ABSTRACT
Background: Some research has already reported the diagnostic value of artificial intelligence (AI) in different endoscopy outcomes. However, the evidence is confusing and of varying quality. Objective: This review aimed to comprehensively evaluate the credibility of the evidence of AI's diagnostic accuracy in endoscopy. Methods: Before the study began, the protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023483073). First, 2 researchers searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library using comprehensive search terms. Then, researchers screened the articles and extracted information. We used A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) to evaluate the quality of the articles. When there were multiple studies aiming at the same result, we chose the study with higher-quality evaluations for further analysis. To ensure the reliability of the conclusions, we recalculated each outcome. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the credibility of the outcomes. Results: A total of 21 studies were included for analysis. Through AMSTAR2, it was found that 8 research methodologies were of moderate quality, while other studies were regarded as having low or critically low quality. The sensitivity and specificity of 17 different outcomes were analyzed. There were 4 studies on esophagus, 4 studies on stomach, and 4 studies on colorectal regions. Two studies were associated with capsule endoscopy, two were related to laryngoscopy, and one was related to ultrasonic endoscopy. In terms of sensitivity, gastroesophageal reflux disease had the highest accuracy rate, reaching 97%, while the invasion depth of colon neoplasia, with 71%, had the lowest accuracy rate. On the other hand, the specificity of colorectal cancer was the highest, reaching 98%, while the gastrointestinal stromal tumor, with only 80%, had the lowest specificity. The GRADE evaluation suggested that the reliability of most outcomes was low or very low. Conclusions: AI proved valuabe in endoscopic diagnoses, especially in esophageal and colorectal diseases. These findings provide a theoretical basis for developing and evaluating AI-assisted systems, which are aimed at assisting endoscopists in carrying out examinations, leading to improved patient health outcomes. However, further high-quality research is needed in the future to fully validate AI's effectiveness.
ABSTRACT
Clinical studies are reviewed by clinical research ethics committees (CRECs) in order to ensure that they are conducted within the framework of good clinical practice and that the rights of volunteers are respected. Research type, department, status, scope, principal investigator's characteristics and CREC decisions were all evaluated. A total of 1044 research applications were found to have been submitted. In addition, 14.6% of the applications were clinical trials and 48.8% were retrospective studies. Of all the researchers, 50.4% of them were found to have indicated an incorrect type of research. The very low number of interventional clinical trials suggests that researchers tended to be hesitant about conducting such trials or did not have the means to do so. The fact that the applications were often submitted by indicating a wrong type of research method also signifies the investigators' lack of knowledge in this regard.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The current literature inadequately addresses the extent to which remote monitoring should be integrated into care models for chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). OBJECTIVE: This study examined a remote monitoring program (RMP) in cystic fibrosis (CF) by exploring experiences, future perspectives, and use behavior over 3 years, with the aim of developing future directions for remote monitoring in CRDs. METHODS: This was a mixed methods, multicenter, observational study in 5 Dutch CF centers following a sequential explanatory design. Self-designed questionnaires using the technology acceptance model were sent out to people with CF who had a minimum of 12 months of experience with the RMP and local health care professionals (HCPs). Questionnaire outcomes were used to inform semistructured interviews with HCPs and people with CF. Qualitative findings were reported following the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist. Anonymous data on use frequency of all people with CF were analyzed. RESULTS: Between the second quarter of 2020 and the end of 2022, a total of 608 people with CF were enrolled in the program, and a total of 9418 lung function tests and 2631 symptom surveys were conducted. In total, 65% (24/37) of HCPs and 89% (72/81) of people with CF responded to the questionnaire, and 7 HCPs and 12 people with CF participated in semistructured interviews. Both people with CF and HCPs were positive about remote monitoring in CF care and found the RMP a good addition to daily care (people with CF: 44/72, 61%; HCPs: 21/24, 88%). Benefits ranged from supporting individual patients to reducing health care consumption. The most valued monitoring tool was home spirometry by both people with CF (66/72, 92%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%). Downsides included the potential to lose sight of patients and negative psychosocial effects, as 17% (12/72) of people with CF experienced some form of stress due to the RMP. A large majority of people with CF (59/72, 82%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%) wanted to keep using the RMP in future, with 79% (19/24) of HCPs and 75% (54/72) of people with CF looking forward to more replacement of in-person care with digital care during periods of well-being. Future perspectives for the RMP were centered on creating hybrid care models, personalizing remote care, and balancing individual benefits with monitoring burden. CONCLUSIONS: Remote monitoring has considerable potential in supporting people with CF and HCPs within the CF care model. We identified 4 practice-based future directions for remote monitoring in CF and CRD care. The strategies, ranging from patient driven to prediction driven, can help clinicians, researchers, and policy makers navigate the rapidly changing digital health field, integrate remote monitoring into local care models, and align remote care with patient and clinician needs.
Subject(s)
Cystic Fibrosis , Cystic Fibrosis/therapy , Cystic Fibrosis/physiopathology , Humans , Female , Adult , Male , Chronic Disease , Surveys and Questionnaires , Telemedicine , Adolescent , Young Adult , Netherlands , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , ChildABSTRACT
Introduction: Integrating genetic data into conservation management decisions is a challenging task that requires strong partnerships between researchers and managers. Conservation in Latin America is of crucial relevance worldwide given the high biodiversity levels and the presence of hotspots in this region. Methods: We conducted a survey across Latin America to identify gaps and opportunities between genetic researchers and conservation managers. We aimed to better understand conservation managers' points of view and how genetic research could help conservation practitioners to achieve their goals, by implementing genetic assessments that could effectively inform conservation practices. We distributed an online survey via four regional collaborating organizations and 32 focal points based in 20 Latin American countries. The target respondents were conservation managers of species or areas in Latin America. Results: We collected a total of 468 answered questionnaires from 21 Latin American countries. Most respondents (44%) were from an academic or research institution while non-academics were mainly from non-governmental institutions (30%) and government agencies (25%). Most respondents (65%) have performed or used genetic assessments in their managed area or species, either alone, in partnership, contracting someone else or using published results. For the majority of this group, the genetic results were relevant to their conservation management goals, helping to inform management decisions. Respondents that had not performed genetic assessments (35%) were mainly from the non-academic group, and their main barriers were limited access to funds, genetic lab facilities, and trained personnel to design studies and conduct lab work. Discussion: From the findings, we describe the current situation and provide a general diagnosis of the conservation-genetics gap in Latin America. We describe the gender gap, academic-practitioner co-development of conservation questions and projects, and the nationality and residency of Latin American conservation managers in relation to the countries where they work. We discuss opportunities to co-create research questions and co-develop studies based on conservation practitioners' needs. We offer recommendations for overcoming barriers to integrate genetic information into conservation actions, and advance agendas that fit the needs and realities of the highly heterogeneous, biodiverse and challenging Latin American region.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Engaging researchers as research subjects is key to informing the development of effective and relevant research practices. It is important to understand how best to engage researchers as research subjects. METHODS: A 24 factorial experiment, as part of a Multiphase Optimization Strategy, was performed to evaluate effects of four recruitment strategy components on participant opening of an emailed survey link and survey completion. Participants were members of three US-based national health research consortia. A stratified simple random sample was used to assign potential survey participants to one of 16 recruitment scenarios. Recruitment strategy components were intended to address both intrinsic and extrinsic sources of motivation, including: $50 gift, $1,000 raffle, altruistic messaging, and egoistic messaging. Multivariable generalized linear regression analyses adjusting for consortium estimated component effects on outcomes. Potential interactions among components were tested. Results are reported as adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Surveys were collected from June to December 2023. A total of 418 participants were included from the consortia, with final analytical sample of 400 eligible participants. Out of the final sample, 82% (341) opened the survey link and 35% (147) completed the survey. Altruistic messaging increased the odds of opening the survey (aOR 2.02, 95% CI: 1.35-2.69, p = 0.033), while egoistic messaging significantly reduced the odds of opening the survey (aOR 0.56, 95%CI 0.38-0.75, p = 0.08). The receipt of egoistic messaging increased the odds of completing the survey once opened (aOR 1.81, 95%CI: 1.39-2.23, p < 0.05). There was a significant negative interaction effect between the altruistic appeal and egoistic messaging strategies for survey completion outcome. Monetary incentives did not a have a significant impact on survey completion. CONCLUSION: Intrinsic motivation is likely to be a greater driver of health researcher participation in survey research than extrinsic motivation. Altruistic and egoistic messaging may differentially impact initial interest and survey completion and when combined may lead to improved rates of recruitment, but not survey completion. Further research is needed to determine how to best optimize message content and whether the effects observed are modified by survey burden.
