Search

Introduction: Peer review, a cornerstone of academia, promotes rigor and relevance in scientificpublishing. As educators are encouraged to adopt a more scholarly approach to medical education,peer review is becoming increasingly important. Junior educators both receive the reviews of theirpeers, and are also asked to participate as reviewers themselves. As such, it is imperative for juniorclinician educators to be well-versed in the art of peer reviewing their colleagues’ work. In thisarticle, our goal was to identify and summarize key papers that may be helpful for faculty membersinterested in learning more about the peer-review process and how to improve their reviewing skills. Methods: The online discussions of the 2016-17 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM)Faculty Incubator program included a robust discussion about peer review, which highlighted anumber of papers on that topic. We sought to augment this list with further suggestions by guestexperts and by an open call on Twitter for other important papers. Via this process, we created a listof 24 total papers on the topic of peer review. After gathering these papers, our authorship groupengaged in a consensus-building process incorporating Delphi methods to identify the papers thatbest described peer review, and also highlighted important tips for new reviewers. Results: We found and reviewed 24 papers. In our results section, we present our authorshipgroup’s top five most highly rated papers on the topic of peer review. We also summarize thesepapers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers. Conclusion: We present five key papers on peer review that can be used for faculty development fornovice writers and reviewers. These papers represent a mix of foundational and explanatory papersthat may provide some basis from which junior faculty members might build upon as they both undergothe peer-review process and act as reviewers in turn.

Scholarly peer review is crucial to science: it not only determines what is published where, but also, indirectly, who is hired, funded and promoted. Yet, virtually every academic has peer review horror stories. Empirical evidence suggests that "peer review is prejudiced, capricious, inefficient, ineffective, and generally unscientific" [1]. An experiment at a major machine learning conference found that peer review was unreliable highlighted that the outcome of peer review can be very noisy [2, 3]. In May 2019, ACM SIGSOFT launched an initiative to improve the quality of research papers and peer reviews at software engineering venues. It has two main components: empirical standards and recommendations for improving review processes.

Papers describing software are an important part of computational fields of scientific research. These “software papers” are unique in a number of ways, and they require special consideration to improve their impact on the scientific community and their efficacy at conveying important information. Here, we discuss 10 specific rules for writing software papers, covering some of the different scenarios and publication types that might be encountered, and important questions from which all computational researchers would benefit by asking along the way., Author summary Computational researchers have a responsibility to ensure that the software they write stands up to the same scientific scrutiny as traditional research studies. These 10 simple rules make doing so easier by enhancing usability, reproducibility, transparency, and other crucial characteristics that aren’t taught in most computer science or research methods curricula.

The evidence suggests that mentoring is one of useful teaching methods in academic medicine but it is not clear for which outcome mentoring is effective. In this study, the authors investigated the number of original research articles that the participants had published in peer-reviewed English-language journals (as a first or a corresponding author) within one year prior to investigation and what characteristics of the participants who published at least one paper would be like compared to those who did not. In March 2015, the authors recruit early- and mid-career Japanese physicians (238 men and 240 women; mean age 40.6 years old) in a web survey. In total, 23.9% of physicians had published at least one original research article as a first author, 10.0% had published as a corresponding author, and 23.4% had a research mentor. A multivariate logistic regression model adjusting for variables selected at p < 0.15 in univariable models showed that even after adjusting for their motivation levels for clinical research, physicians with a research mentor [odds ratio (OR) 6.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.74-11.93], physicians who obtained DMSc, roughly equivalent to PhD in the West (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.26-3.72), and physicians who worked at teaching hospitals (OR 6.39; 95% CI, 2.54-16.04) were more likely to publish an original paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Having a research mentor or DMSc is associated with an experience of successfully publishing original papers in peer-reviewed journals for young and mid-career physician-researchers.

Part 1: The International Cross Domain Conference (CD-ARES 2016); International audience; Peer review is widely viewed as an essential step for ensuring scientific quality of a work and is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing. On the other hand, the actors involved in the publishing process are often driven by incentives which may, and increasingly do, undermine the quality of published work, especially in the presence of unethical conduits. In this work we investigate the feasibility of a tool capable of generating fake reviews for a given scientific paper automatically. While a tool of this kind cannot possibly deceive any rigorous editorial procedure, it could nevertheless find a role in several questionable scenarios and magnify the scale of scholarly frauds.A key feature of our tool is that it is built upon a small knowledge base, which is very important in our context due to the difficulty of finding large amounts of scientific reviews. We experimentally assessed our method 16 human subjects. We presented to these subjects a mix of genuine and machine generated reviews and we measured the ability of our proposal to actually deceive subjects judgment. The results highlight the ability of our method to produce reviews that often look credible and may subvert the decision.

The efficacy of leveraging telehealth services on clinical outcomes remains scarcely documented. We conducted a rapid review to explore the effectiveness of telehealth interventions for the diagnosis, contact tracing and care of the corona virus disease of 2019 in sub Saharan Africa. Using MEDLINE, Science Direct and Cochrane Library databases, a review was conducted during the month of July 2020 of peer reviewed articles reporting on the use of telehealth interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. All the studies were assessed against the inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. The 7 studies included in the synthesis were conducted in 2 countries [Nigeria (× 1), Zimbabwe (× 1)], and commentaries covering the entire sub Saharan Africa in general (× 4) and to Uganda (× 1). All the included articles and commentaries were published in 2020. We established that mobile applications are effective in providing information for referrals of potential patients infected by COVID 19 and provides convenient access to routine care without the risk of exposure through close contact. In countries such as Nigeria, mobile positioning data significantly improved decision making, capacity and scope of contact tracing and surveillance of known contacts of confirmed cases. We noted that collaborations between the government, mobile network operators and technology companies were utilised for successful mobile positioning data tracing interventions for COVID patients. Mobile applications such as the Vula platform in South Africa were also noted as effective in providing psychological support to health care workers attending to patients.

