Search

Objective: The aims of the study were: (1) to clarify the definitions of "migrant" used in occupational health research; (2) to summarize migrant workers' industry sectors, occupations and employment conditions; (3) to identify the occupational health and safety services available to migrant workers; (4) to summarize work-related health problems found among migrant workers; (5) to identify the methodological challenges to research into occupational health of migrant workers; and (6) to recommend improvements in migrant occupational health research. Methods: This position paper was prepared by researchers from several European countries and Australia, working within the EU COST Action OMEGA-NET. The paper drew on two recent systematic reviews on the occupational health of international migrant workers and other literature, and also identified uncertainties and gaps in the research literature. Migrants may, for example, be temporary or permanent, moving for specific jobs migrants or other reasons. Their ethnicity and language capabilities will affect their work opportunities. Results: The occupational health literature seldom adequately identifies the heterogeneity or characteristics of the migrant group being studied. Migrants tend to work in more physically and mentally demanding environments with higher exposures than native workers. Migrants tend to have an increased risk of physical and mental ill health, but less access to health care services. This has been demonstrated recently by high rates of COVID-19 and less access to health care. There have been a number of cross-sectional studies of migrant health but few long-term cohort studies were identified. Other study designs, such as registry-based studies, surveys and qualitative studies may complement cross-sectional studies. Mixed-methodology studies would be valuable in research on migrants' occupational health. Language and lack of trust are barriers to migrant research participation. Conclusion: Targeted research, especially longitudinal, identifying how these economically important but often-vulnerable workers can be best assisted is needed. Researchers should identify the characteristics of the migrant workers that they are studying including visa/migration circumstances (temporary, permanent, undocumented), racial and ethnic characteristics, existing skills and language abilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Most studies do not produce their intended outcomes on time or within budget. However, it is challenging to identify the facilitators and barriers to successful study management when the "behind the scenes action" of especially digitally enabled health research studies are akin to a black box. Therefore, it is necessary to explore first-hand experience of the facilitators and barriers to managing digitally enabled health studies. The goal of such studies is to produce new knowledge and/or develop tools that can be translated to real-world benefits for the health and care sector, individuals, and other stakeholders. These studies now exist in a time that encourages collaborative research activities with interdisciplinary research partnerships, industry collaboration, end-user involvement and insights for policy. These expectations require teams with different work cultures, methodologies, technologies, and approaches to work together, resulting in significant benefits but also challenges. Objectives: To explore the relationship between the dynamics and needs of research teams and the technology used to manage digitally enabled studies through the experience of those who worked on such studies. Methods: We used an interpretive phenomenological approach to explore research team members' experiences and perceptions of study management in the field of digitally enabled health research. We interviewed 15 research team members from eight studies. A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore concepts related to study activity management, team dynamics, resources and technologies used to manage research activities, and reflections of personal experiences. An adductive thematic analysis was performed on the transcripts. Results: Five main themes were identified: 1) Project Team, 2) Study management, which included management technologies, 3) Study plan, 4) Intervention, 5) Participants. This paper focuses on the first two main themes. Sub-themes included: Roles and responsibilities, Methods, Changes, Challenges and solutions and Expectations vs. reality. Sub-themes were applicable to all main themes. Therefore, results were presented as knowledge gained from the interaction between sub-themes within each theme, i.e. referred to as "comprehensive insights" in the results section of this paper. Conclusion: This interview study provides new knowledge about the realities of working in collaborative, digitally enabled health research studies and demonstrates several opportunities for improved understanding of study management. More realistic and thorough understanding of the complex system in which digitally enabled health research exists can be applied to better prepare experienced researchers and newly graduated students entering the field, as well as improve existing strategies for management. Highlights: 1. Research team members with developed skills from other fields can add value to research projects by contributing relevant yet different perspectives and solutions, regardless of a lack of experience in digitally enabled health studies. 2. Working together while having different approaches to science, e.g. building knowledge subjectively via experience (constructivism) vs. gaining knowledge objectively via observation and structured study (positivism), requires us all to understand the purpose of each approach and openly acknowledge one another's contributions. 3. Researchers are eternal learners – given the speed of technology development and work cultures of collaborating non-scientific research-based partners, we need to expand our knowledge of methodologies and research approaches to keep pace and relevance. 4. The use of study management technologies was largely unplanned. Research team members chose and used systems and programs that they were familiar with and available at the time. 5. The multitude of study management technologies mentioned were individually focused on a study stage or task, largely siloed, and subsequently challenging for collaborative tasks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Currently, literature on spiritual health remains limited. Even more so, literature on spiritual health remains limited in Canada. This is exacerbated by the fact that spiritual health is a term that remains widely contested with no concrete definition. Meanwhile, the semantic connection between "religion" and "spirituality" remains ambiguous in the West and scholars hold different positions. In this paper, we outline our scoping review protocol to describe the current landscape of spiritual health and spirituality (in relation to health) research in Canada, including the meaning and understanding behind these two concepts. Methods and analysis: This protocol for our scoping review is documented in accordance with the PRISMA-P reporting guidelines and adheres to Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology. We will conduct a search strategy across select electronic databases and review the reference lists of chosen papers. Two reviewers, HMB and MM, will independently and blindly screen all title/abstracts and full-text studies for eligibility. Any Canadian-situated studies that centrally mention and focus on "spirituality" or "spiritual health" will be included. Relevant variables will be extracted through an iterative process, with the data charting being continuously reviewed and refined. Findings from this scoping review will support the future of health research and conceptual expansion of health beyond the mental, physical and social. Approval from a research ethics board is not required, nor has it been obtained, as the data is derived from journal articles and academic publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online research methods have grown in popularity due in part to the globalised and far-reaching nature of the internet but also linked to the Covid-19 pandemic whereby restrictions to travel and face to face contact necessitated a shift in methods of research recruitment and data collection. Ethical guidance exists to support researchers in conducting online research, however this is lacking within health fields. This scoping review aims to synthesise formal ethical guidance for applying online methods within health research as well as provide examples of where guidance has been used. A systematic search of literature was conducted, restricted to English language records between 2013 and 2022. Eligibility focused on whether the records were providing ethical guidance or recommendations, were situated or relevant to health disciplines, and involved the use or discussion of online research methods. Following exclusion of ineligible records and duplicate removal, three organisational ethical guidance and 24 research papers were charted and thematically analysed. Four key themes were identified within the guidance documents, 1) consent, 2) confidentiality and privacy, 3) protecting participants from harm and 4) protecting researchers from harm with the research papers describing additional context and understanding around these issues. The review identified that there are currently no specific guidelines aimed at health researchers, with the most cited guidance coming from broader methodological perspectives and disciplines or auxiliary fields. All guidance discussed each of the four key themes within the wider context of sensitive topics and vulnerable populations, areas and issues which are often prominent within health research thus highlighting the need for unifying guidance specific