Ending "domestic helicopter research".

"Helicopter research" refers to a practice where researchers from wealthier countries conduct studies in lower-income countries with little involvement of local researchers or community members. This practice also occurs domestically. In this Commentary, we outline strategies to curb domestic helicopter research and to foster equity-centered collaborations.

Evaluation of Large Language Model Performance and Reliability for Citations and References in Scholarly Writing: Cross-Disciplinary Study.

BACKGROUND: Large language models (LLMs) have gained prominence since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of citations and references generated by ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) in two distinct academic domains: the natural sciences and humanities. METHODS: Two researchers independently prompted ChatGPT to write an introduction section for a manuscript and include citations; they then evaluated the accuracy of the citations and Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). Results were compared between the two disciplines. RESULTS: Ten topics were included, including 5 in the natural sciences and 5 in the humanities. A total of 102 citations were generated, with 55 in the natural sciences and 47 in the humanities. Among these, 40 citations (72.7%) in the natural sciences and 36 citations (76.6%) in the humanities were confirmed to exist (P=.42). There were significant disparities found in DOI presence in the natural sciences (39/55, 70.9%) and the humanities (18/47, 38.3%), along with significant differences in accuracy between the two disciplines (18/55, 32.7% vs 4/47, 8.5%). DOI hallucination was more prevalent in the humanities (42/55, 89.4%). The Levenshtein distance was significantly higher in the humanities than in the natural sciences, reflecting the lower DOI accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT's performance in generating citations and references varies across disciplines. Differences in DOI standards and disciplinary nuances contribute to performance variations. Researchers should consider the strengths and limitations of artificial intelligence writing tools with respect to citation accuracy. The use of domain-specific models may enhance accuracy.

What Is "Key Information"? Consideration of the Reasons People Do or Do Not Take Part in Research.

We performed a qualitative review of 50 consent forms posted on Clinicaltrials.gov, examining the content of key information sections. We found that key information disclosures are typically focused on procedures, risks, potential benefits, and alternatives. Drawing upon reviews of the large literature examining the reasons people do or do not take part in research, we propose that these disclosures should be based more directly on what we know to be the real reasons why people choose to take part or refuse participation. We propose key information language for consideration by researchers and institutional review boards.

The role of community engagement in promoting research participants' understanding of pharmacogenomic research results: Perspectives of stakeholders involved in HIV/AIDS research and treatment.

Community engagement (CE) is praised to be a powerful vehicle in empowering communities with knowledge and skills to make informed decisions for better health care. Several CE approaches have been proposed to improve participants' and research communities' understanding of genomic research including pharmacogenomic information and results. However, there is limited literature on how these approaches can be used to communicate findings of pharmacogenomic research to communities of people living with HIV. This study explored stakeholders' perspectives on the role of community engagement in promoting understanding of pharmacogenomic research results among people living with HIV. We adopted a qualitative approach that involved 54 stakeholders between September 2021 and February 2022. We held five focus group discussions among 30 community representatives from five research institutions, 12 key informant interviews among researchers, and 12 in-depth interviews among ethics committee members. A thematic approach was used to analyze the results. Five themes merged from this data and these included (i) benefits of engaging communities prior to returning individual pharmacogenomic research results to participants. (ii) Obtaining community consensus on the kinds of pharmacogenomic results to be returned. (iii) Opinions on how pharmacogenomic research information and results should be communicated at community and individual levels. (iv) Perceived roles of community stakeholders in promoting participants' understanding and utilization of pharmacogenomic research results. (v) Perceived challenges of engaging communities when returning individual results to research participants. Stakeholders opined that CE facilitates co-learning between researchers and research communities. Researchers can adapt existing CE approaches that are culturally acceptable for meaningful engagement with minimal ethical and social risks when communicating pharmacogenomic research results. CE approaches can facilitate understanding of pharmacogenomic research and findings among research participants and communities. Therefore, if creatively adapted, existing and new CE approaches can enable researchers to communicate simple and understandable results of pharmacogenomic research.