Subject(s)
Motivation , Patient Selection , Research Personnel , Humans , Female , Research Personnel/psychology , Research Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Middle Aged , Internet/statistics & numerical data , AltruismABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) has become an essential part of health research. There is a need for genuine involvement in order to ensure that research is relevant to patients. This can then improve the quality, relevance, and impact of health research, while at the same time reducing wasted research and in doing so bringing science and society closer together. Despite the increasing attention for this involvement, it is not yet common practice to report on proposed activities. An article reporting planned PPI could provide guidance and inspiration for the wider academic community in future activities. Therefore, this current article aims to describe the way in which PPI principles are incorporated in the research project called "Quality of Life in Oncology: measuring what matters for cancer patients and survivors in Europe (EUonQoL)." This project aims to develop a new set of questionnaires to enable cancer patients to assess their quality of life, entitled the EUonQoL-Kit. METHODS: The first step is to recruit cancer patients and their informal caregivers as co-researchers in order to train them to collaborate with the researchers. Based on their skills and preferences, they are then assigned to several of the project's work packages. Their individual roles, tasks, and responsibilities regarding the work packages, to which they have been assigned, are evaluated and adapted when necessary. The impact of their involvement is evaluated by both the researchers and co-researchers. DISCUSSION: PPI is a complex and dynamic process. As such, the overall structure of the research may be defined while at the same time leaving room for certain aspects to be filled in later. Our research is, we believe, relevant as co-researcher involvement in such a large European project as EUonQoL is a new development.
ABSTRACT
Job insecurity is now one of the major stressors affecting well-being at work. In academia, researchers appear to be in the most precarious position. To explore the relationship between job insecurity and well-being at work, we analyzed a sample of research fellows belonging to STEM disciplines in Italy. Using a latent profile approach, we identified three "hidden" subgroups: "Safe & Sound"; "Safe not so Sound" and "Neither Safe or Sound." Compared to previous studies, our results show that even within a population of STEM researchers that tends to have good levels of employability and mobility, there are subgroups of people characterized by greater job insecurity and low work commitment, who suffer from emotional exhaustion and cynicism at work level, i.e., more exposed to the risk of burnout.
ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has negatively affected research activities across various fields. This study aimed to determine nursing researchers' concerns about research activities during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan and subsequent changes brought on by it. For this study, we conducted descriptive statistics and text mining analyses using data from two surveys conducted by the Japan Academy of Nursing Science (JANS) in the early days of the pandemic (first survey: mid-2020) and after 2 years (second survey: early 2022). Concerns about research activities were observed in 89% and 80% of the nursing researchers in the first and second surveys, respectively. Furthermore, concerns about "Difficulty in collecting research data" and "Content and quality of your research" were stronger in the second survey. Text mining analyses revealed that in the first survey, they were concerned about environmental changes and restrictions when proceeding with research during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was unfamiliar at the time. In the second survey, after overcoming environmental changes in the early stages of the pandemic, nursing researchers' concerns shifted to anxiety about the future, such as concerns about degree acquisition, employment and career advancement, and research results. The current study highlights various concerns among nursing researchers regarding research activities that have evolved over time during the pandemic. Academic societies must flexibly construct support measures for nursing researchers when a new infectious disease occurs. Such measures should be sensitive to the prevailing social circumstances and the evolving needs of researchers.
