Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 17.459
Filtrar
3.
Pan Afr Med J ; 35(Suppl 2): 147, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33193962

RESUMO

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2-a new single-stranded RNA virus with respiratory system proclivity and epithelial cell- is a novel infectious disease that originated in Wuhan, China in December, 2019 and has spread to many countries with the total number of confirmed cases put at 20,259,579 cases as of 12th August, 2020. It is transmitted from human-to-human via droplets. When an infected person coughs or sneezes, these droplets find their way into the mouth or nostrils of another person that is within a close range. Alternatively it can be contracted by touching infected hard surfaces and using the same hands to touch the mouth, nose and eye(s). COVID-19 has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 11th March, 2020. There is currently no therapeutic substance accepted as a panacea for the prophylaxis of this infectious disease. As a result of this back drop, many nations have instituted fourteen (14) days quarantine for suspected cases, social distancing and border closure in an attempt to curb the spread of COVID-19. There has been several conspirary theories that emanated since the disease was declared a pandemic. This paper provides useful information to serve as reference to those who seek proper understanding of COVID-19 and its deleterious effects in the body, by distiguishing between the factsand the conspiracy theoriesof coronavirus disease.


Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Delusões , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Aerossóis , Microbiologia do Ar , Betacoronavirus/fisiologia , Bioterrorismo , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/organização & administração , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Decepção , Fômites , Genocídio , Órgãos Governamentais , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Política , Quarentena , Pesquisadores , Mídias Sociais
5.
Recurso na Internet em Português | LIS - Localizador de Informação em Saúde | ID: lis-47911

RESUMO

Em parceria com o Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia (Inmetro), pesquisadores do Instituto Oswaldo cruz (IOC/Fiocruz) registraram novas imagens que revelam os efeitos da infecção pelo novo coronavírus nas células. Obtidas através de microscopia de alta resolução, as fotografias mostram que as células infectadas apresentam prolongamentos de membrana, chamados de filopódios, que formam conexões intercelulares


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico por imagem , Células/imunologia , Pesquisadores , Betacoronavirus
7.
PLoS One ; 15(10): e0239336, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33052905

RESUMO

All across the globe politically initiated research evaluations are based on "informed peer review" procedures. Scholars are appointed as evaluators and can apply self-defined quality standards in order to overcome shortcomings of standardized measures. Even though there are no binding criteria in these procedures and the quality standards of the scholars' disciplines vary, studies suggest that scholars, in their role as government-appointed research evaluators, assess research uniformly.By drawing on a small-N investigation, this study compares the quality standards scholars apply as government-appointed research evaluators with quality standards they follow as researchers. The study points to a paradox: Criteria scholars refer to while describing the excellence of their own research and criteria they use as evaluators differ and contradict each other. The results are discussed from different angles.


Assuntos
Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde/normas , Pesquisadores/psicologia , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Desenvolvimento de Programas , Projetos de Pesquisa
11.
Bull World Health Organ ; 98(9): 625-631, 2020 Sep 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33012862

RESUMO

While governments have been focusing on the unprecedented disruption to the global economy caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the urgent need for COVID-19 research, other health research has become a casualty of the pandemic. Major research operations that are unrelated to COVID-19 have been significantly diminished or suspended entirely because of either COVID-19-related legal restrictions or logistical, staffing or operational concerns. Billions of people globally are currently affected by lockdowns or curfews. Since the timescale of such restrictive measures is unknown and subject to change, many studies are now in limbo and the welfare of tens of thousands of study participants is at risk. These circumstances have introduced complex ethical challenges that merit urgent attention from international sponsors, researchers and regulators. Certain sponsors and regulators have published guidelines on how the COVID-19-related disruptions to clinical research should be managed. Although these guidelines provide a good starting point in navigating the challenges of the evolving pandemic, they only apply to those researchers funded or governed by these bodies. Here, we provide guidelines on managing such disruptions that apply beyond these specific settings. We highlight some of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on other ongoing research projects that are unrelated to COVID-19 and provide practical guidance on how the welfare of affected study participants should be managed. We conclude that policy-makers, sponsors, researchers and regulators must adopt a more flexible approach to ensure participant safety, while maintaining data integrity and complying with good clinical practices.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/economia , Pesquisa Biomédica/legislação & jurisprudência , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Betacoronavirus , Humanos , Pandemias , Pesquisadores , Sujeitos da Pesquisa
13.
Cell Syst ; 11(4): 331-335, 2020 10 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33007226

RESUMO

The lack of childcare infrastructure in the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted many systemic problems faced by academic caregivers, and particularly new parents. This commentary uses the lessons from the pandemic to highlight the potential role of mentors in supporting caregiver responsibilities.