Beyond community engagement: perspectives on the meaningful involvement of people with HIV and affected communities (MIPA) in HIV cure research in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Meaningful involvement of people with HIV and affected communities in HIV cure research is essential to ensuring that cure research efforts are conducted transparently, socially justly, and ethically. This study set out to investigate how people with HIV and affected communities are involved in cure research in the Netherlands and explore what can be done to optimize involvement and engagement. METHODS: Eighty-five semi-structured online, telephone, and face-to-face interviews were conducted with people with HIV (N = 30), key populations (N = 35), and key informants (KI; N = 20) in the field of HIV. The interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Awareness of the meaningful involvement of people with HIV (MIPA) efforts was low among people with HIV and key populations, which contrasted with KI, who exhibited greater awareness. People with HIV and KI emphasized the importance of MIPA in ensuring the representation of lived experiences in HIV cure research and fostering trust between communities and researchers. Practical implementations of MIPA were unclear, ultimately resulting in difficulties defining MIPA beyond clinical trial participation. People with HIV and key populations also doubted their skills and self-efficacy to make meaningful contributions when confronted with involvement beyond participating in research and clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: MIPA is crucial for improving the quality, transparency, and ethical conduct of HIV cure research. It emphasizes the need for increased awareness and funding, standardized guidelines to ensure meaningful involvement, and combat tokenism and misconceptions.

Participatory methods used in the evaluation of medical devices: a comparison of focus groups, interviews, and a survey.

BACKGROUND: Stakeholder engagement in evaluation of medical devices is crucial for aligning devices with stakeholders' views, needs, and values. Methods for these engagements have however not been compared to analyse their relative merits for medical device evaluation. Therefore, we systematically compared these three methods in terms of themes, interaction, and time-investment. METHODS: We compared focus groups, interviews, and an online survey in a case-study on minimally invasive endoscopy-guided surgery for patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. The focus groups and interviews featured two rounds, one explorative focussing on individual perspectives, and one interactive focussing on the exchange of perspectives between participants. The comparison between methods was made in terms of number and content of themes, how participants interact, and hours invested by all researchers. RESULTS: The focus groups generated 34 themes, the interviews 58, and the survey 42. Various improvements for the assessment of the surgical procedure were only discussed in the interviews. In focus groups, participants were inclined to emphasise agreement and support, whereas the interviews consisted of questions and answers. The total time investment for researchers of focus groups was 95 h, of interviews 315 h, and survey 81 h. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of medical device evaluation, interviews appeared to be the most appropriate method for understanding stakeholder views since they provide a scope and depth of information that is not generated by other methods. Focus groups were useful to rapidly bring views together. Surveys enabled a quick exploration. Researchers should account for these methodological differences and select the method that is suitable for their research aim.

A Review of the Use of Native and Engineered Probiotics for Colorectal Cancer Therapy.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a serious global health concern, and researchers have been investigating different strategies to prevent, treat, or support conventional therapies for CRC. This review article comprehensively covers CRC therapy involving wild-type bacteria, including probiotics and oncolytic bacteria as well as genetically modified bacteria. Given the close relationship between CRC and the gut microbiota, it is crucial to compile and present a comprehensive overview of bacterial therapies used in the context of colorectal cancer. It is evident that the use of native and engineered probiotics for colorectal cancer therapy necessitates research focused on enhancing the therapeutic properties of probiotic strains.. Genetically engineered probiotics might be designed to produce particular molecules or to target cancer cells more effectively and cure CRC patients.

'It's Powerful' The impact of involving children and young people in developing paediatric research agendas: A qualitative interview study.

INTRODUCTION: There is a growing consensus that children and young people (CYP) should be involved in matters that concern them. Progress is made in involving CYP in developing pediatric research agendas (PRAs), although the impact of their involvement remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the impact of involving CYP in developing PRAs and assess the extent to which postpatient and public involvement (post-PPI) activities were planned. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews to identify and gain an in-depth understanding of the impact of involving CYP in developing PRAs. The transcripts were uploaded to Atlas.ti to be coded and organised. Dutch-language interviews were analysed and interpreted together with vocational education and training (VET) students. These students were aged between 14 and 18 years and were training to become nurses. RESULTS: Three CYP and 15 researchers decided to participate. We focused on three categories of impact: agenda-setting impact, individual impact and academic impact. Involving CYP creates a more enriched and clarified agenda. It ensured that both CYP and researchers underwent personal or professional growth and development, it created a connection between the people involved, awareness about the importance of involving CYP and it ensured that the people involved had a positive experience. The participants were unable to indicate the academic impact of their PRAs, but they did understand the key factors for creating it. In addition, the need to measure impact was highlighted, with a particular focus on assessing individual impact. DISCUSSION: Our study outlines the diverse subthemes of impact that arise from involving CYP in developing PRAs. Despite the potential of research agendas to amplify CYP voices, only a minority of researchers strategized post-PPI activities ensuring impactful outcomes, prompting the need for thorough evaluation of various impact forms and consistent alignment with the overarching goal of transforming the research field. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We involved VET students in the data analysis and interpretation phase by forming a young person advisory group. The data analysis of the interviews analysed by the VET students revealed four distinct themes: 1. Learnt new knowledge. 2. Learnt to collaborate. 3. Learnt to listen. 4. Assessment of the individual impact.

