Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 7.430
Filtrar
2.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(27): e256, 2020 Jul 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32657090

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a large volume of publications, a barrage of non-reviewed preprints on various professional repositories and a slew of retractions in a short amount of time. METHODS: We conducted an e-survey using a cloud-based website to gauge the potential sources of trustworthy information and misinformation and analyzed researchers', clinicians', and academics' attitude toward unpublished items, and pre- and post-publication quality checks in this challenging time. RESULTS: Among 128 respondents (mean age, 43.2 years; M:F, 1.1:1), 60 (46.9%) were scholarly journal editors and editorial board members. Social media channels were distinguished as the most important sources of information as well as misinformation (81 [63.3%] and 86 [67.2%]). Nearly two in five (62, 48.4%) respondents blamed reviewers, editors, and misinterpretation by readers as additional contributors alongside authors for misinformation. A higher risk of plagiarism was perceived by the majority (70, 58.6%), especially plagiarism of ideas (64.1%) followed by inappropriate paraphrasing (54.7%). Opinion was divided on the utility of preprints for changing practice and changing retraction rates during the pandemic period, and higher rejections were not supported by most (76.6%) while the importance of peer review was agreed upon by a majority (80, 62.5%). More stringent screening by journal editors (61.7%), and facilitating open access plagiarism software (59.4%), including Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based algorithms (43.8%) were among the suggested solutions. Most (74.2%) supported the need to launch a specialist bibliographic database for COVID-19, with information indexed (62.3%), available as open-access (82.8%), after expanding search terms (52.3%) and following due verification by academics (66.4%), and journal editors (52.3%). CONCLUSION: While identifying social media as a potential source of misinformation on COVID-19, and a perceived high risk of plagiarism, more stringent peer review and skilled post-publication promotion are advisable. Journal editors should play a more active role in streamlining publication and promotion of trustworthy information on COVID-19.


Assuntos
Comunicação , Editoração , Má Conduta Científica , Mídias Sociais , Adulto , Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Revisão por Pares , Plágio , Pneumonia Viral , Inquéritos e Questionários
3.
S Afr Med J ; 110(5): 364-368, 2020 Apr 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32657718

RESUMO

In everyday clinical practice, healthcare professionals (HCPs) are exposed to large quantities of confidential patient information, and many use WhatsApp groups to share this information. WhatsApp groups provide efficient mechanisms for clinical management advice, decision-making support and peer review. However, most HCPs do not fully understand the legal and ethical implications of sharing content in a WhatsApp group setting, which is often thought to be hosted on a secure platform and therefore removed from public scrutiny. In our paper, we unpack the legal and ethical issues that arise when information is shared in WhatsApp groups. We demonstrate that sharing content in this forum is tantamount to the publication of content; in other words, those who share content are subject to the same legal ramifications as a journalist would be. We also examine the role of the WhatsApp group administrator, who bears an additional legal burden by default, often unknowingly so. We consider the recommendations made by the Health Professions Council of South Africa in their guidelines for the use of social media, and highlight some areas where we feel the guidelines may not adequately protect HCPs from the legal repercussions of sharing content in a WhatsApp group. Finally, we provide a set of guidelines for WhatsApp group users that should be regularly posted onto the group by the relevant group administrator to mitigate some of the legal liabilities that may arise. We also provide guidelines for group administrators.


Assuntos
Responsabilidade Legal , Aplicativos Móveis/ética , Aplicativos Móveis/legislação & jurisprudência , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Comunicação , Confidencialidade/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , Revisão por Pares , Mídias Sociais/legislação & jurisprudência , África do Sul
5.
EMBO Rep ; 21(6): e50817, 2020 06 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32496027

RESUMO

Pre-print servers have helped to rapidly publish important information during the COVID-19 pandemic. The downside is the risk of spreading false information or fake news though.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Editoração , Publicações Seriadas , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Decepção , Humanos , Internet , Revisão por Pares , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Editoração/normas , Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações Seriadas/normas
7.
PLoS One ; 15(5): e0232891, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32413059