Background Patients who suffer from different diseases may use different electronic health (eHealth) resources. Thus, those who plan eHealth interventions should take into account which eHealth resources are used most frequently by patients that suffer from different diseases. Objective The aim of this study was to understand the associations between different groups of chronic diseases and the use of different eHealth resources. Methods Data from the seventh survey of the Tromsø Study (Tromsø 7) were analyzed to determine how different diseases influence the use of different eHealth resources. Specifically, the eHealth resources considered were use of apps, search engines, video services, and social media. The analysis contained data from 21,083 participants in the age group older than 40 years. A total of 15,585 (15,585/21,083; 73.92%) participants reported to have suffered some disease, 10,604 (10,604/21,083; 50.29%) participants reported to have used some kind of eHealth resource in the last year, and 7854 (7854/21,083; 37.25%) participants reported to have used some kind of eHealth resource in the last year and suffered (or had suffered) from some kind of specified disease. Logistic regression was used to determine which diseases significantly predicted the use of each eHealth resource. Results The use of apps was increased among those individuals that (had) suffered from psychological problems (odds ratio [OR] 1.39, 95% CI 1.23-1.56) and cardiovascular diseases (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.01-1.24) and those part-time workers that (had) suffered from any of the diseases classified as others (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.35-3.32). The use of search engines for accessing health information increased among individuals who suffered from psychological problems (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.25-1.55), cancer (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11-1.44), or any of the diseases classified as other diseases (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.13-1.42). Regarding video services, their use for accessing health information was more likely when the participant was a man (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.13-1.53), (had) suffered from psychological problems (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.43-2.01), or (had) suffered from other diseases (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.20-1.71). The factors associated with an increase in the use of social media for accessing health information were as follows: (had) suffered from psychological problems (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.42-1.91), working part time (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.62-2.63), receiving disability benefits (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.14-1.76), having received an upper secondary school education (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.38), being a man with a high household income (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.07-2.60), suffering from cardiovascular diseases and having a high household income (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.62-8.16), and suffering from respiratory diseases while being retired (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.28-2.97). Conclusions Our findings show that different diseases are currently associated with the use of different eHealth resources. This knowledge is useful for those who plan eHealth interventions as they can take into account which type of eHealth resource may be used for gaining the attention of the different user groups.

Background Type 1 diabetes is a chronic condition of blood glucose metabolic disorder caused by a lack of insulin secretion from pancreas cells. In people with type 1 diabetes, hyperglycemia often occurs upon infection incidences. Despite the fact that patients increasingly gather data about themselves, there are no solid findings that uncover the effect of infection incidences on key parameters of blood glucose dynamics to support the effort toward developing a digital infectious disease detection system. Objective The study aims to retrospectively analyze the effect of infection incidence and pinpoint optimal parameters that can effectively be used as input variables for developing an infection detection algorithm and to provide a general framework regarding how a digital infectious disease detection system can be designed and developed using self-recorded data from people with type 1 diabetes as a secondary source of information. Methods We retrospectively analyzed high precision self-recorded data of 10 patient-years captured within the longitudinal records of three people with type 1 diabetes. Obtaining such a rich and large data set from a large number of participants is extremely expensive and difficult to acquire, if not impossible. The data set incorporates blood glucose, insulin, carbohydrate, and self-reported events of infections. We investigated the temporal evolution and probability distribution of the key blood glucose parameters within a specified timeframe (weekly, daily, and hourly). Results Our analysis demonstrated that upon infection incidence, there is a dramatic shift in the operating point of the individual blood glucose dynamics in all the timeframes (weekly, daily, and hourly), which clearly violates the usual norm of blood glucose dynamics. During regular or normal situations, higher insulin and reduced carbohydrate intake usually results in lower blood glucose levels. However, in all infection cases as opposed to the regular or normal days, blood glucose levels were elevated for a prolonged period despite higher insulin and reduced carbohydrates intake. For instance, compared with the preinfection and postinfection weeks, on average, blood glucose levels were elevated by 6.1% and 16%, insulin (bolus) was increased by 42% and 39.3%, and carbohydrate consumption was reduced by 19% and 28.1%, respectively. Conclusions We presented the effect of infection incidence on key parameters of blood glucose dynamics along with the necessary framework to exploit the information for realizing a digital infectious disease detection system. The results demonstrated that compared with regular or normal days, infection incidence substantially alters the norm of blood glucose dynamics, which are quite significant changes that could possibly be detected through personalized modeling, for example, prediction models and anomaly detection algorithms. Generally, we foresee that these findings can benefit the efforts toward building next generation digital infectious disease detection systems and provoke further thoughts in this challenging field.