ABSTRACT
Background: The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ' What does the evidence say about the 'problem' with 'poor' research culture, what are the benefits of 'good' research culture, and what does 'good' look like?' Aims: To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods: A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results: 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions: There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals' well-being, career progression and performance.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Undertaking Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) when developing health and social care research grant applications is critical. However, researchers may not have any funding to undertake PPI when developing grants. In response, the National Institute for Health and Care Research- Research Design Service for Yorkshire and the Humber in the United Kingdom, provided Public Involvement Fund Awards of up to £600 to fund PPI activity when researchers were developing grant applications. Researchers provided post-activity reports about how they utilised the Public Involvement Fund. These reports were analysed with the aim of evaluating the usefulness of the Public Involvement Fund and to provide learning about supporting researchers to undertake PPI when developing grants. METHODS: The project was a qualitative document analysis of 55 reports. Initially a researcher coded four reports and three Public Contributors provided feedback. Researchers coded the remaining reports and identified key findings. A workshop was held with the three Public Contributors to develop the findings. RESULTS: Researchers accessing the Public Involvement Fund award were generally early career researchers or clinicians who did not have other sources of funding for pre-grant PPI input. Researchers felt the award was useful in enabling them to conduct PPI, which strengthened their grant applications. Some researchers found that the award limit of £600 and guidance encouraging expenditure within three months, made it difficult to undertake PPI throughout the full grant development process. Instead, the majority of researchers consulted Public Contributors on one or two occasions. Researchers struggled to recruit diverse members or run group sessions due to the time pressures of grant deadlines. Researchers wanted training on undertaking PPI alongside the financial support. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers, especially early career researchers found having a Public Involvement Fund award instrumental in enabling them to undertake PPI when developing grant applications. It would be beneficial for similar schemes to be widely available. Schemes need to provide sufficient funding to enable meaningful PPI and allow researchers to hold the award for long enough to facilitate involvement during the whole grant development process. Researchers continue to need training on undertaking PPI.
Undertaking Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) when developing health and social care research grant applications is important. This ensures that patients have a voice in deciding what topics are researched. However, researchers often do not have funding to undertake PPI when developing grants. In response, a regional research advice service in the United Kingdom established a small grant scheme (up to £600) to fund PPI activity. This was called the Public Involvement Fund (PIF). Researchers developing health and social care grant applications could apply. After spending the funding, researchers wrote reports to explain how they used the Public Involvement Fund and the challenges they faced. We analysed 55 reports submitted over a three-year period to understand researchers' experiences of the fund. Researchers found the funding critical in enabling them to undertake PPI. Many felt their grants were improved from consulting Public Contributors. For example, helping them to decide a topic, changing their research method or choosing a questionnaire. However, researchers sometimes struggled to recruit Public Contributors, particularly when the research was not about a specific health condition. Researchers wanted to be able to have the award for long enough to enable them to involve Public Contributors throughout the whole grant development process. Alongside funding, researchers also need specific training about undertaking PPI when developing grants. For example, how to recruit representative Public Contributors quickly. It is recommended that similar schemes to the PIF are available to enable researchers to fund PPI activities when developing grant applications.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Improving the nutritional quality of the food supply increases access to nutritious foods, which improves dietary habits and population health. Yet, knowledge mobilization initiatives between public health nutrition researchers and food industries are often not adequately considered and understood. This study explored what elements related to this specific context need to be recognized so that researchers can better mobilize nutrition science knowledge with the food industry to promote the nutritional improvement of food products. METHOD: A case study qualitative approach was selected to answer the research question, using semi-structured interviews as the data collection technique. Québec baking industry actors were shown a mock-up of an online mobilization platform sharing the results of the Food Quality Observatory that describes the nutritional quality of breads offered in Québec, Canada. They were asked to think aloud as they explored the web platform and were interviewed. Two coders analyzed the data using an inductive approach and thematic content analysis, starting with individual open coding, and then put forward their analyses and drafted the final themes. RESULTS: The final data consisted of 10 semi-structured interviews conducted between October 2019 and August 2020. Four main themes were identified: the industry's context, the knowledge mobilization initiative, the product-related matters stemming from the information shared and the motivation within the industry. Within each theme, sub-themes were highlighted and related to the industries' motivation to improve their products' nutritional quality. This study also specified key considerations for changes to the sodium and fiber content in bread. CONCLUSION: Other steps beyond using simple language and a website format could be taken to better mobilize scientific knowledge with food industries, such as providing more consumer information, using an integrated knowledge mobilization approach that includes a consideration of ethics, working with communication professionals, collaborating with food science experts, and providing resources to act on shared information. Legislation such as the front-of-pack regulations could accelerate the pace of collaboration between researchers and industry. Overall, establishing a prior relationship with industries could help gain a better understanding of the themes highlighted in this study. Future research could build on this case study to provide more insights and solidify these findings. CLASSIFICATION CODES: Public Health, Public Private, Policy Making, Research Institutions, Use of Knowledge.