RESUMO

Literature-based Discovery (LBD) aims to discover new knowledge automatically from large collections of literature. Scientific literature is growing at an exponential rate, making it difficult for researchers to stay current in their discipline and easy to miss knowledge necessary to advance their research. LBD can facilitate hypothesis testing and generation and thus accelerate scientific progress. Neural networks have demonstrated improved performance on LBD-related tasks but are yet to be applied to it. We propose four graph-based, neural network methods to perform open and closed LBD. We compared our methods with those used by the state-of-the-art LION LBD system on the same evaluations to replicate recently published findings in cancer biology. We also applied them to a time-sliced dataset of human-curated peer-reviewed biological interactions. These evaluations and the metrics they employ represent performance on real-world knowledge advances and are thus robust indicators of approach efficacy. In the first experiments, our best methods performed 2-4 times better than the baselines in closed discovery and 2-3 times better in open discovery. In the second, our best methods performed almost 2 times better than the baselines in open discovery. These results are strong indications that neural LBD is potentially a very effective approach for generating new scientific discoveries from existing literature. The code for our models and other information can be found at: https://github.com/cambridgeltl/nn_for_LBD.


Assuntos
Descoberta do Conhecimento/métodos , Redes Neurais de Computação , Mineração de Dados/métodos , Humanos , Neoplasias/metabolismo , Reconhecimento Automatizado de Padrão/métodos , Revisão por Pares , Comunicação Acadêmica
8.
J Korean Med Sci ; 35(20): e138, 2020 May 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32449322

RESUMO

Peer review is a crucial part of research and publishing. However, it remains imperfect and suffers from bias, lack of transparency, and professional jealousy. It is also overburdened by an increasing quantity of complex papers against the stagnant pool of reviewers, causing delays in peer review. Additionally, many medical, nursing, and healthcare educators, peer reviewers, and authors may not be completely familiar with the current changes in peer review. Moreover, reviewer education and training have unfortunately remained lacking. This is especially crucial since current initiatives to improve the review process are now influenced by factors other than academic needs. Thus, increasing attention has recently focused on ways of streamlining the peer review process and implementing alternative peer-review methods using new technologies and open access models. This article aims to give an overview of the innovative strategies for peer review and to consider perspectives that may be helpful in introducing changes to peer review. Critical assessments of peer review innovations and incentives based on past and present experiences are indispensable. A theoretical appraisal must be balanced by a realistic appraisal of the ethical roles of all stakeholders in enhancing the peer review process. As the peer review system is far from being perfect, identifying and developing core competencies among reviewers, continuing education of researchers, reviewer education and training, and professional engagement of the scientific community in various disciplines may help bridge gaps in an imperfect but indispensable peer review system.


Assuntos
Revisão por Pares , Pesquisa Biomédica , Educação Continuada
9.
Eur J Dent Educ ; 24(3): 548-558, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32347592

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Writing, sharing, answering, discussing and rating examination questions are a way to involve students in creating content and applying their knowledge. The PeerWise online question-setting platform facilitates student communities in this activity. This mixed-methods study asks the question: Does students' writing and answering examination questions enhance their engagement and learning of Neurology as a Life Science topic? METHODS: Over a 2-year period, self-assembled groups of 3-4 students submitted 1-2 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) every 2 weeks into the PeerWise portal for review by their peers. Summative examination results were compared with previous year's control group. Data were also collected regarding student engagement (number of MCQs answered or submitted comments) are compared to summative assessment results at the end of semester. Post-intervention student satisfaction surveys were analysed qualitatively and quantitatively to assess the effectiveness of the exercise. RESULTS: With 174 and 80 student participants in intervention and control groups, respectively, no statistical difference was found in the average marks between the cohorts. However, within intervention group, positive correlation (Spearman's r = .272-.333) was found between higher level of student engagement with PeerWise and higher examination result. Positive correlation remained persistent after completion of the PeerWise exercise. Student survey revealed greater engagement with subject content, and qualitative thematic analysis was mapped to define various ways students engaged with the PeerWise activity. CONCLUSION: Tasking students to regularly generate and review MCQs enhances engagement with the topic, and higher engagement with PeerWise correlating to higher examination scores.