Background Parents seek trustworthy information online to promote healthy eating for their toddlers. Such information must be perceived as relevant and easy to implement and use. Objective The objectives of this study were to conduct a process evaluation of the electronic health (eHealth) intervention (Food4toddlers) targeting food environment, parental feeding practices, and toddlers’ diet and to examine possible differences in these areas according to education and family composition. Methods A 2-armed randomized controlled trial, including 298 parent–toddler dyads from Norway, was conducted in 2017. In total, 148 parents in the intervention group received access to an intervention website for 6 months. Data on website usage were retrieved from the learning management platform used (NEO). Participants’ satisfaction with the intervention was asked for in a postintervention questionnaire. Chi-square and t tests were used to examine differences in usage and satisfaction between education and family composition groups. Results Most participants were mothers (144/148, 97.2%), lived in two-adult households (148/148, 100%), and were born in Norway (132/148, 89.1%). Mean parental age was 31.5 years (SD 4.2). More than 87.8% (129/147) had a university education degree and 56.5% (83/147) had over 4 years of university education. Most (128/148, 86.5%) intervention participants entered the website at least once (mean days of access 7.4 [SD 7.1]). Most parents reported the website as appropriate to the child’s age (71/83, 86%) and self-explanatory (79/83, 95%) and appreciated the interface (52/83, 63%) and layout (46/83, 55%). In total, 61% (51/83) stated that they learned something new from the intervention. Parents with over 4 years of university education and in 1-child households used the intervention website more than those with 4 years or less of university education (8.4 vs 5.9 days in total, P=.04) and households with more than 1 child (8.3 vs 5.8 days in total, P=.04), respectively. Conclusions The Food4toddlers intervention website was found to be relevant by most participants in the intervention group, although usage of the website differed according to educational level and family composition. For eHealth interventions to be effective, intervention materials such as websites must be used by the target group. Our results highlight the need to include users from different groups when developing interventions. Trial Registration ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN92980420; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN92980420

Source at https://doi.org/10.2196/13678. Background: Despite the increasing prevalence of diabetes and increasing use of electronic health (eHealth) among people with diabetes, little is known about the association between the use of eHealth and the use of provider-based health services. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate whether the use of eHealth might change patients’ decisions regarding doctor-seeking behavior and whether information acquired from the internet was discussed with a doctor. Methods: We used email survey data collected in 2018 from members of the Norwegian Diabetes Association (aged 18 to 89 years) diagnosed with diabetes. Using logistic regressions, we studied patients’ internet-triggered changes in decisions regarding doctor visits; whether they discussed information from the internet with a doctor; and whether these topics were associated with gender, age, education, self-rated health, and self-reported anxiety/depression. Results: Among the 895 informants, 75.4% (645/856) had never made an internet-triggered change of decision in any direction regarding visiting a doctor, whereas 16.4% (41/859) had decided to visit and 17.3% (148/856) had decided not to visit. The probability of changing decisions decreased with higher age and increased with the severity of self-reported anxiety/depression. Around half of the study participants (448/858, 52.2%) had never discussed information from the internet with a doctor. The probability of discussing internet information with a doctor was higher for those in bad/very bad self-rated health (odds ratio 2.12, CI 1.15-3.90) and for those with moderate self-reported anxiety/depression (odds ratio 2.30, CI 1.30-4.10). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that using eHealth has a significant impact on doctor-visiting decisions among people with diabetes, especially among people aged 18 to 39 years and among those reporting anxiety/depression. It is of great importance that the information posted is of high quality and that the large differences between internet-users regarding age as well as mental and somatic health status are taken into account. More research is needed to confirm and further explore the findings of this study.

Background The internet is being widely used for seeking health information. However, there is no consensus on the association between health information seeking on the internet and the use of health care services. Objective We examined the association between health information seeking via the internet and physician visits. In addition, we investigated the association between online health information seeking and the decisions to visit and not to visit a physician. Methods We used the cross-sectional electronic health (eHealth) data of 18,197 participants from the seventh survey of the Tromsø Study (Tromsø 7). The participants were aged ≥40 years and living in Tromsø, Norway. We used logistic regression models to examine the association between online health information seeking and physician visits, the decision to visit a physician, and the decision not to visit a physician, with adjustment for the demographic status, socioeconomic status, and health status of the participants. Results The use of Web search engines was associated with a physician visit. However, the association was moderated by age, and the OR decreased as age increased. The ORs for the use of Web search engines were 1.99 (95% CI 1.94-2.02) and 1.07 (95% CI 1.03-1.12) at ages 40 and 80 years, respectively. The decision to visit a physician was associated with the use of Web search engines (OR 2.95, 95% CI 2.03-4.46), video search engines (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.21-1.70), and health apps (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.42). The association between social media use and the decision to visit a physician was moderated by gender. Women who used social media had 1.42 (95% CI 1.31-1.55) times higher odds of deciding to visit a physician, whereas the decision to visit a physician was not different between men who used social media and those who did not use social media. Conversely, the decision not to visit a physician was associated with the use of Web search engines (OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.92-4.18), video search engines (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07-1.51), social media (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.10-1.49), and health apps (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.07-1.35). Conclusions Health information found on the internet was positively associated with both the decision to visit a physician and the decision not to visit a physician. However, the association of health information seeking with the decision to visit a physician was slightly stronger than the association with the decision not to visit a physician. This could imply that the use of eHealth services is associated with a resultant increase in physician visits. In summary, our findings suggest that the internet serves as a supplement to health care services rather than as a replacement.

