Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 24.266
Filtrar
5.
Neuron ; 109(19): 3018-3021, 2021 10 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34619081

RESUMO

In an interview with Neuron, Bart De Strooper charts how support from unconventional leaders has informed his inclusive mentorship style. He discusses the need for science literacy and advocacy to combat existential crises, and his optimism around the ongoing revolution in dementia research.


Assuntos
Neurociências/tendências , COVID-19 , Escolha da Profissão , Diversidade Cultural , História do Século XX , História do Século XXI , Mentores , Pandemias , Pesquisa , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto
6.
Neuron ; 109(19): 3022-3024, 2021 10 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34619082

RESUMO

In this Neuron Q&A, Xiang Yu talks about the stress and anxiety brought to the lab by the pandemic, the new opportunities for teaching and scientific conferences it created, the value of the individual, and the social responsibility of science for humanity and society to shape a brighter future.


Assuntos
Neurociências/tendências , Pequim , COVID-19 , China , História do Século XXI , Pandemias , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto
7.
FASEB J ; 35(11): e21973, 2021 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34624149

RESUMO

Contemporary science has become increasingly multi-disciplinary and team-based, resulting in unprecedented growth in biomedical innovation and technology over the last several decades. Collaborative research efforts have enabled investigators to respond to the demands of an increasingly complex 21st century landscape, including pressing scientific challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic. A major contributing factor to the success of team science is the mobilization of core facilities and shared research resources (SRRs), the scientific instrumentation and expertise that exist within research organizations that enable widespread access to advanced technologies for trainees, faculty, and staff. For over 40 years, SRRs have played a key role in accelerating biomedical research discoveries, yet a national strategy that addresses how to leverage these resources to enhance team science and achieve shared scientific goals is noticeably absent. We believe a national strategy for biomedical SRRs-led by the National Institutes of Health-is crucial to advance key national initiatives, enable long-term research efficiency, and provide a solid foundation for the next generation of scientists.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica/organização & administração , COVID-19 , Colaboração Intersetorial , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)/organização & administração , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Academias e Institutos/organização & administração , Mobilidade Ocupacional , Congressos como Assunto , Humanos , Políticas , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto , Sociedades Científicas/organização & administração , Participação dos Interessados , Estados Unidos , Universidades/organização & administração
9.
Multimedia | Recursos Multimídia | ID: multimedia-9235

RESUMO

La fuerza laboral en salud se aborda desde su dimensión internacional en relación a tres ejes determinantes como son la formación, la innovación y la investigación, en esta mesa que reúne a Verónica González, Directora de Investigación y Cooperación Técnica de la Escuela de Gobierno en Salud Floreal Ferrara, a Cinthia L'hopital, Directora de Formación y Educación Permanente de la Escuela de Gobierno en Salud Floreal Ferrara y a Gabriel Listovsky, Coordinador Regional del Campus Virtual de Salud Pública de la OPS, moderados por Débora Yanco, Consultora nacional de Recursos Humanos en Salud OPS/OMS. en el marco de la Semana de la Salud internacional organizada por la Escuela de Gobierno en Salud Floreal Ferrara del Ministerio de Salud de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, y la Universidad Nacional de José C. Paz


Assuntos
Categorias de Trabalhadores , Mão de Obra em Saúde/tendências , Educação Profissionalizante , Avaliação de Recursos Humanos em Saúde , Capacitação de Recursos Humanos em Saúde , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto , Saúde Global , Estratégias de Saúde Globais
14.
Pediatrics ; 148(3)2021 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34465592

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Large, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential in answering pivotal questions in child health. METHODS: We created a bird's eye view of all large, noncluster, nonvaccine pediatric RCTs with ≥1000 participants registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (last search January 9, 2020). We analyzed the funding sources, countries, outcomes, publication status, and correlation with the pediatric global burden of disease (GBD) for eligible trials. RESULTS: We identified 247 large, nonvaccine, noncluster pediatric RCTs. Only 17 mega-trials with ≥5000 participants existed. Industry funding was involved in only 52 (21%) and exclusively funded 47 (19%) trials. Participants were from high-income countries (HICs) in 100 (40%) trials, from lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) in 122 (49%) trials, and from both HICs and LMICs in 19 (8%) trials; 6 trials did not report participants' country location. Of trials conducted in LMIC, 43% of investigators were from HICs. Of non-LMIC participants trials (HIC or HIC and LMIC), 39% were multicountry trials versus 11% of exclusively LMIC participants trials. Few trials (18%; 44 of 247) targeted mortality as an outcome. 35% (58 of 164) of the trials completed ≥12 months were unpublished at the time of our assessment. The number of trials per disease category correlated well with pediatric GBD overall (ρ = 0.76) and in LMICs (ρ = 0.69), but not in HICs (ρ = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Incentivization of investigator collaborations across diverse country settings, timely publication of results of large pediatric RCTs, and alignment with the pediatric GBD are of pivotal importance to ultimately improve child health globally.


Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Sujeitos da Pesquisa/estatística & dados numéricos , Criança , Saúde da Criança , Bases de Dados Factuais , Países Desenvolvidos/estatística & dados numéricos , Países em Desenvolvimento/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Editoração/estatística & dados numéricos , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos
16.
Ann Surg ; 274(4): 549-555, 2021 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34506309

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess contemporary trends in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Career Development (K) Awards within the Departments of Surgery and its impact on the likelihood of achieving independent R01 grants. BACKGROUND: The NIH provides K-type Career Development Awards to nurture young clinicians toward a productive academic career, thereby maintaining a pipeline of physician-scientists. However, the impact of K awards on career trajectory of surgeons remains unclear. METHODS: The NIH grant data was queried for all new K08/K23 grants awarded to Departments of Surgery (1999-2019). Principal Investigators' data and grant-related information was obtained. RESULTS: The NIH awarded 298 K08/23 surgical grants ($41,893,170) over the last 2 decades. Median budget increased from $116,370 to $167,508 (P<0.001). Of grantees, 83.2% were MDs, 15.1% MD/PhD, and 1.7% PhDs, with 25.2% being women. Principal Investigators' were mostly practicing surgeons (91.1%) with fellowship training (82.4%) and young in their careers {4 [interquartile ranges (IQR) 4] years of experience}. Vascular surgery (15.9%), Complex General Surgical Oncology (15.1%), and Trauma/Critical Care (14.6%) were the most frequent specialties. Awards were associated with 3,336 publications [median 8/project (IQR 13)]. The majority of K grantees (77.2%) currently hold an academic faculty position. Only 32.2% of awardees received independent R01 grant funding, at a median of 5.5 years (IQR 5) after their K awards. Sex (P = 0.71), previous fellowship training (P = 0.63), type of surgical specialty (P = 0.72), or MD/PhD degree (P = 0.75) were not associated with increased likelihood of achieving a subsequent R01 award. CONCLUSION: Although the majority of K awardees maintain an academic career, only a limited number of grantees progress to obtain NIH R01 funding. Increased mentorship, financial support, and infrastructure are needed to facilitate career development awardees opportunities to enhance their ability to achieve independent funding.


Assuntos
Distinções e Prêmios , Escolha da Profissão , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Apoio à Pesquisa como Assunto , Especialidades Cirúrgicas , Cirurgiões , Pesquisa Biomédica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...