ABSTRACT
This commentary draws on our experience organising a targeted networking event at the 10th International Conference on Health and Hepatitis in Substance Users, in Glasgow, Scotland in October 2022. The event, held the day before the conference, brought together people with lived and living experiences of drug use and early- and mid-career researchers on an equitable basis. We offer reflections, focussing on how the event promoted community-academic engagement from members of the respective groups. We provide recommendations for how conferences can organise to engage with people who use drugs-both those with lived and living experience and foster greater inclusion for all attendees.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of antibiotic prescriptions for upper respiratory infections (URIs) are inappropriate. Clinical decision support (CDS) systems to mitigate unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions have been implemented into electronic health records, but their use by providers has been limited. OBJECTIVE: As a delegation protocol, we adapted a validated electronic health record-integrated clinical prediction rule (iCPR) CDS-based intervention for registered nurses (RNs), consisting of triage to identify patients with low-acuity URI followed by CDS-guided RN visits. It was implemented in February 2022 as a randomized controlled stepped-wedge trial in 43 primary and urgent care practices within 4 academic health systems in New York, Wisconsin, and Utah. While issues were pragmatically addressed as they arose, a systematic assessment of the barriers to implementation is needed to better understand and address these barriers. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case study, collecting quantitative and qualitative data regarding clinical workflows and triage-template use from expert interviews, study surveys, routine check-ins with practice personnel, and chart reviews over the first year of implementation of the iCPR intervention. Guided by the updated CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research), we characterized the initial barriers to implementing a URI iCPR intervention for RNs in ambulatory care. CFIR constructs were coded as missing, neutral, weak, or strong implementation factors. RESULTS: Barriers were identified within all implementation domains. The strongest barriers were found in the outer setting, with those factors trickling down to impact the inner setting. Local conditions driven by COVID-19 served as one of the strongest barriers, impacting attitudes among practice staff and ultimately contributing to a work infrastructure characterized by staff changes, RN shortages and turnover, and competing responsibilities. Policies and laws regarding scope of practice of RNs varied by state and institutional application of those laws, with some allowing more clinical autonomy for RNs. This necessitated different study procedures at each study site to meet practice requirements, increasing innovation complexity. Similarly, institutional policies led to varying levels of compatibility with existing triage, rooming, and documentation workflows. These workflow conflicts were compounded by limited available resources, as well as an implementation climate of optional participation, few participation incentives, and thus low relative priority compared to other clinical duties. CONCLUSIONS: Both between and within health care systems, significant variability existed in workflows for patient intake and triage. Even in a relatively straightforward clinical workflow, workflow and cultural differences appreciably impacted intervention adoption. Takeaways from this study can be applied to other RN delegation protocol implementations of new and innovative CDS tools within existing workflows to support integration and improve uptake. When implementing a system-wide clinical care intervention, considerations must be made for variability in culture and workflows at the state, health system, practice, and individual levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04255303; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04255303.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Collaboration is gaining prominence in the priority setting of Health Policy And System Research (HPSR). However, its practice and challenges are not well explored in Ethiopia. Understanding the practice and barriers of collaborative Health Policy and System Research will help design approaches and platforms for setting inclusive and participatory policy and system-level health research topics. This paper explores the practice and barriers of collaborative HPSR-priority setting exercise in Ethiopia. METHODS: This study investigates the practice and barriers of collaborative health policy and system research priority-setting exercises in Ethiopia. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, we conducted Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and an online self-administered survey with open-ended questionnaires to capture diverse perspectives from stakeholders involved in the research priority-setting process. Through conventional content analysis, we identified key contents related to current practices, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing collaboration in health policy and system research prioritization. RESULTS: Our findings reveal a complex landscape characterized by varying levels of stakeholder engagement, institutional capacity constraints, and competing priorities within the health research ecosystem. Despite notable efforts to foster collaboration, stakeholders identified persistent challenges such as limited resources, institutional fragmentation, and inadequate coordination mechanisms as barriers to effective priority-setting processes. The implications of our research extend beyond academic discourse, with direct relevance to health policy and system research practice in Ethiopia. By shedding light on the dynamics of collaborative priority-setting exercises, our findings offer valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking to enhance the effectiveness and inclusivity of health research prioritization processes. Addressing the identified barriers and leveraging existing strengths in the research ecosystem can contribute to more evidence-informed health policies and programs, ultimately improving health outcomes for Ethiopian populations. CONCLUSIONS: Most institutions do not apply health policy and system research-priority setting to conduct informed decision-making. The barriers explored were weak integration, lack of knowledge, system, and platforms for the priority setting of Health Policy and System Resreach. So, it is recommended to build skills of different actors in the Health Policy and System Research-priority setting exercise and design a system and platform to integrate different stakeholders for collaborative research topics priority setting.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Health Policy , Health Priorities , Stakeholder Participation , Ethiopia , Humans , Policy Making , Health Services Research , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To understand the actual situation and needs of young researchers and to provide reference for the management of Young Researchers Association (YRA) and the Japanese Society for Hygiene activities in the future. METHODS: An Internet survey was conducted on 67 members registered in YRA of the Japanese Society for Hygiene. The questions included those on basic information, research content and impressions about the activities of the society. RESULTS: Although members of YRA differ in backgrounds, research method used, and years of research experience, the respondents rated the organization as highly useful and participated continuously. In particular, they considered that participation in the planning of academic conferences and summer gatherings of YRA not only helped improve interpersonal relationships and expertise, but also provided opportunities to consult regarding educational activities and collect information. Regarding the format of conferences, it was shown that the majority of requests were for a hybrid format. It was also shown that most of the respondents expected opportunities for collaboration and joint research through participation in YRA. CONCLUSION: Through YRA, we would like to contribute to the further revitalization of young researchers and the Japanese Society for Hygiene by understanding and responding to the needs of diverse young researchers.
Subject(s)
Research Personnel , Research , Humans , Japan , Surveys and Questionnaires , Hygiene , Female , Male , Societies, Scientific , Adult , Awareness , Internet , Congresses as TopicABSTRACT
While low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially in Southern and Eastern Africa, bear the largest burden of the HIV globally, investigators working on the front lines in these regions are leading a limited number of research efforts, particularly related to HIV cure. Conducting HIV cure research in high-burden HIV LIMCs provides an unparalleled opportunity to formulate innovative research strategies, design trials tailored to the local context, evaluate clinical outcomes within key and vulnerable populations, meaningful involvement of stakeholders, and to shape policies in areas where HIV prevention and cure interventions can yield the most significant impact. Further, the high prevalence of infection, with varied HIV strains affecting large diverse populations, creates a unique environment for studies that would not be feasible in any other part of the world. This underscores the critical importance of addressing obstacles to unlock the full potential of research efforts in these regions. In this viewpoint, we identify significant challenges facing early career investigators in LMICs, particularly in Africa, that hinder their full engagement in HIV cure research. Drawing examples from the International AIDS Society's Research-for-Cure Academy, we provide practical recommendations to overcome barriers that include limited access to funding, effective mentors, educational and career development opportunities, coupled with inadequate investment in infrastructure that contribute towards the limited number of investigators from high-burden HIV LIMCs who are spearheading cutting-edge cure research. Addressing these challenges is crucial to empower investigators who possess unique insights and expertise, and who are well positioned to lead HIV cure-related research efforts. We acknowledge and welcome initiatives that promote capacity building and knowledge exchange between early-career investigators in LMICs and their peers and scientific leaders from high-income countries (HICs). Prioritizing investment in global collaboration and partnership will play a pivotal role in empowering the next generation of African scientists and clinicians. To expedite advancements of cure-related strategies that will be effective in high-burden HIV LMICs, we endorse the sustainable expansion of these pivotal initiatives in these regions, to enhance their effectiveness and hasten progress in the pursuit of a global HIV cure.