trend. Finally, some of the trends in project team discipline with relation to hazards show a shift to equal numbers of engineers and social scientists on multidisciplinary teams while others remain fairly homogeneous in their team dynamics. This article provides unique perspectives on how to better allocate funds through extensive topic and funding analysis. This work is a brief analysis of trends in the hazard and disaster research community, focusing on multidisciplinary project teams and their correlation to funding amounts and research areas.

Critical Time, Space, and Decision-Making Agent Considerations in Human-Centered Interdisciplinary Hurricane-Related Research.

In hazard and disaster contexts, human-centered approaches are promising for interdisciplinary research since humans and communities feature prominently in many definitions of disaster and the built environment is designed and constructed by humans to serve their needs. With a human-centered approach, the decision-making agent becomes a critical consideration. This article discusses and illustrates the need for alignment of decision-making agents, time, and space for interdisciplinary research on hurricanes, particularly evacuation and the immediate aftermath. We specifically consider the fields of sociobehavioral science, transportation engineering, power systems engineering, and decision support systems in this context. These disciplines have historically adopted different decision-making agents, ranging from individuals to households to utilities and government agencies. The fields largely converged to the local level for studies' spatial scales, with some extensions based on the physical construction and operation of some systems. Greater discrepancy across the fields is found in the frequency of data collection, which ranges from one time (e.g., surveys) to continuous monitoring systems (e.g., sensors). Resolving these differences is important for the success of interdisciplinary teams in protective-action-related disaster research.