for health researchers. Further research should aim to understand better how online health studies apply ethical principles, to support in informing gaps across both research and guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A dramatic increase in pesticide usage in agriculture highlights the need for on-site monitoring for public health and safety. Here, a paper-based sensor combined with a wet system was developed for the simple and rapid screening of organophosphate (OP) and carbamate (CM) pesticides based on the inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChE). The paper-based sensor was designed as a foldable device consisting of a cover and detection sheets pre-prepared with indoxyl acetate and AChE, respectively. The paper-based sensor requires only the incubation of a sample on the test zone for 10 minutes, followed by closing of the foldable sheet to initiate the enzymatic reaction. Importantly, the buffer loading hole was additionally designed on the cover sheet to facilitate the interaction of the coated substrate and the immobilized enzyme. This subsequently facilitates the mixing of indoxyl acetate with AChE, resulting in the improved analytical performance of the sensor. The absence or decrease in blue color produced by the AChE hydrolysis of indoxyl acetate can be observed in the presence of OPs and CMs. Under optimized conditions and using image analysis, the limit of detection (LOD) of carbofuran, dichlorvos, carbaryl, paraoxon, and pirimicarb are 0.003, 0.3, 0.5, 0.6, and 0.6 ppm, respectively. The assay could be applied to determine OP and CM residues in spiked food samples. Visual interpretation of the color signal was clearly observed at the concentration of 5 mg/kg. Furthermore, a self-contained sample pre-concentration approach greatly enhanced the detection sensitivity. The paper-based device developed here is low-cost, requires minimal reagents and is easy to handle. As such, it would be practically useful for pesticide screening by nonprofessional end-users. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper explores the feasibility of establishing a large-scale population-based cohort and biobank in Switzerland by assessing potential participants' needs, expectations, and concerns about such an infrastructure providing information on health, lifestyle, and exposure trajectories, the development of disease, and risk factors over time. Methods: We utilized a scenario-based questionnaire in the Swiss Health Study pilot phase (2020–2021), involving 1349 adults aged 20–69 from the cantons Vaud and Bern. We conducted descriptive statistics supported by R and qualitative content analysis of n = 374 open responses related to attitudes towards research. Results: We highlight the benefits and challenges of the scenario-based approach, discuss the sample represented in the pilot phase, and present implications for building a full cohort. We also report on participants' attitudes towards and previous experience with health research. We analyze references regarding informed consent and feedback, attitudes towards the Swiss Health Study, and recommendations on improving its scope, design, and instruments. Results indicate a high interest (90%) in participating in a national health study, with 85% of a random population sample willing to join a long-term cohort. Only 43% were familiar with biobanks, and 44% preferred general consent. Trust was high for Swiss-based public research but lower for researchers from other countries or private sector. Over 95% expressed willingness to complete online questionnaires, undergo physical examination, and donate biosamples. Almost all participants wanted to know the outcomes of the medical tests (99.5%) and the exposure to environmental stressors (95%) from their study center visit. Preferred tools for monitoring sleep, physical activity, and diet were known smartphone apps with automatic data management. Conclusion: Overall, the study reveals a positive attitude towards personalized health research, with a strong willingness to share data and samples. Key insights focus the meaning of informed consent for participation, the relevance of sampling and representativeness, as well as the significance and challenges of personalized feedback, especially regarding environmental health concerns. Findings emphasize participants' supportive yet reflexive stances, underscoring the importance of aligning research values with individual values in personalized health research. These insights contribute valuable considerations for refining the scope, design, and instruments of future cohort studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Digital health tracking is a source of valuable insights for public health research and consumer health technology. The brain is the most complex organ, containing information about psychophysical and physiological biomarkers that correlate with health. Specifically, recent developments in electroencephalogram (EEG), functional near-infra-red spectroscopy (fNIRS), and photoplethysmography (PPG) technologies have allowed the development of devices that can remotely monitor changes in brain activity. The inclusion criteria for the papers in this review encompassed studies on self-applied, remote, non-invasive neuroimaging techniques (EEG, fNIRS, or PPG) within healthcare applications. A total of 23 papers were reviewed, comprising 17 on using EEGs for remote monitoring and 6 on neurofeedback interventions, while no papers were found related to fNIRS and PPG. This review reveals that previous studies have leveraged mobile EEG devices for remote monitoring across the mental health, neurological, and sleep domains, as well as for delivering neurofeedback interventions. With headsets and ear-EEG devices being the most common, studies found mobile devices feasible for implementation in study protocols while providing reliable signal quality. Moderate to substantial agreement overall between remote and clinical-grade EEGs was found using statistical tests. The results highlight the promise of portable brain-imaging devices with regard to continuously evaluating patients in natural settings, though further validation and usability enhancements are needed as this technology develops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The amount of grey literature and 'softer' intelligence from social media or websites is vast. Given the long lead‐times of producing high‐quality peer‐reviewed health information, this is causing a demand for new ways to provide prompt input for secondary research. To our knowledge, this is the first review of automated data extraction methods or tools for health‐related grey literature and soft data, with a focus on (semi)automating horizon scans, health technology assessments (HTA), evidence maps, or other literature reviews. We searched six databases to cover both health‐ and computer‐science literature. After deduplication, 10% of the search results were screened by two reviewers, the remainder was single‐screened up to an estimated 95% sensitivity; screening was stopped early after screening an additional 1000 results with no new includes. All full texts were retrieved, screened, and extracted by a single reviewer and 10% were checked in duplicate. We included 84 papers covering automation for health‐related social media, internet fora, news, patents, government agencies and charities, or trial registers. From each paper, we extracted data about important functionalities for users of the tool or method; information about the level of support and reliability; and about practical challenges and research gaps. Poor availability of code, data, and usable tools leads to low transparency regarding performance and duplication of work. Financial implications, scalability, integration into downstream workflows, and meaningful evaluations should be carefully planned before starting to develop a tool, given the vast amounts of data and opportunities those tools offer to expedite research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mobile phone–assisted personal interviewing (MPAPI) is becoming a more widely used technique to collect survey data. Not having a hard copy paper document to return to when cleaning data raises the question of how data error rates compare with traditional paper surveys and at what cost. One hundred health research interviewers trained to use traditional pen-and-paper (PAP) survey methodology were recruited and randomly assigned to either a PAP or an MPAPI group. After receiving training on the survey instrument, each of the 100 interviewers conducted interviews with the same five interviewees, for a total of 500 interviews. Costs associated with the two survey methods were calculated. Very low error rates were achieved in both PAP and MPAPI, with a total of 381 data errors identified in 21,500 survey items. Findings suggest that experienced, well-trained interviewers using a short, well-constructed survey can produce very low error rates, independent of survey mode and that the benefits of MPAPI would be magnified as the size and complexity of the study increases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 2013, the WHO Member States requested the WHO to establish a Global Observatory on Health Research and Development (R&D), as part of a strategic work-plan to promote innovation, build capacity, improve access, and mobilize resources to address diseases that disproportionately affect the world's poorest countries. The rationale for establishing a Global Observatory on Health R&D is to provide a mechanism to monitor and analyse health R&D resource flows, product pipelines, and research outputs, aiming to contribute to the identification of gaps to inform priority-setting for new R&D investments to be operationalized through a new global financing and coordination mechanism for health R&D and utilized by all stakeholders informing health research policy decisions in countries, civil society, and the private sector. As one of the mechanisms to achieve the goals of the Global Observatory on Health R&D, the WHO is launching a Call for Papers to be published as a Thematic Series in Health Research Policy and Systems to contribute state-of-the-art knowledge and innovative approaches to analyse, interpret, and report on health R&D information. Further, to serve as a key resource to inform the future WHO-convened coordination mechanism, which will be utilized to generate evidence-informed priorities for new R&D investments to be financed through a proposed new global financing and coordination mechanism for health R&D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of medical studies, the topographic aspect (a study about the special circumstances that contributes to the beginning, develop, and ending of diseases belonging to a country) acquired particular significance in New Spain through the work of Diego Cisneros (1618). Juan de Melgarejo, professor, protophysician, priest, and author of two medical writings, continued with the work of Cisneros. The one that concerns us in this paper is called Parecer que ejecutó el Dr. D. Juan de Melgarejo por mandato de su Santidad y orden del Proto Medicato sobre la incorrupción del Ayate de María Santísima de Guadalupe, por los años de 1666. This text remained unpublished and it is closely related to the line of Melgarejo's works on the Virgin of Guadalupe. In this work he analyzes the ayate (cloak) of Juan Diego from a topographic perspective inserted in theoretical and experimental aspects of the hippocratical-galenic slope that prevailed in the medicine perspective of the Baroque New Spain. This research includes aspects on the university education of the author and regarding his tasks as protophysician, one of which was, precisely, the development of the Guadalupean manuscript. All the sources we have used are original. They come from México's General Archive of the Nation, and they all were interpreted by the author. They show the training given by doctors at the Royal and Pontifical University of Mexico and the link between this and the tasks of the Royal Protomedicato Tribunal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we developed a mathematical model for the dynamics of coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) transmission. The model embraces the notion of contact tracing and contaminated surfaces which are vital for disease control and contribute to disease transmission, respectively. We analyzed the model properties such as the positivity of the solution, invariant region, existence, and stability nature of equilibria. Besides, we computed the basic reproduction number R0. The local stability and the global stability of disease‐free equilibrium (DFE) points are proved by using the Routh–Hurwitz criteria and the Castillo‐Chavez and Song approach, respectively. LaSalle's invariant principle is applied to prove the stability of an endemic equilibrium (EE) point. The possibility of bifurcation is discussed using the center manifold theory. We used real data on the spread and control of COVID‐19 disease in Ethiopia. Based on the data reported, we estimated the values of the parameters using the least squares method together with the fmin function in the MATLAB optimization toolbox. The sensitivity analysis of the model is explored numerically to illustrate the impact of the parameters on disease transmission. The study addressed that contact tracing is especially important because COVID‐19 often has asymptomatic carriers, and there are many asymptomatic individuals unaware in Ethiopia. The new infections would decrease in the communities by detecting and isolating COVID‐19 cases before they could spread the virus to others. Moreover, the study endorsed that the contaminated surface has contributed to disease transmission. The sensitivity analysis shows that if the rate of disinfected contaminated objects (ϕ) rises, then the transmission of the disease is reduced. Consequently, this study will aid in the fight against COVID‐19 policymakers and NGOs. It can also be used as a policy input for different countries under this crisis. Because of the mathematical modeling of this global pandemic, there is another point of view rather than public health research outputs. Additionally, with the concept of contact tracing and contaminated surfaces incorporated into the model, the result provides insight for disease prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Computable biomedical knowledge (CBK) is: "the result of an analytic and/or deliberative process about human health, or affecting human health, that is explicit, and therefore can be represented and reasned upon using logic, formal standards, and mathematical approaches." Representing biomedical knowledge in a machine-interpretable, computable form increases its ability to be discovered, accessed, understood, and deployed. Computable knowledge artifacts can greatly advance the potential for implementation, reproducibility, or extension of the knowledge by users, who may include practitioners, researchers, and learners. Enriching computable knowledge artifacts may help facilitate reuse and translation into practice. Following the examples of 10 Simple Rules papers for scientific code, software, and applications, we present 10 Simple Rules intended to make shared computable knowledge artifacts more useful and reusable. These rules are mainly for researchers and their teams who have decided that sharing their computable knowledge is important, who wish to go beyond simply describing results, algorithms, or models via traditional publication pathways, and who want to both make their research findings more accessible, and to help others use their computable knowledge. These rules are roughly organized into 3 categories: planning, engineering, and documentation. Finally, while many of the following examples are of computable knowledge in biomedical domains, these rules are generalizable to computable knowledge in any research domain. Author summary: Computable biomedical knowledge, including algorithms, models, and evidence, is already impacting—and will likely transform—health research and healthcare delivery. Representing this knowledge in formats that can be discovered and processed by computers increases its potential for use at scale. Similarly, making these algorithms, models, etc. (aka computable knowledge artifacts) understandable and reusable by others can help facilitate reuse and translation into practice. However, as with other types of scientific software or research data, creating artifacts that are usable by and useful to others requires intentionality, and often additional time and effort. We've developed over 100 computable knowledge artifacts in diverse areas of health research and healthcare and we've learned a few things along the way. We've distilled these lessons learned into 10 Simple Rules to help researchers who would like to make their computational research products available and useful to others. Our work centers on knowledge in the biomedical domain, but we believe these 10 Simple Rules are generalizable and valuable as design principles for any researcher wishing to share computational research products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background : Health research capacity strengthening (HRCS) has been deemed as a complex, multifaceted, and dynamic activity. Despite this, most studies that assess the effectiveness of health research capacity strengthening programmes have not employed complexity-aware approaches and therefore, evidence on how and why such programmes work across different contexts is underdeveloped. This realist study seeks to elicit the initial programme theories (IPTs) that describe how and why the 'Developing Excellence in Leadership, Training and Science Africa' (DELTAS Africa) programme – one of the flagship research capacity strengthening programmes in Africa – works to generate research capacity outcomes specifically in the participating African universities. Methods and Analysis : A realist review of the DELTAS Africa programme documents, and relevant published papers that report on similar research capacity interventions will be carried out. This will help to both identify the outcome pathways and underlying assumptions of the DELTAS Africa programme, as well as tacit theories as postulated by other researchers. The review evidence will inform the drafting of the initial programme theories (IPTs). Interviews with the DELTAS Africa programme designing team will be conducted using a realist interviewing technique to unearth ontologically deeper insights on context, mechanism, and outcomes. Using the realist context-mechanism-outcome configurational maps, we will identify how contexts (i.e., within the African universities) shape mechanisms (the processes, reasoning, or behaviours triggered by the HRCS activities) through which the programme brings about an outcome at institutional level. Conclusion: The initial programme theories will describe how and why health research capacity strengthening works, for whom and under what circumstances across the participating African universities. The programme theories will provide policy-relevant insights on the generative causal mechanisms of HRCS; evidence that is critically needed to inform the design, implementation, and evaluation of HRCS initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research into canine health and welfare is supported by Government, charitable and private UK funding organisations. However, there is no current overall visibility or coordination of these funding activities, potentially compromising optimal distribution of limited resources. This study aimed to survey UK canine health and welfare funding by not-for-profit funders between 2012 and 2022, providing a novel baseline analysis to inform future sector stakeholder priorities. Results: Funding data were collected from 10 wide-scope funders (UK Government funding councils and medical charities), 18 animal-directed funders (organisations specifically concerned with animal health and welfare) and 81 breed community groups. These 109 UK funders together provided traceable canine-relevant funding of £57.8 million during the surveyed period, comprising 684 individual grant awards supporting over 500 separate research projects. Wide-scope funders contributed £41.2 million (71.2% of total funding); animal-directed organisations, £16.3 million (28.1% of total funding); and breed-specific groups, £370K (0.6% of total funding). Individual grants ranged from £2.3 million to £300. Funding patterns varied between sectors. Animal-directed funders provided £14.7 million of canine-relevant research funding that foregrounded the dog, 73% of all such funding; wide-scope funders provided £17.5 million of canine-relevant One Health research funding, 97% of all such funding. Customised metrics developed for this study assessed the 'benefit to the dog' and 'pathway to impact' of individual research projects. Overall, studies supported by animal-directed funders achieved significantly higher 'benefit to the dog' scores (Mann-Whitney U = 45235, p<0.001) and 'pathway to impact' scores (Mann-Whitney U = 43506.5, p<0.001) than those supported by wide-scope funders. Conclusion: The landscape of UK not-for-profit funding of canine health and welfare research is complex, with considerable variation between providers. Although wide-scope funders provide the majority of overall canine-relevant research funding, animal-directed funders provide the majority of canine-focused funding and support research with greater direct impact on canine welfare. Visibility of past funding patterns will enable stakeholders in this sector to make more informed decisions about future research. Definitions: To increase clarity, certain words and phrases are used in specific ways within the context of this paper. Animal-directed funders—Charities and other funding organisations whose remit primarily concerns animals or veterinary work Canine-focused research—Investigations where the primary purpose is to advance understandings of canine health and/or welfare Canine-relevant research—All research that is framed as advancing understandings of canine health and/or welfare as a primary or subsidiary purpose Institution—Refers to universities and other centres where research is carried out Organisation—Refers to funding bodies, including research councils, charities and other groups Research grant—A single funding event originating from one or more funders Research project—A cohesive piece of research concerning a particular topic; may involve multiple researchers and/or multiple research grants, in series or in parallel Wide-scope funders—Large organisations whose remit does not primarily concern animals, i.e. (in this dataset) UKRI councils and the Wellcome Trust [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A quality management system for clinical and public health research operations is indispensable because it ensures the integrity and reliability of research outcomes. By implementing a robust quality management practice in research implementation and operation, research teams can uphold the highest standard of research conduct, thereby enhancing the credibility and trustworthiness of research findings. This paper elucidates the significance and role of a quality management system in clinical and public health research operations and its efficacy in minimising and eliminating protocol deviations and highlights the key steps in setting up a quality management system for research operations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sub-Saharan African-born community in Australia is significantly underrepresented in health research, partly, due to challenges associated with collecting their primary data. Based on experience from a mixed-method study comprising 24 in-depth interviews and a survey of 253 participants in the community, this communication paper highlights a number of 'high-level' practical issues that might be encountered when collecting primary data from the community and provides suggestions for future studies. Included in this paper is a brief discussion of important lessons from the fieldwork that are critical for achieving successful data collection from the community. The lessons include difficulty of proving external validity for samples drawn from the community, difficulty of developing a reliable sampling frame, challenges in selecting appropriate support organisations, risk of low response to surveys and language barrier. The study concludes that understanding the ethnic diversities in this community and engaging appropriate support organisations are critical to achieving a successful data collection experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• New technical developments should facilitate that data are FAIR. • Implementation of common ontologies and data harmonization should enable data re-use. • Environment and Health (E&H) data should be part of the European Open Science Cloud. • Interconnect and synergize different research domains for optimal use of data. • An EU level E&H data research infrastructure is needed to support E&H research. Management of datasets that include health information and other sensitive personal information of European study participants has to be compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR, Regulation (EU) 2016/679). Within scientific research, the widely subscribed'FAIR' data principles should apply, meaning that research data should be findable, accessible, interoperable and re-usable. Balancing the aim of open science driven FAIR data management with GDPR compliant personal data protection safeguards is now a common challenge for many research projects dealing with (sensitive) personal data. In December 2020 a workshop was held with representatives of several large EU research consortia and of the European Commission to reflect on how to apply the FAIR data principles for environment and health research (E&H). Several recent data intensive EU funded E&H research projects face this challenge and work intensively towards developing solutions to access, exchange, store, handle, share, process and use such sensitive personal data, with the aim to support European and transnational collaborations. As a result, several recommendations, opportunities and current limitations were formulated. New technical developments such as federated data management and analysis systems, machine learning together with advanced search software, harmonized ontologies and data quality standards should in principle facilitate the FAIRification of data. To address ethical, legal, political and financial obstacles to the wider re-use of data for research purposes, both specific expertise and underpinning infrastructure are needed. There is a need for the E&H research data to find their place in the European Open Science Cloud. Communities using health and population data, environmental data and other publicly available data have to interconnect and synergize. To maximize the use and re-use of environment and health data, a dedicated supporting European infrastructure effort, such as the EIRENE research infrastructure within the ESFRI roadmap 2021, is needed that would interact with existing infrastructures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This summary paper for the symposium provides a brief overview of the papers by Craig Veitch, John Beard and Max Kamien that deal with the environmental, socioeconomic and political descriptors of ‘rurality’. Those three papers deal with a number of fundamental truths about rural and remote health, including the fact that internal migration is an important and poorly understood factor in determining community and health outcomes. A brief treatment of the issue suggests that selective internal migration is likely to mean that the burden of illness in rural and remote areas is even higher than that suggested by the published figures. The paper then asserts that thinking in the rural and remote health sector in Australia focuses largely on the negative aspects of the current characteristics of rural areas. A self-evident definition of ‘rurality’ is offered that has it defined by the set of factors that currently characterise places, communities and individuals outside the major cities. The paper suggests that each of these characteristics has an upside or benefit, as well as a downside or risk, and that giving greater attention to the former will provide a better basis for informing rural health policy and practice than the deficit view alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents several research papers on women's health. The first paper discusses that women using combined estrogen and progestin hormone replacement therapy (CHRT) have an increased risk of breast cancer. It further informs that data on use for long durations and on risk associated with patterns of use are lacking. It attempts to evaluate relationship between durations and patterns of CHRT use and risk of breast cancer by histological type and hormone receptor status. It adds that use of CHRT is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, particularly invasive lobular tumors, it is immaterial whether the progestin component was taken in a sequential or in a continuous manner. The second paper discusses effectiveness of therapy with individual antiresorptive agents for prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. It also discusses whether combination antiresorptive therapy with hormones and bisphosphonates is safe or efficacious. It informs that combination therapy with hormone replacement and alendronate was efficacious and well tolerated. Alendronate was superior to hormone replacement, and combination therapy was superior to either therapy alone.

Background: The ethnicity data gap pertains to 3 major challenges to address ethnic health inequality: 1) Under-representation of ethnic minorities in research; 2) Poor data quality on ethnicity; 3) Ethnicity data not being meaningfully analysed. These challenges are especially relevant for research involving under-served migrant populations in the UK. We aimed to review how ethnicity is captured, reported, analysed and theorised within policy-relevant research on ethnic health inequities. Methods: We reviewed a selection of the 1% most highly cited population health papers that reported UK data on ethnicity, and extracted how ethnicity was recorded and analysed in relation to health outcomes. We focused on how ethnicity was obtained (i.e. self reported or not), how ethnic groups were categorised, whether justification was provided for any categorisation, and how ethnicity was theorised to be related to health. We held three 1-h-long guided focus groups with 10 young people from Nigeria, Turkistan, Syria, Yemen and Iran. This engagement helped us shape and interpret our findings, and reflect on. 1) How should ethnicity be asked inclusively, and better recorded? 2) Does self-defined ethnicity change over time or context? If so, why? Results: Of the 44 included papers, most (19; 43%) used self-reported ethnicity, categorised in a variety of ways. Of the 27 papers that aggregated ethnicity, 13 (48%) provided justification. Only 8 of 33 papers explicitly theorised how ethnicity related to health. The focus groups agreed that 1) Ethnicity should not be prescribed by others; individuals could be asked to describe their ethnicity in free-text which researchers could synthesise to extract relevant dimensions of ethnicity for their research; 2) Ethnicity changes over time and context according to personal experience, social pressure, and nationality change; 3) Migrants and non-migrants' lived experience of ethnicity is not fully inter-changeable, even if they share the same ethnic category. Conclusions: Ethnicity is a multi-dimensional construct, but this is not currently reflected in UK health research studies, where ethnicity is often aggregated and analysed without justification. Researchers should communicate clearly how ethnicity is operationalised for their study, with appropriate justification for clustering and analysis that is meaningfully theorised. We can only start to tackle ethnic health inequity by treating ethnicity as rigorously as any other variables in our research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Existing evidence suggests that clinician and organisation engagement in research can improve healthcare performance. With the increase in allied health professional (AHP) research activity, it is imperative for healthcare organisations, clinicians, managers, and leaders to understand research engagement specifically within allied health fields. This systematic review aims to examine the value of research engagement by allied health professionals and organisations on healthcare performance. Methods: This systematic review had a two-stage search strategy. Firstly, the papers from a previous systematic review examining the effect of research engagement in healthcare were screened to identify papers published pre-2012. Secondly, a multi-database search was used to conduct a re-focused update of the previous review, focusing specifically on allied health to identify publications from 2012–2021. Studies which examined the value of allied health research engagement on healthcare performance were included. All stages of the review were conducted by two reviewers independently. Each study was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis was completed to analyse the similarities and differences between and within the different study types. Results: Twenty-two studies were included, comprising of mixed research designs, of which six were ranked as high importance. The findings indicated that AHP research engagement appears related to positive findings in improvements to processes of care. The review also identified the most common mechanisms which may link research engagement with these improvements. Discussion: This landmark systematic review and narrative synthesis suggests value in AHP research engagement in terms of both processes of care and more tentatively, of healthcare outcomes. While caution is required because of the lack of robust research studies, overall the findings support the agenda for growing AHP research. Recommendations are made to improve transparent reporting of AHP research engagement and to contribute essential evidence of the value of AHP research engagement. Trial registration: This systematic review protocol was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews, PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021253461). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article describes the values, vision, mission and aims of the Association of Schools of Public Health in the European Region (ASPHER). The mission and objectives of ASPHER include promotion of education, research and service in the field of public health to create a dynamic academic and practical educational infrastructure, promotion of public awareness, policy, and support for mentoring academic environments, and promotion of peer review in research to raise standards in public health.

This study examines the distribution of health outcomes research (HOR) studies in the clinical literature by clinical areas and journal impact factor. The authors reviewed 535 journals and divided the sample into higher and lower impact journals across four clinical area. Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to examine differences across four categories of outcomes research articles published, specifically the incidence of articles in higher versus lower impact journals and differences across clinical areas. All high-impact journals published more safety and quality articles than process assessment, quality of life, or cost analysis studies. The number of each type of outcomes research study published was highly variable across all clinical areas. Only arthritis and outcomes research journals showed statistically significant differences between higher versus lower impact journals. Authors may benefit from considering these differences in their clinical specialty area when deciding where to submit HOR studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: To establish guidance on grading strength of evidence for the Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) program of the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Study Design and Setting: Authors reviewed authoritative systems for grading strength of evidence, identified domains and methods that should be considered when grading bodies of evidence in systematic reviews, considered public comments on an earlier draft, and discussed the approach with representatives of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. Results: The EPC approach is conceptually similar to the GRADE system of evidence rating; it requires assessment of four domains: risk of bias, consistency, directness, and precision. Additional domains to be used when appropriate include dose–response association, presence of confounders that would diminish an observed effect, strength of association, and publication bias. Strength of evidence receives a single grade: high, moderate, low, or insufficient. We give definitions, examples, mechanisms for scoring domains, and an approach for assigning strength of evidence. Conclusion: EPCs should grade strength of evidence separately for each major outcome and, for comparative effectiveness reviews, all major comparisons. We will collaborate with the GRADE group to address ongoing challenges in assessing the strength of evidence. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Africa faces a significant burden of infectious diseases, including Malaria and HIV/AIDS, along with an increasing prevalence of non-infectious diseases such as diabetes and cancer. This dual health challenge is amplified by socioeconomic difficulties, restricted access to healthcare, and lifestyle changes, thus present unique scientific needs. Effectively addressing these issues requires a skilled scientific workforce adept in comprehensive healthcare strategies. This analysis explores the critical landscape of health research in Africa, emphasizing the unique opportunity presented by the continent's youthful population, projected to reach almost 1 billion by 2050. The youth's innovative potential and fresh perspectives offer a chance to overcome development barriers in health research. Nevertheless, challenges such as under-resourced education, limited research training, inadequate mentorship, and funding difficulties persist. This paper urgently calls upon African leaders, international partners, and stakeholders to prioritize health research, mobilize funding, forge strategic partnerships, and empower the youth as essential steps to capitalize on the continent's dynamic youth for breakthrough health outcomes. Such investments are vital not just for health but for the overall economic, social, and strategic growth of the continent. Through shared responsibility and a united effort, the potential of African youth can be harnessed, leading to transformative research, improved health outcomes, and a prosperous future. This perspective represents the collective voice of passionate young researchers and advocates across Africa, calling for a new era of health research on the continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Predatory journals are a blemish on scholarly publishing and academia and the studies published within them are more likely to contain data that is false. The inclusion of studies from predatory journals in evidence syntheses is potentially problematic due to this propensity for false data to be included. To date, there has been little exploration of the opinions and experiences of evidence synthesisers when dealing with predatory journals in the conduct of their evidence synthesis. In this paper, the thoughts, opinions, and attitudes of evidence synthesisers towards predatory journals and the inclusion of studies published within these journals in evidence syntheses were sought. Focus groups were held with participants who were experienced evidence synthesisers from JBI (previously the Joanna Briggs Institute) collaboration. Utilising qualitative content analysis, two generic categories were identified: predatory journals within evidence synthesis, and predatory journals within academia. Our findings suggest that evidence synthesisers believe predatory journals are hard to identify and that there is no current consensus on the management of these studies if they have been included in an evidence synthesis. There is a critical need for further research, education, guidance, and development of clear processes to assist evidence synthesisers in the management of studies from predatory journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of an ongoing series, this fourth article is the second of 2 related articles that deal with the basics of producing a high-quality manuscript. Although ophthalmology and vision science are the principal focus of this series, the general concepts essential to producing a quality manuscript are applicable to diverse fields of research. This article provides guidelines on how to present research findings in a structured form using the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRaD) style. The components to be included, and equally important excluded, from each section are elucidated in detail. Commonly omitted or inaccurately or incompletely presented components of the manuscript, such as statistical analysis and references, are highlighted. The necessity to carefully refine manuscripts before submission is discussed. This article concludes by illustrating methods of appropriately dealing with referees'' comments and resubmitting manuscripts. Although researchers may have to deal with rejection as part of the process, we hope that this series provides an easy-to-follow structure to maximize manuscript quality and improve the prospect of scientific publication. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article focuses on various studies related to women's health. Randomized trials, conducted by researcher P.M. Ridker and colleagues, have shown that low-dose aspirin decreases the risk of a first myocardial infarction in men, with little effect on the risk of ischemic stroke. There are few similar data in women. Researchers randomly assigned 39,876 initially healthy women 45 years of age or older to receive 100 mg of aspirin on alternate days or placebo and then monitored them for 10 years for a first major cardiovascular event. In this large, primary-prevention trial among women, aspirin lowered the risk of stroke without affecting the risk of myocardial infarction or death from cardiovascular causes, leading to a non-significant finding with respect to the primary end point. To evaluate combinations of L-thyroxine plus liothyronine in hypothyroid patients that match the proportions present in normal secretions of the human thyroid gland, H.F. Escobar-Morreale and colleagues conducted a randomized trial on 28 women with overt primary hypothyroidism.

Background: Existing evidence suggests that clinician and organisation engagement in research can improve healthcare performance. With the increase in allied health professional (AHP) research activity, it is imperative for healthcare organisations, clinicians, managers, and leaders to understand research engagement specifically within allied health fields. This systematic review aims to examine the value of research engagement by allied health professionals and organisations on healthcare performance. Methods: This systematic review had a two-stage search strategy. Firstly, the papers from a previous systematic review examining the effect of research engagement in healthcare were screened to identify papers published pre-2012. Secondly, a multi-database search was used to conduct a re-focused update of the previous review, focusing specifically on allied health to identify publications from 2012–2021. Studies which examined the value of allied health research engagement on healthcare performance were included. All stages of the review were conducted by two reviewers independently. Each study was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis was completed to analyse the similarities and differences between and within the different study types. Results: Twenty-two studies were included, comprising of mixed research designs, of which six were ranked as high importance. The findings indicated that AHP research engagement appears related to positive findings in improvements to processes of care. The review also identified the most common mechanisms which may link research engagement with these improvements. Discussion: This landmark systematic review and narrative synthesis suggests value in AHP research engagement in terms of both processes of care and more tentatively, of healthcare outcomes. While caution is required because of the lack of robust research studies, overall the findings support the agenda for growing AHP research. Recommendations are made to improve transparent reporting of AHP research engagement and to contribute essential evidence of the value of AHP research engagement. Trial registration: This systematic review protocol was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews, PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021253461). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Existing evidence suggests that clinician and organisation engagement in research can improve healthcare performance. With the increase in allied health professional (AHP) research activity, it is imperative for healthcare organisations, clinicians, managers, and leaders to understand research engagement specifically within allied health fields. This systematic review aims to examine the value of research engagement by allied health professionals and organisations on healthcare performance. Methods: This systematic review had a two-stage search strategy. Firstly, the papers from a previous systematic review examining the effect of research engagement in healthcare were screened to identify papers published pre-2012. Secondly, a multi-database search was used to conduct a re-focused update of the previous review, focusing specifically on allied health to identify publications from 2012–2021. Studies which examined the value of allied health research engagement on healthcare performance were included. All stages of the review were conducted by two reviewers independently. Each study was assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. A narrative synthesis was completed to analyse the similarities and differences between and within the different study types. Results: Twenty-two studies were included, comprising of mixed research designs, of which six were ranked as high importance. The findings indicated that AHP research engagement appears related to positive findings in improvements to processes of care. The review also identified the most common mechanisms which may link research engagement with these improvements. Discussion: This landmark systematic review and narrative synthesis suggests value in AHP research engagement in terms of both processes of care and more tentatively, of healthcare outcomes. While caution is required because of the lack of robust research studies, overall the findings support the agenda for growing AHP research. Recommendations are made to improve transparent reporting of AHP research engagement and to contribute essential evidence of the value of AHP research engagement. Trial registration: This systematic review protocol was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews, PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021253461). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are the subject of a growing body of research with the potential to positively impact public and ecological health. However, to effect positive change, findings must be communicated beyond the scientific community. Objective: We sought to (a) evaluate the relationships between communications strategy, media attention, and scholarly citations of PFAS research and (b) offer guidance for researchers and communications professionals who would like to publicize future work and increase its impact. Methods: We analyzed 273 peer-reviewed epidemiological studies on PFAS human health impacts with publication years 2018–2020, as collected by a pre-existing database. We investigated whether a press release was issued, open-access status, abstract and press release readability, timing of publication and press release distribution, journal impact factor, study type and sample size, statistical significance of finding(s), number of scholarly citations, and the Altmetric Attention Score (a measure of media attention). Discussion: Of papers reporting a statistically significant association with health harm, those with a press release received 20 times more media attention (as assessed by Altmetric scores) than those that did not. However, only 6.2% of all papers and 7.8% of significant papers issued one. Among papers with a press release, media attention was positively correlated with better abstract and press release readability and speed in issuing the press release. Scholarly citations were positively correlated with media attention, presence of a press release, and open-access status. Conclusion: Most papers with significant findings on PFAS are published without a press release and receive little or no media attention. This reduces the likelihood that important research is reaching the public and decisionmakers who can translate science into action. Issuing a press release and receiving media attention also appear to increase scholarly citations. We provide recommendations for authors to increase the reach and impact of future papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vulnerability has typically been addressed in the context of research ethics from the point of view of participants, with a focus on how to prevent the potential or exacerbation of existing harm caused by the power and role asymmetries between researchers and participants. However, more recent approaches to research ethics question whether researchers are, by definition, located in a privileged position during the research process and safe from any kind of vulnerability. In line with this, we reflect on the dimensions of researcher vulnerability specific to studies using a qualitative methodology in health research. Our argument is that participants and researchers should be on the receiving end of efforts to implement ethical procedures and protection from harm. Based on the autoethnographic analysis of our experiences as qualitative health researchers, this paper aims to identify dimensions of researcher vulnerability, and draw out relevant recommendations for practice. The reflections upon which this paper is based emerged during a spring school focusing on research ethics in qualitative health research, during which we discussed situations from our own research experience which left us feeling vulnerable. We identify four dimensions related to the experience of vulnerability (reciprocity; emotional labor; application of ethical standards; reversed power asymmetries) and five crosscutting aspects relating to these dimensions (researching sensitive topics; researching in contexts of vulnerability, poverty and structural violence; being a novice; lacking adequate support; insufficient time and space for ethical reflexivity). Our recommendations address particular challenges for these dimensions, and center on the role of reflexivity, as one of the cornerstones for enabling ethical qualitative research practice, requiring us to acknowledge and address our own vulnerability and positionality. Autoethnographic exercises are particularly useful for zooming in on ethically important moments in research related to researcher vulnerability and fruitful for identifying resources to respond to such challenges in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The translation of research into healthcare practice relies on effective communication between disciplines, however strategies to address the gap between information sharing and knowledge transfer are still under exploration. Communities of Practice (CoP) are informal networks of stakeholders with shared knowledge or endeavour and present an opportunity to address this gap beyond disciplinary boundaries. However, the evidence-base supporting their development, implementation and efficacy in health is not well described. This review explores the evidence underpinning the use of CoP in health research and translation. Methods: A scoping review was undertaken using Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework. A comprehensive search of health databases and grey literature was performed using keywords and controlled vocabulary. Studies were not restricted by date or research method. Results: A total of 1355 potentially relevant articles were identified through the global search strategy. Following screening, six articles were retained for analysis. Included studies were published between 2002 and 2013 in the United Kingdom (n = 3), Canada (n = 2) and Italy (n = 1). Three papers reported primary research; one used a quantitative methodology, one a qualitative, and one a descriptive evaluation approach. The three remaining papers explored seminal and evolving theories of CoP in the context of knowledge transfer and translation to the health sector. Conclusions: A paucity of evidence exists regarding the development and efficacy of CoP in health research and translation. Further empirical research is required to determine if communities of practice can enhance the translation of research into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on several papers that regarding the aspects of public health in Europe. It mentions that paper of M. McKee and B. Jacobson that states that the European public health faces problems with its diverse health systems. It also adds that study of M. McCubbin and D. Cohen that assumes that divergent actor interests is involved in the difficulty or impossibility to achieve lasting health care reforms in Europe.

Background: Health research partnership approaches have grown in popularity over the past decade, but the systematic evaluation of their outcomes and impacts has not kept equal pace. Identifying partnership assessment tools and key partnership characteristics is needed to advance partnerships, partnership measurement, and the assessment of their outcomes and impacts through systematic study. Objective: To locate and identify globally available tools for assessing the outcomes and impacts of health research partnerships. Methods: We searched four electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL + , PsychINFO) with an a priori strategy from inception to June 2021, without limits. We screened studies independently and in duplicate, keeping only those involving a health research partnership and the development, use and/or assessment of tools to evaluate partnership outcomes and impacts. Reviewer disagreements were resolved by consensus. Study, tool and partnership characteristics, and emerging research questions, gaps and key recommendations were synthesized using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results: We screened 36 027 de-duplicated citations, reviewed 2784 papers in full text, and kept 166 studies and three companion reports. Most studies originated in North America and were published in English after 2015. Most of the 205 tools we identified were questionnaires and surveys targeting researchers, patients and public/community members. While tools were comprehensive and usable, most were designed for single use and lacked validity or reliability evidence. Challenges associated with the interchange and definition of terms (i.e., outcomes, impacts, tool type) were common and may obscure partnership measurement and comparison. Very few of the tools identified in this study overlapped with tools identified by other, similar reviews. Partnership tool development, refinement and evaluation, including tool measurement and optimization, are key areas for future tools-related research. Conclusion: This large scoping review identified numerous, single-use tools that require further development and testing to improve their psychometric and scientific qualities. The review also confirmed that the health partnership research domain and its measurement tools are still nascent and actively evolving. Dedicated efforts and resources are required to better understand health research partnerships, partnership optimization and partnership measurement and evaluation using valid, reliable and practical tools that meet partners' needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The overall goal of this work is to produce a set of recommendations (SoNHR–Social Networks in Health Research) that will improve the reporting and dissemination of social network concepts, methods, data, and analytic results within health sciences research. Methods: This study used a modified-Delphi approach for recommendation development consistent with best practices suggested by the EQUATOR health sciences reporting guidelines network. An initial set of 28 reporting recommendations was developed by the author team. A group of 67 (of 147 surveyed) experienced network and health scientists participated in an online feedback survey. They rated the clarity and importance of the individual recommendations, and provided qualitative feedback on the coverage, usability, and dissemination opportunities of the full set of recommendations. After examining the feedback, a final set of 18 recommendations was produced. Results: The final SoNHR reporting guidelines are comprised of 18 recommendations organized within five domains: conceptualization (how study research questions are linked to network conceptions or theories), operationalization (how network science portions of the study are defined and operationalized), data collection & management (how network data are collected and managed), analyses & results (how network results are analyzed, visualized, and reported), and ethics & equity (how network-specific human subjects, equity, and social justice concerns are reported). We also present a set of exemplar published network studies which can be helpful for seeing how to apply the SoNHR recommendations in research papers. Finally, we discuss how different audiences can use these reporting guidelines. Conclusions: These are the first set of formal reporting recommendations of network methods in the health sciences. Consistent with EQUATOR goals, these network reporting recommendations may in time improve the quality, consistency, and replicability of network science across a wide variety of important health research areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Low-resource settings are often less capable of responding to and implementing available quality research evidence for public healthcare practice and policy development due to various factors. In most low-resource settings, limited empirical evidence is available to help deal with localised factors that contribute to low public health research uptake, particularly from the perspective of key research stakeholders. Methods: Although the study initially employed a two-phase exploratory sequential approach, this paper focuses on the results generated from a quantitative approach. Considering the determining factors that affect research uptake in the context of low-resource settings, a measuring instrument was developed and its reliability and validity were assessed using an exploratory factor analysis approach. Results: A total of 212 respondents, according to their job roles and titles, were identified as researchers, front-line workers, programme managers, and directors/senior managers of higher learning institutions, indicating that the three constructs applied in the questionnaire, namely (1) individual factors, (2) organisational factors, and (3) research characteristics, demonstrated relatively high reliability with a Cronbach's alpha of greater than 0.791. Conclusion: The study concludes that the instrument can potentially be used to measure factors that affect research uptake in low-resource settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most public health research on the commercial determinants of health (CDOH) to date has focused on a narrow segment of commercial actors. These actors are generally the transnational corporations producing so-called unhealthy commodities such as tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed foods. Furthermore, as public health researchers, we often discuss the CDOH using sweeping terms such as private sector, industry, or business that lump together diverse entities whose only shared characteristic is their engagement in commerce. The absence of clear frameworks for differentiating among commercial entities, and for understanding how they might promote or harm health, hinders the governance of commercial interests in public health. Moving forward, it is necessary to develop a nuanced understanding of commercial entities that goes beyond this narrow focus, enabling the consideration of a fuller range of commercial entities and the features that characterise and distinguish them. In this paper, which is the second of three papers in a Series on commercial determinants of health, we develop a framework that enables meaningful distinctions among diverse commercial entities through consideration of their practices, portfolios, resources, organisation, and transparency. The framework that we develop permits fuller consideration of whether, how, and to what extent a commercial actor might influence health outcomes. We discuss possible applications for decision making about engagement; managing and mitigating conflicts of interest; investment and divestment; monitoring; and further research on the CDOH. Improved differentiation among commercial actors strengthens the capacity of practitioners, advocates, academics, regulators, and policy makers to make decisions about, to better understand, and to respond to the CDOH through research, engagement, disengagement, regulation, and strategic opposition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Vulnerability has typically been addressed in the context of research ethics from the point of view of participants, with a focus on how to prevent the potential or exacerbation of existing harm caused by the power and role asymmetries between researchers and participants. However, more recent approaches to research ethics question whether researchers are, by definition, located in a privileged position during the research process and safe from any kind of vulnerability. In line with this, we reflect on the dimensions of researcher vulnerability specific to studies using a qualitative methodology in health research. Our argument is that participants and researchers should be on the receiving end of efforts to implement ethical procedures and protection from harm. Based on the autoethnographic analysis of our experiences as qualitative health researchers, this paper aims to identify dimensions of researcher vulnerability, and draw out relevant recommendations for practice. The reflections upon which this paper is based emerged during a spring school focusing on research ethics in qualitative health research, during which we discussed situations from our own research experience which left us feeling vulnerable. We identify four dimensions related to the experience of vulnerability (reciprocity; emotional labor; application of ethical standards; reversed power asymmetries) and five crosscutting aspects relating to these dimensions (researching sensitive topics; researching in contexts of vulnerability, poverty and structural violence; being a novice; lacking adequate support; insufficient time and space for ethical reflexivity). Our recommendations address particular challenges for these dimensions, and center on the role of reflexivity, as one of the cornerstones for enabling ethical qualitative research practice, requiring us to acknowledge and address our own vulnerability and positionality. Autoethnographic exercises are particularly useful for zooming in on ethically important moments in research related to researcher vulnerability and fruitful for identifying resources to respond to such challenges in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Photo elicitation interviewing (PEI), as a visual qualitative research methodology, has been used widely in various fields with different participants. However, little has been written about using the method in public health research, especially involving men in low-income settings. In this paper, the authors reflect upon the use of PEI in a study that explored fathers' experiences in child care and feeding in a low-income neighbourhood of Addis Ababa city in Ethiopia. The reflections focus on two overarching themes; (1) how PEI worked well as an effective technique in terms of addressing the research questions posed in this low-resourced setting and (2) how it served to enhance phenomenology in qualitative public health research. The researchers also discuss the limitations and lessons from employing this methodology through continuous reflexivity, which is valuable to qualitative work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program ("Program") seeks to assess the inventory, quality, and impact of its funded research in the context of all clinical and translational research involving WTC populations. This paper presents a protocol for ongoing scoping reviews of WTC-related health research. Methods: Using terms relevant to the September 11 attacks, we will search OVID MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Embase for records of peer-reviewed publications. Title, abstract, and full text screening will be used to exclude records according to a priori criteria. Data abstraction will be performed on all articles that meet inclusion criteria using a standardized query form that was developed in collaboration with NIOSH. A team of reviewers will be trained to abstract data from included articles. Articles will be double-reviewed, and disagreements will be adjudicated. Results: We will summarize existing research involving WTC populations. The summary will assess the extent, nature, and signals of impact of WTC-related health research. Conclusions: Our review will lay the groundwork for additional study of research impact by identifying population, clinical, and translational topics that can be assessed through future focused reviews. It will also support planning activities by Program policy makers and stakeholders as they work to achieve the Program's research goals. Systematic review registration: This publication serves as documentation of the protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), children have the right to the highest attainable standard of health. One component of this right that has received little attention is the connection between children's health and their participation in health-related research. This represents a missed opportunity in the full realisation of the right to health. This paper accordingly argues that Article 24 should obligate or incentivise State Parties to create more research opportunities for children in implementing this right. It explores the links between paediatric research and children's health, highlighting the impacts of the lack of research on the paucity or absence of many treatment and prevention options for childhood diseases. It also considers the application of other rights which may be implicated in paediatric research. While paediatric health-related research is imperative, it must occur within a framework which respects all children's rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information graphics or infographics combine visual representations of information or data with text. They have been used in health research to disseminate research findings, translate knowledge and address challenges in health communication to lay audiences. There is emerging evidence of the design of infographics with the involvement of patients and the public in health research. Approaches to involvement include public and patient involvement, patient engagement and participatory research approaches. To date, there has been no comprehensive review of the literature on the design of infographics with patients and the public in health research. This paper presents a protocol and methodological framework for a scoping review to identify and map the available evidence for the involvement of patients and the public in infographics design in health research. It has been informed by preliminary searches and discussions and will guide the conduct and reporting of this review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on patient public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health research has grown significantly in the last decade, with a diverse range of definitions and topologies promulgated. This has led to disputes over what the central functions and purpose of PPIE in health research is, and this in turn makes it difficult to assess and evaluate PPIE in practice. This paper argues that the most important function of PPIE is the attempt to make health research more democratic. Bringing this function to the fore and locating PPIE in the wider context of changes in contemporary forms of democratic engagement provides greater conceptual clarity over what PPIE in research should be trying to achieve. Conceptualizing PPIE as a form of democratization has a number of benefits. First, theories of what are appropriate, normatively justifiable and workable criteria for PPIE practices can be developed, and this can provide tools to address the legitimacy and accountability questions that have troubled the PPIE community. Second, this work can be used to form the basis of a research agenda to investigate how PPIE in health research operates, and how it can facilitate and/or improve democratic processes in health research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic presented complex challenges to public health research involving human subjects, necessitating creative thinking to maintain safe and productive qualitative data collection. In this paper, we describe how an interdisciplinary team overcame these challenges by translating in-person workshops into at-home design probes to explore connections between university students' climate change attitudes and their health. Probes were purposively designed to facilitate and focus participation during lockdown with two key interactional components: (1) participant ⇔ probe, and (2) participant ⇔ physical environment. Thematic analysis of 18 completed probes (replete with elicitive drawing, etched stone, mapping, and writing activities) revealed a rich spectrum of climate change perceptions, eco-emotions, and key areas of impact. This case study provides insight into how pandemic-imposed restrictions presented a novel opportunity to reconceptualize how we collect qualitative data in public health research and summarizes the unique benefits of integrating such design-based approaches into the field moving forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The collection and use of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in care-based child health research raises challenging ethical and logistical questions. This paper offers an analysis of two questions related to PROs in child health research: (1) Is it ethically obligatory, desirable or preferable to share PRO data collected for research with children, families, and health care providers? And if so, (2) What are the characteristics of a model best suited to guide the collection, monitoring, and sharing of these data? Methods: A multidisciplinary team of researchers, providers, patient and family partners, and ethicists examined the literature and identified a need for focus on PRO sharing in pediatric care-based research. We constructed and analyzed three models for managing pediatric PRO data in care-based research, drawing on ethical principles, logistics, and opportunities to engage with children and families. Results: We argue that it is preferable to share pediatric PRO data with providers, but to manage expectations and balance the risks and benefits of research, this requires a justifiable data sharing model. We argue that a successful PRO data sharing model will allow children and families to have access to and control over their own PRO data and be engaged in decision-making around how PROs collected for research may be integrated into care, but require support from providers. Conclusion: We propose a PRO data sharing model that can be used across diverse research settings and contributes to improved transparency, communication, and patient-centered care and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The failure of randomised controlled trials to adequately reflect areas of highest health need have been repeatedly highlighted. This has implications for the validity and generalisability of findings, for equity and efficiency, but also for research capacity-building. Rai et al. (BMC Med Res Methodol 21:80, 2021) recently argued that the poor alignment between UK clinical research activity (specifically multi-centre RCTs) and local prevalence of disease was, in part, the outcome of behaviour and decision-making by Chief Investigators involved in trial research. They argued that a shift in research culture was needed. Following our recent multi-site mixed methods evaluative study about NHS 111 online we identify some of the additional structural barriers to delivering health research "where populations with the most disease live", accounting for the Covid-19 disruption to processes and delivery.Methods: The NHS 111 study used a mixed-method research design, including interviews with healthcare staff and stakeholders within the primary, urgent and emergency health care system, and a survey of users and potential users of the NHS 111 online service. This paper draws on data collated by the research team during site identification and selection, as we followed an action research cycle of planning, action, observation and reflection. The process results were discussed among the authors, and grouped into the two themes presented.Results: We approached 22 primary and secondary care sites across England, successfully recruiting half of these. Time from initial approach to first participant recruitment in successful sites ranged from one to ten months. This paper describes frontline bureaucratic barriers to research delivery and recruitment in the local Clinical Research Network system and secondary care sites carrying large research portfolios, alongside the adaptive practices of research practitioners that mitigate these.Conclusions: This paper augments the recommendations of Rai et al., describing delays encountered during the COVID-19 pandemic, and suggesting in addition to cultural change, it may be additionally important to dismantle infrastructural barriers and improve support to research teams so they can conduct health research "where populations with the most disease live". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]