Shaping research for people living with co-existing mental and physical health conditions: A research priority setting initiative from the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: Those with severe and enduring mental ill health are at greater risk of long-term physical health conditions and have a reduced life expectancy as a result. Multiple factors compound this health inequality, and the need for setting research priorities in this area is highlighted with physical and mental healthcare services being separate, and limited multimorbidity research. METHODS: The aim of this exercise was to work in partnership with healthcare professionals and carers, family, friends and individuals with lived experience of both mental and physical health conditions, to set research priorities to help people with mental health conditions to look after their physical health. The exercise was guided by the James Lind Alliance approach. For this, a steering group was set up, two surveys were completed and a final priority workshop was conducted. RESULTS: This priority setting exercise guided by people's needs and lived experience has produced a set of well-defined research topics. Initially, 555 research questions were suggested in the first survey, which were refined to 54 questions for the second survey. A priority setting workshop was then conducted to get the final 10 priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Taking these topics forward to improve services and treatment for both mental and physical ill health may in turn improve physical health and lessen the reduced life expectancy of those living with mental ill health. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This work was completed in collaboration with people who have lived experience of mental ill health and physical health conditions, as well as carers, family and friends. Their contribution has been significant for this work from piloting surveys, amending language used and educating the researchers and contributing to this paper. The initial work was completed with a steering group and continued with surveys and workshops.

Job description and perception of clinical research personnel working in a network of French intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of information about the organisation and management of clinical research personnel in Europe and of their professional activity in intensive care. We therefore conducted a cross-sectional survey among personnel currently working in a French intensive care research network that involves 41 centres nationwide. The aim of the survey was to describe the personnel's personal and institutional organisation and management, their job perception in terms of satisfaction and stress, and suggestions for improvement. METHODS: Over 3 months in 2023, the research personnel received an electronic questionnaire on their personal and professional profile, past and present training, workplace and functions currently performed, personal knowledge about job skills required, job satisfaction and stress by as measured on a rating scale, and suggested ways of improvement. RESULTS: Ninety seven people replied to the questionnaire (a response rate of 71.3%), of whom 78 (57.3%) were sufficiently involved in intensive care to provide complete answers. This core sample had profiles in line with French recruitment policies and comprised mainly Bachelor/Master graduates, with nurses accounting for only 21.8%. The female to male ratio was 77:23%. Many responders declared to have a shared activity of technician (for investigation) and assistant (for quality control). More than 70% of the responders considered that most of the tasks required of each worker were major. Figures were much lower for project managers, who were few to take part in the survey. On a scale of 10, the median of job satisfaction was 7 for personal work organisation, 6 for training and for institutional organisation, and only 5 for personal career management. The median of job stress was 5 and was inversely correlated with satisfaction with career management. Respect of autonomy, work-sharing activity between investigation and quality control, a better career progression, financial reward for demanding tasks, and participation in unit staff meetings were the main suggestions to improve employee satisfaction. CONCLUSION: This nationwide survey provides a new insight into the activity of French clinical research personnel and points to ways to improve the quality and efficiency of this workforce.

Linguistic correlates of societal variation: A quantitative analysis.

Traditionally, many researchers have supported a uniformitarian view whereby all languages are of roughly equal complexity, facilitated by internal trade-offs between complexity at different levels, such as morphology and syntax. The extent to which the speakers' societies influence the trade-offs has not been well studied. In this paper, we focus on morphology and syntax, and report significant correlations between specific linguistic and societal features, in particular those relating to exoteric (open) vs. esoteric (close-knit) society types, characterizable in terms of population size, mobility, communication across distances, etc. We conduct an exhaustive quantitative analysis drawing upon WALS, D-Place, Ethnologue and Glottolog, finding some support for our hypothesis that languages spoken by exoteric societies tend towards more complex syntaxes, while languages spoken by esoteric societies tend towards more complex morphologies.