Assuntos
Educação em Odontologia , Avaliação Educacional , Currículo , Humanos , Revisão por Pares , Estudantes
14.
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol ; 318(5): H1051-H1058, 2020 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32196356

RESUMO

The present study was undertaken to address the concern that author compliance with American Physiological Society (APS) journal instructions to authors for data presentation in manuscript figures is inadequate. Common instances of noncompliance are omitted molecular weight markers for immunoblots and bar graphs lacking individual data points. The American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology (AJP-Heart and Circ) editorial team designed a program to assess figure data presentation in submitted manuscripts. The intended outcome was to improve author compliance with APS data presentation guidelines and to improve overall rigor and reproducibility in articles published in AJP-Heart and Circ. The AJP-Heart and Circ team invited 37 peer reviewers to participate in a figure reviewer project (FRp). Over a period of five months, 32 first-revision manuscripts were enrolled in the FRp. Each manuscript was reviewed by the original peer reviewers and an additional figure reviewer (FR). Post-peer review, corresponding authors and FRs were surveyed for insight into their experiences. Of the 32 corresponding authors invited, 20 (63%) responded to the survey. In response to the survey, 100% of respondents stated that peer review was performed in a timely fashion despite the additional FR. When asked whether the FR experience had any effect on how one would present data in manuscript figures in future submissions, 65% of authors and 83% of FRs said yes. In addition, 63% of authors responding agreed that the overall quality of their figures was improved after revising based on FR comments. This exercise resulted in improved compliance with APS data presentation guidelines and changed attitudes among both authors and reviewers as to the need for consistent and clear data presentation in manuscript figures.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The goal of the American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology figure reviewer program was to improve author compliance with existing APS data presentation instructions for manuscript figures. The result was an improvement in compliance with these guidelines. Time from submission to final decision did not significantly increase for papers with the additional figure reviewer, and both figure reviewers and corresponding authors reported positive feedback in post-program surveys.


Assuntos
Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto/normas , Fisiologia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Políticas Editoriais , Revisão por Pares/normas , Sociedades Científicas
20.
Can Assoc Radiol J ; 71(1): 48-57, 2020 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32066281

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Quality improvement is vital to ensure health-care providers meet optimal patient care standards. Within our jurisdiction, accreditation requires image peer review as part of the quality assurance program. We propose a method to improve quality assurance in radiography by implementing a novel software-based peer review system for radiography technologists. METHODS: This is a retrospective study. A peer review tool was developed in Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic. The tool has 14 image quality criteria, which were selected based on national and international criteria, each containing standardized answers ensuring a common scoring regime. The tool provides data analysis and storage of all peer reviews performed. Radiography supervisors utilized the tool to evaluate image quality of various body parts at 28 hospitals. The tool enabled each Medical Imaging Department to objectively score images at their own hospital. Approximately 2% of all radiographs were randomly chosen for peer review. Additionally, the tool allowed for regional analysis based on hospital, body part, and quality criterion. RESULTS: Initial findings exposed equipment-related issues such as worn imaging plates, artifacts, and poor exposures, which prompted increased preventative maintenance. Other documented issues included foreign objects, inadequate collimation and centering, and inconsistent usage of lead markers. After identifying quality assurance-related issues, hospitals implemented education, resulting in improved overall image quality scores in subsequent audits. CONCLUSION: The peer review tool helped identify and correct various issues affecting image quality and ensures our program meets required accreditation standards. Furthermore, staff found utilizing the tool to identify areas for improvement improved collaboration, ongoing education, and support between staff.


Assuntos
Revisão por Pares/métodos , Garantia da Qualidade dos Cuidados de Saúde/métodos , Melhoria de Qualidade , Radiografia/normas , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA