Raising concerns on questionable ethics approvals - a case study of 456 trials from the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection.

BACKGROUND: The practice of clinical research is strictly regulated by law. During submission and review processes, compliance of such research with the laws enforced in the country where it was conducted is not always correctly filled in by the authors or verified by the editors. Here, we report a case of a single institution for which one may find hundreds of publications with seemingly relevant ethical concerns, along with 10 months of follow-up through contacts with the editors of these articles. We thus argue for a stricter control of ethical authorization by scientific editors and we call on publishers to cooperate to this end. METHODS: We present an investigation of the ethics and legal aspects of 456 studies published by the IHU-MI (Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection) in Marseille, France. RESULTS: We identified a wide range of issues with the stated research authorization and ethics of the published studies with respect to the Institutional Review Board and the approval presented. Among the studies investigated, 248 were conducted with the same ethics approval number, even though the subjects, samples, and countries of investigation were different. Thirty-nine (39) did not even contain a reference to the ethics approval number while they present research on human beings. We thus contacted the journals that published these articles and provide their responses to our concerns. It should be noted that, since our investigation and reporting to journals, PLOS has issued expressions of concerns for several publications we analyze here. CONCLUSION: This case presents an investigation of the veracity of ethical approval, and more than 10 months of follow-up by independent researchers. We call for stricter control and cooperation in handling of these cases, including editorial requirement to upload ethical approval documents, guidelines from COPE to address such ethical concerns, and transparent editorial policies and timelines to answer such concerns. All supplementary materials are available.

Scientific Integrity Requires Publishing Rebuttals and Retracting Problematic Papers.

Recently, an article by Seneff et al. entitled "Innate immunosuppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs" was published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT). Here, we describe why this article, which contains unsubstantiated claims and misunderstandings such as "billions of lives are potentially at risk" with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, is problematic and should be retracted. We report here our request to the editor of FCT to have our rebuttal published, unfortunately rejected after three rounds of reviewing. Fighting the spread of false information requires enormous effort while receiving little or no credit for this necessary work, which often even ends up being threatened. This need for more scientific integrity is at the heart of our advocacy, and we call for large support, especially from editors and publishers, to fight more effectively against deadly disinformation.

RoboHapalytics: A Robot Assisted Haptic Controller for Immersive Analytics.

Immersive environments offer new possibilities for exploring three-dimensional volumetric or abstract data. However, typical mid-air interaction offers little guidance to the user in interacting with the resulting visuals. Previous work has explored the use of haptic controls to give users tangible affordances for interacting with the data, but these controls have either: been limited in their range and resolution; were spatially fixed; or required users to manually align them with the data space. We explore the use of a robot arm with hand tracking to align tangible controls under the user's fingers as they reach out to interact with data affordances. We begin with a study evaluating the effectiveness of a robot-extended slider control compared to a large fixed physical slider and a purely virtual mid-air slider. We find that the robot slider has similar accuracy to the physical slider but is significantly more accurate than mid-air interaction. Further, the robot slider can be arbitrarily reoriented, opening up many new possibilities for tangible haptic interaction with immersive visualisations. We demonstrate these possibilities through three use-cases: selection in a time-series chart; interactive slicing of CT scans; and finally exploration of a scatter plot depicting time-varying socio-economic data.

Assessing the burden of COVID-19 in developing countries: systematic review, meta-analysis and public policy implications.

INTRODUCTION: The infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 has been carefully measured and analysed in high-income countries, whereas there has been no systematic analysis of age-specific seroprevalence or IFR for developing countries. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature to identify all COVID-19 serology studies in developing countries that were conducted using representative samples collected by February 2021. For each of the antibody assays used in these serology studies, we identified data on assay characteristics, including the extent of seroreversion over time. We analysed the serology data using a Bayesian model that incorporates conventional sampling uncertainty as well as uncertainties about assay sensitivity and specificity. We then calculated IFRs using individual case reports or aggregated public health updates, including age-specific estimates whenever feasible. RESULTS: In most locations in developing countries, seroprevalence among older adults was similar to that of younger age cohorts, underscoring the limited capacity that these nations have to protect older age groups.Age-specific IFRs were roughly 2 times higher than in high-income countries. The median value of the population IFR was about 0.5%, similar to that of high-income countries, because disparities in healthcare access were roughly offset by differences in population age structure. CONCLUSION: The burden of COVID-19 is far higher in developing countries than in high-income countries, reflecting a combination of elevated transmission to middle-aged and older adults as well as limited access to adequate healthcare. These results underscore the critical need to ensure medical equity to populations in developing countries through provision of vaccine doses and effective medications.

Correction of scientific literature: Too little, too late!

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the limitations of the current scientific publication system, in which serious post-publication concerns are often addressed too slowly to be effective. In this Perspective, we offer suggestions to improve academia's willingness and ability to correct errors in an appropriate time frame.

Collaborative Work in Augmented Reality: A Survey.

In Augmented Reality (AR), users perceive virtual content anchored in the real world. It is used in medicine, education, games, navigation, maintenance, product design, and visualization, in both single-user and multi-user scenarios. Multi-user AR has received limited attention from researchers, even though AR has been in development for more than two decades. We present the state of existing work at the intersection of AR and Computer-Supported Collaborative Work (AR-CSCW), by combining a systematic survey approach with an exploratory, opportunistic literature search. We categorize 65 papers along the dimensions of space, time, role symmetry (whether the roles of users are symmetric), technology symmetry (whether the hardware platforms of users are symmetric), and output and input modalities. We derive design considerations for collaborative AR environments, and identify under-explored research topics. These include the use of heterogeneous hardware considerations and 3D data exploration research areas. This survey is useful for newcomers to the field, readers interested in an overview of CSCW in AR applications, and domain experts seeking up-to-date information.

Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the last decade Open Science principles have been successfully advocated for and are being slowly adopted in different research communities. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic many publishers and researchers have sped up their adoption of Open Science practices, sometimes embracing them fully and sometimes partially or in a sub-optimal manner. In this article, we express concerns about the violation of some of the Open Science principles and its potential impact on the quality of research output. We provide evidence of the misuses of these principles at different stages of the scientific process. We call for a wider adoption of Open Science practices in the hope that this work will encourage a broader endorsement of Open Science principles and serve as a reminder that science should always be a rigorous process, reliable and transparent, especially in the context of a pandemic where research findings are being translated into practice even more rapidly. We provide all data and scripts at https://osf.io/renxy/ .

Can Visualization Alleviate Dichotomous Thinking? Effects of Visual Representations on the Cliff Effect.

Common reporting styles for statistical results in scientific articles, such as p-values and confidence intervals (CI), have been reported to be prone to dichotomous interpretations, especially with respect to the null hypothesis significance testing framework. For example when the p-value is small enough or the CIs of the mean effects of a studied drug and a placebo are not overlapping, scientists tend to claim significant differences while often disregarding the magnitudes and absolute differences in the effect sizes. This type of reasoning has been shown to be potentially harmful to science. Techniques relying on the visual estimation of the strength of evidence have been recommended to reduce such dichotomous interpretations but their effectiveness has also been challenged. We ran two experiments on researchers with expertise in statistical analysis to compare several alternative representations of confidence intervals and used Bayesian multilevel models to estimate the effects of the representation styles on differences in researchers' subjective confidence in the results. We also asked the respondents' opinions and preferences in representation styles. Our results suggest that adding visual information to classic CI representation can decrease the tendency towards dichotomous interpretations - measured as the 'cliff effect': the sudden drop in confidence around p-value 0.05 - compared with classic CI visualization and textual representation of the CI with p-values. All data and analyses are publicly available at https://github.com/helske/statvis.

Open up: a survey on open and non-anonymized peer reviewing.

BACKGROUND: Our aim is to highlight the benefits and limitations of open and non-anonymized peer review. Our argument is based on the literature and on responses to a survey on the reviewing process of alt.chi, a more or less open review track within the so-called Computer Human Interaction (CHI) conference, the predominant conference in the field of human-computer interaction. This track currently is the only implementation of an open peer review process in the field of human-computer interaction while, with the recent increase in interest in open scientific practices, open review is now being considered and used in other fields. METHODS: We ran an online survey with 30 responses from alt.chi authors and reviewers, collecting quantitative data using multiple-choice questions and Likert scales. Qualitative data were collected using open questions. RESULTS: Our main quantitative result is that respondents are more positive to open and non-anonymous reviewing for alt.chi than for other parts of the CHI conference. The qualitative data specifically highlight the benefits of open and transparent academic discussions. The data and scripts are available on https://osf.io/vuw7h/, and the figures and follow-up work on http://tiny.cc/OpenReviews. CONCLUSION: While the benefits are quite clear and the system is generally well-liked by alt.chi participants, they remain reluctant to see it used in other venues. This concurs with a number of recent studies that suggest a divergence between support for a more open review process and its practical implementation.

Glanceable Visualization: Studies of Data Comparison Performance on Smartwatches.

We present the results of two perception studies to assess how quickly people can perform a simple data comparison task for small-scale visualizations on a smartwatch. The main goal of these studies is to extend our understanding of design constraints for smartwatch visualizations. Previous work has shown that a vast majority of smartwatch interactions last under 5 s. It is still unknown what people can actually perceive from visualizations during such short glances, in particular with such a limited display space of smartwatches. To shed light on this question, we conducted two perception studies that assessed the lower bounds of task time for a simple data comparison task. We tested three chart types common on smartwatches: bar charts, donut charts, and radial bar charts with three different data sizes: 7, 12, and 24 data values. In our first study, we controlled the differences of the two target bars to be compared, while the second study varied the difference randomly. For both studies, we found that participants performed the task on average in <300 ms for the bar chart, <220 ms for the donut chart, and in <1780 ms for the radial bar chart. Thresholds in the second study per chart type were on average 1.14-1.35× higher than in the first study. Our results show that bar and donut charts should be preferred on smartwatch displays when quick data comparisons are necessary.