The following article, Hansen, A.H., Brož, J., Claudi, T. & Årsand, E. (2018). Relations between the use of electronic health and the use of general practitioner and somatic specialist visits in patients with type 1 diabetes: Cross-sectional study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(11), can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.2196/11322. Background: The prevalence of diabetes and the use of electronic health (eHealth) are increasing. People with diabetes need frequent monitoring and follow-up of health parameters, and eHealth services can be of great value. However, little is known about the association between the use of eHealth and provider-based health care services among people with diabetes. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate the use of 4 different eHealth platforms (apps, search engines, video services, and social media sites) and associations with the use of provider-based health care visits among people diagnosed with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Methods: We used email survey data collected from 1250 members of the Norwegian Diabetes Association (aged 18 to 89 years) in 2018. Eligible for analyses were the 523 respondents with T1DM. Using descriptive statistics, we estimated the use of eHealth and the use of general practitioners (GPs) and somatic specialist outpatient services. By logistic regressions, we studied the associations between the use of these provider-based health services and the use of eHealth, adjusted for gender, age, education, and self-rated health. Results: Of the sample of 523 people with T1DM, 90.7% (441/486) had visited a GP once or more, and 61.0% (289/474) had visited specialist services during the previous year. Internet search engines (such as Google) were used for health purposes sometimes or often by 84.0% (431/513), apps by 55.4% (285/514), social media (such as Facebook) by 45.2% (232/513), and video services (such as YouTube) by 23.3% (118/506). Participants aged from 18 to 39 years used all forms of eHealth more than people aged 40 years and older, with the exception of social media. The use of search engines was positively associated with the use of somatic specialist services (odds ratio 2.43, 95% CI 1.33-4.45). GP visits were not associated with any kind of eHealth use. Conclusions: eHealth services are now widely used for health support and health information by people with T1DM, primarily in the form of search engines but often in the form of apps and social media as well. We found a positive association between the use of search engines and specialist visits and that people with T1DM are frequent users of eHealth, GPs, and specialist services. We found no evidence that eHealth reduces the use of provider-based health care; these services seem to be additional rather than alternative. Future research should focus on how health care services can meet and adapt to the high prevalence of eHealth use. Our results also indicate that many patients with T1DM do not visit specialist clinics once a year as recommended. This raises questions about collaboration in health care services and needs to be followed up in future research.

Background The electronic health record (EHR) has been fully established in all Norwegian hospitals. Patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs) are available to citizens aged 16 years and older through the national health portal Helsenorge. Objective This study aimed at understanding how patients use PAEHRs. Three research questions were addressed in order to explore (1) characteristics of users, (2) patients’ use of the service, and (3) patient experience with the service. Methods We conducted an online survey of users who had accessed their EHR online at least once through the national health portal. Patients from two of the four health regions in Norway were invited to participate. Quantitative data were supplemented by qualitative information. Results A total of 1037 respondents participated in the survey, most of whom used the PAEHR regularly (305/1037, 29.4%) or when necessary (303/1037, 29.2%). Service utilization was associated with self-reported health, age, gender, education, and health care professional background. Patients found the service useful to look up health information (687/778, 88.3%), keep track of their treatment (684/778, 87.9%), prepare for a hospital appointment (498/778, 64.0%), and share documents with their general practitioner (292/778, 37.5%) or family (194/778, 24.9%). Most users found it easy to access their EHR online (965/1037, 93.1%) and did not encounter technical challenges. The vast majority of respondents (643/755, 85.2%) understood the content, despite over half of them acknowledging some difficulties with medical terms or phrases. The overall satisfaction with the service was very high (700/755, 92.7%). Clinical advantages to the patients included enhanced knowledge of their health condition (565/691, 81.8%), easier control over their health status (685/740, 92.6%), better self-care (571/653, 87.4%), greater empowerment (493/674, 73.1%), easier communication with health care providers (493/618, 79.8%), and increased security (655/730, 89.7%). Patients with complex, long-term or chronic conditions seemed to benefit the most. PAEHRs were described as useful, informative, effective, helpful, easy, practical, and safe. Conclusions PAEHRs in Norway are becoming a mature service and are perceived as useful by patients. Future studies should include experimental designs focused on specific populations or chronic conditions that are more likely to achieve clinically meaningful benefits. Continuous evaluation programs should be conducted to assess implementation and changes of wide-scale routine services over time.

Background: Information from ratings sites are increasingly informing patient decisions related to health care and the selection of physicians. Objective: The current study sought to determine the validity of online patient ratings of physicians through comparison with physician peer review. Methods: We extracted 223,715 reviews of 41,104 physicians from 10 of the largest cities in the United States, including 1142 physicians listed as “America’s Top Doctors” through physician peer review. Differences in mean online patient ratings were tested for physicians who were listed and those who were not. Results: Overall, no differences were found between the online patient ratings based upon physician peer review status. However, statistical differences were found for four specialties (family medicine, allergists, internal medicine, and pediatrics), with online patient ratings significantly higher for those physicians listed as a peer-reviewed “Top Doctor” versus those who were not. Conclusions: The results of this large-scale study indicate that while online patient ratings are consistent with physician peer review for four nonsurgical, primarily in-office specializations, patient ratings were not consistent with physician peer review for specializations like anesthesiology. This result indicates that the validity of patient ratings varies by medical specialization.

Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 30.05.2017. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Background: Adequate self-management is the cornerstone of type 2 diabetes treatment, as people make the majority of daily treatment measures and health decisions. The increasing prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the complexity of diabetes self-management demonstrate the need for innovative and effective ways to deliver self-management support. eHealth interventions are promoted worldwide and hold a great potential in future health care for people with chronic diseases such as T2DM. However, many eHealth interventions face high dropout rates. This led to our interest in the experiences of participants who dropped out of an eHealth intervention for adults with T2DM, based on the Guided Self-Determination (GSD) counseling method. Objective: In this study, we aimed to explore experiences with an eHealth intervention based on GSD in general practice from the perspective of those who dropped out and to understand their reasons for dropping out. To the best of our knowledge, no previous qualitative study has focused on participants who withdrew from an eHealth self-management support intervention for adults with T2DM. Methods: A qualitative design based on telephone interviews was used to collect data. The sample comprised 12 adults with type 2 diabetes who dropped out of an eHealth intervention. Data were collected in 2016 and subjected to qualitative content analysis. Results: We identified one overall theme: “Losing motivation for intervention participation.” This theme was illustrated by four categories related to the participants’ experiences of the eHealth intervention: (1) frustrating technology, (2) perceiving the content as irrelevant and incomprehensible, (3) choosing other activities and perspectives, and (4) lacking face-to-face encounters. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the eHealth intervention based on GSD without face-to-face encounters with nurses reduced participants’ motivation for engagement in the intervention. To maintain motivation, our study points to the importance of combining eHealth with regular face-to-face consultations. Our study also shows that the perceived benefit of the GSD eHealth intervention intertwined with choosing to focus on other matters in complex daily lives are critical aspects in motivation for such interventions. This indicates the importance of giving potential participants tailored information about the aim, the content, and the effort needed to remain engaged in complex interventions so that eligible participants are recruited. Finally, motivation for engagement in the eHealth intervention was influenced by the technology used in this study. It seems important to facilitate more user-friendly but high-security eHealth technology. Our findings have implications for improving the eHealth intervention and to inform researchers and health care providers who are organizing eHealth interventions focusing on self-management support in order to reduce dropout rates.

Background: Audio and video podcasts have gained popularity in recent years. Increasingly, podcasts are being used in the field of medicine as a tool to disseminate information. This format has multiple advantages including highly accessible creation tools, low distribution costs, and portability for the user. However, despite its ongoing use in medical education, there are no data describing factors associated with the success or quality of podcasts. Objective: The goal of the study was to assess the landscape of anesthesia podcasts in Canada and develop a methodology for evaluating the quality of the podcast. To achieve our objective, we identified the scope of podcasts in anesthesia specifically, constructed an algorithmic model for measuring success, and identified factors linked to both successful podcasts and a peer-review process. Methods: Independent reviewers performed a systematic search of anesthesia-related podcasts on iTunes Canada. Data and metrics recorded for each podcast included podcast’s authorship, number posted, podcast series duration, target audience, topics, and social media presence. Descriptive statistics summarized mined data, and univariate analysis was used to identify factors associated with podcast success and a peer-review process. Results: Twenty-two podcasts related to anesthesia were included in the final analysis. Less than a third (6/22=27%) were still active. The median longevity of the podcasts’ series was just 13 months (interquartile range: 1-39 months). Anesthesiologists were the target audience for 77% of podcast series with clinical topics being most commonly addressed. We defined a novel algorithm for measuring success: Podcast Success Index. Factors associated with a high Podcast Success Index included podcasts targeting fellows (Spearman R=0.434; P=.04), inclusion of professional topics (Spearman R=0.456-0.603; P=.01-.03), and the use of Twitter as a means of social media (Spearman R=0.453;P=.03). In addition, more than two-thirds (16/22=73%) of podcasts demonstrated evidence of peer review with podcasts targeting anesthesiologists most strongly associated with peer-reviewed podcasts (Spearman R=0.886; P=.004) Conclusions: We present the first report on the scope of anesthesia podcasts in Canada. We have developed a novel tool for assessing the success of an anesthesiology podcast series and identified factors linked to this success measure as well as evidence of a peer-review process for a given podcast. To enable advancement in this area of anesthesia e-resources, podcast creators and users should consider factors associated with success when creating podcasts. The lack of these aspects may be associated with the early demise of a podcast series. [JMIR Med Educ 2016;2(2):e14]