Assuntos
Cuidado da Criança/provisão & distribução , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pais , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Apoio Social , Universidades , Adulto , Criança , Creches/provisão & distribução , Docentes , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Pesquisadores , Sexismo
14.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0239216, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32931508

RESUMO

Open research data practices are a relatively new, thus still evolving part of scientific work, and their usage varies strongly within different scientific domains. In the literature, the investigation of open research data practices covers the whole range of big empirical studies covering multiple scientific domains to smaller, in depth studies analysing a single field of research. Despite the richness of literature on this topic, there is still a lack of knowledge on the (open) research data awareness and practices in materials science and engineering. While most current studies focus only on some aspects of open research data practices, we aim for a comprehensive understanding of all practices with respect to the considered scientific domain. Hence this study aims at 1) drawing the whole picture of search, reuse and sharing of research data 2) while focusing on materials science and engineering. The chosen approach allows to explore the connections between different aspects of open research data practices, e.g. between data sharing and data search. In depth interviews with 13 researchers in this field were conducted, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed using content analysis. The main findings characterised research data in materials science and engineering as extremely diverse, often generated for a very specific research focus and needing a precise description of the data and the complete generation process for possible reuse. Results on research data search and reuse showed that the interviewees intended to reuse data but were mostly unfamiliar with (yet interested in) modern methods as dataset search engines, data journals or searching public repositories. Current research data sharing is not open, but bilaterally and usually encouraged by supervisors or employers. Project funding does affect data sharing in two ways: some researchers argue to share their data openly due to their funding agency's policy, while others face legal restrictions for sharing as their projects are partly funded by industry. The time needed for a precise description of the data and their generation process is named as biggest obstacle for data sharing. From these findings, a precise set of actions is derived suitable to support Open Data, involving training for researchers and introducing rewards for data sharing on the level of universities and funding bodies.


Assuntos
Engenharia/tendências , Disseminação de Informação , Ciência dos Materiais/tendências , Pesquisadores , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Inquéritos e Questionários
17.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0238518, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32870930

RESUMO

Changing institutional culture to be more diverse and inclusive within the biomedical academic community is difficult for many reasons. Herein we present evidence that a collaborative model involving multiple institutions of higher education can initiate and execute individual institutional change directed at enhancing diversity and inclusion at the postdoctoral researcher (postdoc) and junior faculty level by implementing evidence-based mentoring practices. A higher education consortium, the Big Ten Academic Alliance, invited individual member institutions to send participants to one of two types of annual mentor training: 1) "Mentoring-Up" training for postdocs, a majority of whom were from underrepresented groups; 2) Mentor Facilitator training-a train-the-trainer model-for faculty and senior leadership. From 2016 to 2019, 102 postdocs and 160 senior faculty and administrative leaders participated. Postdocs reported improvements in their mentoring proficiency (87%) and improved relationships with their PIs (71%). 29% of postdoc respondents transitioned to faculty positions, and 85% of these were underrepresented and 75% were female. 59 out of the 120 faculty and administrators (49%) trained in the first three years provided mentor training on their campuses to over 3000 undergraduate and graduate students, postdocs and faculty within the project period. We conclude that early stage biomedical professionals as well as individual institutions of higher education benefited significantly from this collaborative mentee/mentor training model.


Assuntos
Mobilidade Ocupacional , Tutoria , Mentores , Pesquisadores , Pesquisa Biomédica/educação , Diversidade Cultural , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Tutoria/métodos , Mentores/educação , Pesquisadores/educação , Estudantes
19.
Cell Stem Cell ; 27(3): 359-360, 2020 09 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32888424

RESUMO

COVID-19 has unfortunately halted lab work, conferences, and in-person networking, which is especially detrimental to researchers just starting their labs. Through social media and our reviewer networks, we met some early-career stem cell investigators impacted by the closures. Here, they introduce themselves and their research to our readers.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/fisiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Pesquisadores , Animais , Humanos , Pandemias , Células-Tronco/citologia
20.
West J Emerg Med ; 21(5): 1114-1117, 2020 Jul 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32970563

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has seriously impacted clinical research operations in academic medical centers due to social distancing measures and stay-at-home orders. The purpose of this paper is to describe the implementation of a program to continue clinical research based out of an emergency department (ED) using remote research associates (RA). METHODS: Remote RAs were trained and granted remote access to the electronic health record (EHR) by the health system's core information technology team. Upon gaining access, remote RAs used a dual-authentication process to gain access to a host-based, firewall-protected virtual network where the EHR could be accessed to continue screening and enrollment for ongoing studies. Study training for screening and enrollment was also provided to ensure study continuity. RESULTS: With constant support and guidance available to establish this EHR access pathway, the remote RAs were able to gain access relatively independently and without major technical troubleshooting. Each remote RA was granted access and trained on studies within one week and self-reported a high degree of program satisfaction, EHR access ease, and study protocol comfort through informal evaluation surveys. CONCLUSIONS: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we virtualized a clinical research program to continue important ED-based studies.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Pesquisa Biomédica/organização & administração , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/organização & administração , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Pesquisadores/organização & administração , Centros Médicos Acadêmicos/organização & administração , California , Humanos , Informática Médica , Desenvolvimento de Programas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA