Trends in Research Data Management and Academic Health Sciences Libraries.

Spurred by the National Institute of Health mandating a data management and sharing plan as a requirement of grant funding, research data management has exploded in importance for librarians supporting researchers and research institutions. This editorial examines the role and direction of libraries in this process from several viewpoints. Key markers of success include collaboration, establishing new relationships, leveraging existing relationships, accessing multiple avenues of communication, and building niche expertise and cachè as a valued and trustworthy partner.

Starting with I: Combating Anti-Blackness in Libraries.

When millions saw footage of George Floyd's murder by police during the COVID-19 pandemic where marginalized groups had higher death rates, increased awareness and action arose because Black people are treated differently in the United States. Many libraries subsequently created statements and committees to commit to reduce inequities in libraries; however, Black bodies are still being harmed. Therefore, this editorial details the Start and End with I concept and provides concrete steps for making change. It is time to center the voices that have been dismissed and ignored for too long. Are you willing to do what it takes?

Reporting and Availability of COVID-19 Demographic Data by US Health Departments (April to October 2020): Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for consistent collection of demographic data on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and sharing it with the public in open and accessible ways. Due to the lack of consistency in data reporting during the initial spread of COVID-19, the Equitable Data Collection and Disclosure on COVID-19 Act was introduced into the Congress that mandates collection and reporting of demographic COVID-19 data on testing, treatments, and deaths by age, sex, race and ethnicity, primary language, socioeconomic status, disability, and county. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated how COVID-19 demographic data have been collected before and after the introduction of this legislation. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate differences in reporting and public availability of COVID-19 demographic data by US state health departments and Washington, District of Columbia (DC) before (pre-Act), immediately after (post-Act), and 6 months after (6-month follow-up) the introduction of the Equitable Data Collection and Disclosure on COVID-19 Act in the Congress on April 21, 2020. METHODS: We reviewed health department websites of all 50 US states and Washington, DC (N=51). We evaluated how each state reported age, sex, and race and ethnicity data for all confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths and how they made this data available (ie, charts and tables only or combined with dashboards and machine-actionable downloadable formats) at the three timepoints. RESULTS: We found statistically significant increases in the number of health departments reporting age-specific data for COVID-19 cases (P=.045) and resulting deaths (P=.002), sex-specific data for COVID-19 deaths (P=.003), and race- and ethnicity-specific data for confirmed cases (P=.003) and deaths (P=.005) post-Act and at the 6-month follow-up (P<.05 for all). The largest increases were race and ethnicity state data for confirmed cases (pre-Act: 18/51, 35%; post-Act: 31/51, 61%; 6-month follow-up: 46/51, 90%) and deaths due to COVID-19 (pre-Act: 13/51, 25%; post-Act: 25/51, 49%; and 6-month follow-up: 39/51, 76%). Although more health departments reported race and ethnicity data based on federal requirements (P<.001), over half (29/51, 56.9%) still did not report all racial and ethnic groups as per the Office of Management and Budget guidelines (pre-Act: 5/51, 10%; post-Act: 21/51, 41%; and 6-month follow-up: 27/51, 53%). The number of health departments that made COVID-19 data available for download significantly increased from 7 to 23 (P<.001) from our initial data collection (April 2020) to the 6-month follow-up, (October 2020). CONCLUSIONS: Although the increased demand for disaggregation has improved public reporting of demographics across health departments, an urgent need persists for the introduced legislation to be passed by the Congress for the US states to consistently collect and make characteristics of COVID-19 cases, deaths, and vaccinations available in order to allocate resources to mitigate disease spread.

Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring perceived maternal care quality in low- to high-income countries: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Health practitioners and researchers must be able to measure and assess maternal care quality in facilities to monitor, intervene, and reduce global maternal mortality rates. On the global scale, there is a general lack of consensus on how maternal care quality is defined, conceptualized, and measured. Much of the literature addressing this problem has focused primarily on defining, conceptualizing, and measuring clinical indicators of maternal care quality. Less attention has been given in this regard to perceived maternal care quality among women which is known to influence care utilization and adherence. Therefore, there is a need to map the literature focused on defining, conceptualizing, and measuring perceived maternal care quality across low-, middle-, and high-income country contexts. METHODS: This scoping review protocol will follow the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework. A comprehensive search strategy will be used to search for articles published from inception to 2020 in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, and WHO Global Index Medicus. Gray literature will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen articles by title and abstract, then by full-text based on pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria. A third reviewer will arbitrate any discrepancies. This protocol outlines a four-step analytic approach that includes numerical, graphical, tabular, and narrative summaries to provide a comprehensive description of the body of literature. DISCUSSION: The findings from this scoping review will provide a comprehensive overview of the existing evidence on perceived maternal care quality. The findings are expected to inform future work on building consensus around the definition and conceptualization of perceived maternal care quality, and lay the groundwork for future research aimed at developing measures of perceived maternal care quality that can be applied across country contexts. Consequently, this review may aid in facilitating coordinated efforts to measure and improve maternal care quality across diverse country contexts (i.e., low-, middle-, and high-income country contexts). REVIEW REGISTRATION: This scoping review has been registered in the Open Science Framework (osf.io/k8nqh).

Exploring PubMed as a reliable resource for scholarly communications services.

OBJECTIVE: PubMed's provision of MEDLINE and other National Library of Medicine (NLM) resources has made it one of the most widely accessible biomedical resources globally. The growth of PubMed Central (PMC) and public access mandates have affected PubMed's composition. The authors tested recent claims that content in PMC is of low quality and affects PubMed's reliability, while exploring PubMed's role in the current scholarly communications landscape. METHODS: The percentage of MEDLINE-indexed records was assessed in PubMed and various subsets of records from PMC. Data were retrieved via the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) interface, and follow-up interviews with a PMC external reviewer and staff at NLM were conducted. RESULTS: Almost all PubMed content (91%) is indexed in MEDLINE; however, since the launch of PMC, the percentage of PubMed records indexed in MEDLINE has slowly decreased. This trend is the result of an increase in PMC content from journals that are not indexed in MEDLINE and not a result of author manuscripts submitted to PMC in compliance with public access policies. Author manuscripts in PMC continue to be published in MEDLINE-indexed journals at a high rate (85%). The interviewees clarified the difference between the sources, with MEDLINE serving as a highly selective index of journals in biomedical literature and PMC serving as an open archive of quality biomedical and life sciences literature and a repository of funded research. CONCLUSION: The differing scopes of PMC and MEDLINE will likely continue to affect their overlap; however, quality control exists in the maintenance and facilitation of both resources, and funding from major grantors is a major component of quality assurance in PMC.

Behavioral comparisons in Autism Spectrum Disorder and Developmental Coordination Disorder: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) are developmental disorders that, since the DSM-5, can be diagnosed as co-occurring conditions. While some recent studies suggest that ASD and DCD have similar traits, others show clear behavioral distinctions between the two conditions. By gathering all studies that included (1) an ASD group and a DCD group, (2) an ASD+DCD group and a DCD group, or (3) ASD, ASD+DCD, and DCD groups, we aimed to identify similarities and differences in behaviors between the two disorders. METHOD: We used a systematic search of PubMed (1946 -), Scopus (1970 -), PsycINFO (via EBSCO, 1600 -), CINAHL (via EBSCO, 1937 -), SportDiscus (via EBSCO, 1985 -), and WorldCat (via FirstSearch) in addition to reference list and author name searching PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SportDiscus, and WorldCat to identify original studies that met the following criteria: (1) an ASD group and a DCD group, (2) an ASD+DCD group and a DCD group, or (3) ASD, ASD+DCD, and DCD groups. RESULTS: From the 1,598 articles screened, 11 were included in the qualitative analysis. The articles included reported more differences than similarities in individuals with ASD and DCD, with clear distinctions for working memory ability, gestural performance, grip selection, and cortical thickness. Only two studies reported similarities in face processing abilities and perceived competence, and the interventional studies showed group similarities in behavior improvement, such as intelligence and attention. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the articles reviewed, we conclude that while DCD and ASD share some behavioral symptoms, the symptom profiles of each disorder are unique and separable. We recommend that the evaluation of potential DCD in individuals with ASD be performed systematically and thoroughly, so as to distinguish this co-occurring condition from sensorimotor symptoms associated with ASD.