الملخص: عادة ما تكون المقالات ما قبل الطباعة بمثابة مقدمة أولية لأوراق تمت مراجعتها من قِبل النظراء ويتم وضعها على الفور تقريبا، باستثناء بعض الفحص السطحي، في مستودع وصول مفتوح للجمهور للسماح للمعلومات بالوصول إلى القراء بسرعة، والتغلب على الخمول المرتبط عادة بالمعالجة بطريقة المجلات التي تعتمد على مراجعة الأقران. بالنسبة للباحثين في بداية حياتهم المهنية الذين قد يكونون متحمسين للحصول على بعض التقدير لجهودهم، أو الرغبة في الحصول على مدخلات مفتوحة وعلنية حول عملهم، فإن النشر قبل الطباعة هو بالتأكيد خيار نشر مفيد. ومع ذلك، إذا لم يتم فحص البيانات والمعلومات المتعلقة بالصحة بعناية، فقد تشكل خطرا، وقد تعمل أيضا كمصدر لمعلومات مضللة عن الصحة العامة. تشير زيادة النمو والمنافسة بين خوادم ما قبل الطباعة، إلى جانب حجم هائل من المطبوعات المسبقة المتعلقة بـ كوفيد-١٩، وخاصة على خادم ما قبل الطباعة لعلم الأحياء، وخادم ما قبل الطباعة للعلوم الطبية، بالإضافة إلى تحديد الفهرسة التي يتم اختبارها الآن على موقع بوب ميد، إلى أن المطبوعات المسبقة يتم استخدامها بشكل متزايد في العلوم الطبية الحيوية. وهناك حاجة إلى سياسات أخلاقية أقوى وأكثر قوة لفحص المطبوعات المسبقة قبل نشرها للجمهور، وحتى إذا كان هذا يعني تأخيرا طفيفا في النشر، فقد يؤدي ذلك إلى زيادة ثقة الأكاديميين في هذا الشكل من المعلومات العلمية والتواصل. يجب تقديم سياسات أخلاقية واضحة وصارمة بشكل عاجل من قبل مجموعات الأخلاقيات مثل لجنة أخلاقيات النشر، واللجنة الدولية لمحرري المجلات الطبية للمجلات الأعضاء التي تسمح بنشر مقالات ما قبل الطباعة قبل مراجعة النظراء التقليدية. ستفيد الإرشادات الأخلاقية الصارمة التي تتعامل مع سوء السلوك على قدم المساواة في مقالات ما قبل الطباعة والأبحاث التي راجعها النظراء، ستفيد نزاهة النشر الأكاديمي. Abstract: Preprints are typically crude precursors of peer-reviewed papers that are placed almost immediately, save for some superficial screening, on an open-access repository to allow the information to reach readers quickly, circumventing the long-drawn process typically associated with processing in peer-reviewed journals. For early-career researchers who might be enthusiastic about obtaining some recognition for their efforts, or wanting open and public input about their work, preprints are certainly a useful publication choice. However, if health-related data and information have not been carefully scrutinised, they may pose a risk and may even serve as a source of public health misinformation. Surging growth and competition among preprint servers, coupled with a massive volume of COVID-19-related preprints, mainly on bioRxiv and medRxiv, as well as select indexing now being tested on PubMed, suggests that preprints are being increasingly used in the biomedical sciences. Stronger and more robust ethical policies are needed to screen preprints before they are released to the public, and even if this implies a slight delay in publication, it may increase academics' trust in this form of scientific information and communication. Clear and stringent ethical policies need to be urgently introduced by ethics groups such as COPE and the ICMJE, whose many member journals allow preprints to be posted before traditional peer review. Stringent ethical guidelines that treat misconduct equally in preprints and peer-reviewed papers will boost the integrity of academic publishing.

Peer reviewing is a central component in the scientific publishing process. We present the first public dataset of scientific peer reviews available for research purposes (PeerRead v1),1 providing an opportunity to study this important artifact. The dataset consists of 14.7K paper drafts and the corresponding accept/reject decisions in top-tier venues including ACL, NIPS and ICLR. The dataset also includes 10.7K textual peer reviews written by experts for a subset of the papers. We describe the data collection process and report interesting observed phenomena in the peer reviews. We also propose two novel NLP tasks based on this dataset and provide simple baseline models. In the first task, we show that simple models can predict whether a paper is accepted with up to 21% error reduction compared to the majority baseline. In the second task, we predict the numerical scores of review aspects and show that simple models can outperform the mean baseline for aspects with high variance such as ‘originality’ and ‘impact’.

Peer reviews form an essential part of scientific communications. Research papers and proposals are reviewed by several peers before they are finally accepted or rejected for publication and funding, respectively. With the steady increase in the number of research domains, scholarly venues (journal and/or conference), researchers, and papers, managing the peer review process is becoming a daunting task. Application of recommender systems to assist peer reviewing is, therefore, being explored and becoming an emerging research area. In this paper, we present a deep learning network based Meta-Review Generation considering peer review prediction of the scholarly article (MRGen). MRGen is able to provide solutions for: (i) Peer review prediction (Task 1) and (ii) Meta-review generation (Task 2). First, the system takes the peer reviews as input and produces a draft meta-review. Then it employs an integrated framework of convolution layer, long short-term memory (LSTM) model, Bi-LSTM model, and attention mechanism to predict the final decision (accept/reject) of the scholarly article. Based on the final decision, the proposed model MRGen incorporates Pointer Generator Network-based abstractive summarization to generate the final meta-review. The focus of our approach is to give a concise meta-review that maximizes information coverage, coherence, readability and also reduces redundancy. Extensive experiments conducted on the PeerRead dataset demonstrate good consistency between the recommended decisions and original decisions. We also compare the performance of MRGen with some of the existing state-ofthe- art multi-document summarization methods. The system also outperforms a few existing models based on accuracy, Rouge scores, readability, non-redundancy, and cohesion.