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Embedding researchers into policy and other settings may enhance research capacity within organisations to enable them to become more research active. We aimed to generate an evidence map on evaluations of embedded researcher interventions to (i) identify where systematic reviews and primary research are needed and (ii) develop conceptual understandings of 'embedded researchers'. We define 'embedded researchers' through a set of principles that incorporate elements such as the aim of activities, the types of relationships and learning involved, and the affiliations and identities adopted. METHODS: We included studies published across all sectors, searching fourteen databases, other web sources and two journals for evaluations published between 1991 and spring 2021. Data were extracted using a coding tool developed for this study. We identified new typologies of embedded researcher interventions through undertaking Latent Class Analysis. RESULTS: The map describes 229 evaluations spanning a variety of contexts. Our set of principles allowed us to move beyond a narrow focus on embedded researchers in name alone, towards consideration of the wide range of roles, activities, identities, and affiliations related to embedded researchers. We identified 108 different allied terms describing an embedded researcher. Embedded researcher activity spanned a continuum across lines of physical, cultural, institutional, and procedural embeddedness (from weaker to more intense forms of embeddedness) and took a range of forms that bridge or blur boundaries between academia and policy/practice. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a broad map of international embedded researcher activity in a wide range of sectors. The map suggests that embedded researcher interventions occupy a broader suite of models than previously acknowledged and our findings also offer insight on the type and nature of this literature. Given the clear policy interest in this area, a better understanding of the processes involved with becoming embedded within an organisation is needed. Further work is also necessary to address the challenges of evaluating the work of embedded researchers, including consideration for which outcome measures are most appropriate, to better understand their influence.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Selecting a journal with an appropriate scope and breadth, well-respected by other scholars in the field, and widely indexed and accessible to readers is an integral part of publishing. Academic publishing has recently seen a significant shift away from traditional print publications and toward open access journals and online publications. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate academic nurse researchers' knowledge, experience, and attitudes regarding predatory journals. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional quantitative study design was conducted using Predatory Journals Questionnaire to collect the data from academic nurse educators working at X and XX University. RESULTS: Almost two-thirds (68.6 %) of participants had previous knowledge of the term "predatory journal." As well as, the majority of academic educators had previous experience as they had used predatory journals before, as by being asked to publish in their journal (84.3 %) or serve on its editorial board (24.3 %), participants were more likely to receive requests to submit an article to a predatory journal (52.9 %) via email, mail, or phone. In addition, academic nurse researchers had a moderate perspective (mean = 3.87 ± 1.06; mean % score = 71.71) toward predatory journals. CONCLUSION: Publishing in a predatory journal, whether done knowingly or unknowingly, can harm authors' reputations as academics, their capacity to submit to other journals, and the quality of their work. According to the results of our study, many researchers still lacked a thorough understanding of the predatory journal publishing model, which is a phenomenon that demands an increasing amount of research, despite hearing about the phenomenon of a predatory journal and having previously attended training.
Subject(s)
Periodicals as Topic , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Faculty, Nursing , Organizations , PublishingABSTRACT
MOTIVATION: Palliative Care (PC) is a small, relatively young interprofessional sub-specialty; hence mentorship for early-career research faculty is widely dispersed across schools and universities. We developed the Junior Visiting Professor Program (JVPP) to provide junior faculty in palliative care (PC) with opportunities to meet multidisciplinary PC researchers from other institutions and to advance their research through networking and presenting their work. We describe how we designed and implemented the program, and we report on the first cohort of participants. METHODS: We invited PC research groups from US schools of medicine and nursing to participate in this 5-year interprofessional exchange program by nominating junior faculty and serving as hosts. We matched nominees to host institutions based on nominee training experiences, nominee research interests, and host institution faculty expertise. In addition, we provided logistical guidance on visit planning. Post-visit, we surveyed both hosts and junior visiting professors (JVPs) regarding their satisfaction, perceived value, and suggestions regarding the program. RESULTS: We recruited 13 schools to participate and matched 10 nominees to host institutions in our first year. Nine JVPs completed their visit; 6 JVPs and 8 host faculty/staff responded to the post-visit survey. Overall, JVPs were highly satisfied with their matches and the visiting professor experience. Hosts were generally satisfied with their matches and believed the program to be mutually beneficial. The most frequent suggestion was for greater administrative support to plan visits. CONCLUSIONS: Structured, well-supported opportunities for networking across institutions is beneficial for emerging PC researchers and for building PC research capacity.