Replicability tests of scientific papers show that the majority of papers fail replication. Moreover, failed papers circulate through the literature as quickly as replicating papers. This dynamic weakens the literature, raises research costs, and demonstrates the need for new approaches for estimating a study’s replicability. Here, we trained an artificial intelligence model to estimate a paper’s replicability using ground truth data on studies that had passed or failed manual replication tests, and then tested the model’s generalizability on an extensive set of out-of-sample studies. The model predicts replicability better than the base rate of reviewers and comparably as well as prediction markets, the best present-day method for predicting replicability. In out-of-sample tests on manually replicated papers from diverse disciplines and methods, the model had strong accuracy levels of 0.65 to 0.78. Exploring the reasons behind the model’s predictions, we found no evidence for bias based on topics, journals, disciplines, base rates of failure, persuasion words, or novelty words like “remarkable” or “unexpected.” We did find that the model’s accuracy is higher when trained on a paper’s text rather than its reported statistics and that n-grams, higher order word combinations that humans have difficulty processing, correlate with replication. We discuss how combining human and machine intelligence can raise confidence in research, provide research self-assessment techniques, and create methods that are scalable and efficient enough to review the ever-growing numbers of publications—a task that entails extensive human resources to accomplish with prediction markets and manual replication alone.

IntroductionPrevious reviews of mobile messaging for individuals with musculoskeletal pain have shown positive effects on pain and disability. However, the configuration of digital content, method of presentation and interaction, dose and frequency needed for optimal results remain unclear. Patient preferences concerning such systems are also unclear. Addressing these knowledge gaps, incorporating evidence from both experimental and observational studies, may be useful to understand the extent of the relevant literature, and to influence the design and outcomes of future messaging systems. We aim to map information that could be influential in the design of future mobile messaging systems for individuals with musculoskeletal pain conditions, and to summarise the findings of efficacy, effectiveness, and economics derived from both experimental and observational studies.Methods and analysisWe will include studies describing the development and/or use of mobile messaging to support adults (≥18 years) with acute or chronic musculoskeletal pain. We will exclude digital health studies that lack a mobile messaging component, or those targeted at other health conditions unrelated to the bones, muscles and connective tissues, or involving surgical or patients with cancer, or studies involving solely healthy individuals. Our sources of information will be online databases and reference lists of relevant papers. We will include papers published in English in the last 10 years. Two pairs of independent reviewers will screen, select and extract the data, with any disagreements mediated by a third reviewer. We will report the results according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews checklist. We will synthesise the findings in a tabular format and provide a descriptive summary.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required. We will disseminate the findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal, relevant conferences, and relevant consumer forums.Trial registrationOpen Science Framework https://osf.io/8mzya; DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/8MZYA.

This paper investigates the possible benefits as well as the overall impact on the behaviour of students within a learning environment, which is based on double-blinding reviewing of freely selected peer works. Fifty-six sophomore students majoring in Informatics and Telecommunications Engi-neering volunteered to participate in the study. The experiment was conducted in a controlled environment, according to which students were divided into three groups of different conditions: control, usage data, usage and ranking data. No additional information was made available to students in the control condition. The students that participated in the other two conditions were provided with their usage information (logins, peer work viewed/reviewed, etc.), while members of the last group could also have access to ranking information about their positioning in their group, based on their usage data. According to our findings, students’ performance between the groups were comparable, however, the Ranking group revealed differences in the resulted behavior among its members. Specifically, awareness of ranking information mostly benefited students which were relatively in favor of ranking, motivating them to further engage and perform better than the rest of the group members.

Introduction Writing a thesis or dissertation during a postgraduate medical or surgical training is a part of curriculum, which is considered a major component of training during residency. We aimed to analyze and find out the fate of thesis of our residents, their outcome, and impact. We have also evaluated the reasons for not publishing the thesis in a peer-reviewed paper. Methods This study was conducted at a neurosurgical department of a premier training institute. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for the topics of thesis and names of residents to find out whether any paper was published similar to topic of thesis. The faculties and residents were also personally contacted to evaluate the publication status of their thesis. A questionnaire was sent to the students who did not publish their thesis to find out the reasons for not submitting for publication. Results Total 56 residents submitted 85 thesis. The conversion rate to peer-reviewed publication was 32.5%. There was decreasing trend of conversion to publication over 10 years. The most common reasons for not publishing was a bad design of study, or deemed worthless for publication. Conclusion Conversion rate of thesis to paper is poor. In addition to writing thesis, candidates should be encouraged to have publications in indexed journal as full-length articles. Such publications carry more significance in long-term career of a resident.

The social aspect of sustainable and ‘clean’ production/manufacturing technologies is researched and understood by means of Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA), a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) tool, which is still in its infancy. In this paper, a search for all peer-reviewed publications on applied Social LCA, which have appeared in scientific journals, between O’Brien et al (1996) and the latest one at the time of writing (April 2018), was carried out, using Scopus as the repository and using “S-LCA” OR “SLCA” OR “Social LCA” OR “Social Life Cycle Assessment” as search-phrases in title, abstract and keywords of publications, separately. Overall, 213 publications were unearthed, and the trend shows that there has been a near-exponential increase over time. A little over 55% of these publications – 121 to be precise - were applications of S-LCA – often in combination with environmental-LCA and life cycle costing analysis, in an LCSA. This paper discusses the contributions of a selected subset of these 121 publications to the body of S-LCA knowledge, with the focus being restricted to applications in developing and transition economies of the world, on the premise that there is a more urgent need to understand social aspects of production and manufacturing in these parts of the world. A SWOT analysis of S-LCA has been carried out towards the end. There is a consensus among many researchers that while LCC and E-LCA have matured a lot over time, S-LCA, the newest of the trio, is evolving slowly to become a harmonised tool which can serve as an effective complement to the aforesaid two, in life cycle sustainability assessments of products and processes in industry.

Computer Science researchers rely on peer-reviewed conferences to publish their work and to receive feedback. The impact of these peer-reviewed papers on researchers’ careers can hardly be overstated. Yet conference organizers can make inconsistent choices for their review process, even in the same subfield. These choices are rarely reviewed critically, and when they are, the emphasis centers on the effects on the technical program, not the authors. In particular, the effects of conference policies on author experience and diversity are still not well understood. To help address this knowledge gap, this paper presents a cross-sectional study of 56 conferences from one large subfield of computer science, namely computer systems. We introduce a large author survey (n = 918), representing 809 unique papers. The goal of this paper is to expose this data and present an initial analysis of its findings. We primarily focus on quantitative comparisons between different survey questions and comparisons to external information we collected on author demographics, conference policies, and paper statistics. Another focal point of this study is author diversity. We found poor balance in the gender and geographical distributions of authors, but a more balanced spread across sector, experience, and English proficiency. For the most part, women and nonnative English speakers exhibit no differences in their experience of the peer-review process, suggesting no specific evidence of bias against these accepted authors. We also found strong support for author rebuttal to reviewers’ comments, especially among students and less experienced researchers.

Scientific papers are complex and understanding the usefulness of these papers requires prior knowledge. Peer reviews are comments on a paper provided by designated experts on that field and hold a substantial amount of information, not only for the editors and chairs to make the final decision, but also to judge the potential impact of the paper. In this paper, we propose to use aspect-based sentiment analysis of scientific reviews to be able to extract useful information, which correlates well with the accept/reject decision. While working on a dataset of close to 8k reviews from ICLR, one of the top conferences in the field of machine learning, we use an active learning framework to build a training dataset for aspect prediction, which is further used to obtain the aspects and sentiments for the entire dataset. We show that the distribution of aspect-based sentiments obtained from a review is significantly different for accepted and rejected papers. We use the aspect sentiments from these reviews to make an intriguing observation, certain aspects present in a paper and discussed in the review strongly determine the final recommendation. As a second objective, we quantify the extent of disagreement among the reviewers refereeing a paper. We also investigate the extent of disagreement between the reviewers and the chair and find that the inter-reviewer disagreement may have a link to the disagreement with the chair. One of the most interesting observations from this study is that reviews, where the reviewer score and the aspect sentiments extracted from the review text written by the reviewer are consistent, are also more likely to be concurrent with the chair's decision., Comment: Accepted in JCDL'20

Background Productive faculty are key to generating new knowledge and advancing pharmacy practice. The work environments of academic pharmacists are critical to their vitality, commitment, and longevity. Objectives To (1) identify correlates of faculty scholarly productivity and teaching effectiveness, considering personal and environmental characteristics; (2) determine the relationship between a faculty's perception of organizational citizenship behaviors they witness with the organizational culture of their employing college/school of pharmacy; and (3) describe the relationship between organizational climate, job satisfaction, and commitment of academic pharmacists. Methods A self-administered survey was disseminated to a random sample of U.S. academic pharmacists acquired from AACP list-servs. The survey measured perceptions of their organization's culture, the organizational citizenship behaviors they witness at their institution, their job satisfaction, teaching load and productivity, and scholarly productivity based upon peer-reviewed scholarly papers accepted. Both bivariate and multivariate (regression) procedures were employed to identify factors most responsible for explaining academic pharmacist's work environment. Results Responses were received from 177 of 600 survey recipients. Faculty reported having had accepted 10.9 ± 13.6 papers in peer-reviewed journals during the previous 5 years, with most of those in journals with relatively low Impact Factor scores. Faculty productivity was related to type of academic institution employed, teaching effectiveness, job satisfaction, and other factors. Organizational citizenship behaviors and organizational culture was seen similarly by faculty of varied ranks and experience levels. Commitment to remain at the current college/school of pharmacy was highly associated with culture, climate, and job satisfaction conditions. Conclusions The results provided evidence for a strong connection or nexus between teaching and research effectiveness. Organizational culture of academic pharmacy programs is highly important for faculty vitality and commitment. The findings should be helpful for academic leaders in devising programs for mentoring, development, and retention of faculty.

Despite compelling evidence of its potential effectiveness, uptake of self and peer assessment in higher education has been slower than expected. As with other assessment practices, self and peer assessment is ultimately enabled, or inhibited, by the actions of individual academics. This paper explores what academics see as the benefits and challenges of implementing self and peer assessment, through the analysis of interviews with 13 Australian academics. Thematic analysis of our qualitative data identified seven themes of benefits and five challenges. Our academics showed strong belief in the power of self and peer assessment as formative assessment, contrary to past literature which has focussed on the accuracy of students’ marking. This paper therefore brings insights as to not only what academics value about self and peer assessment but also identifies potential inhibitors in practice. Recommendations are made about improving the design and implementation of self and peer assessment in higher...

Background: This paper explores telemonitoring/mhealth approaches as a promising real time and contextual strategy in overhauling HIV and TB interventions quality access and uptake, retention,adherence and coverage impact in endemic and prone-epidemic prevention and control in sub-Sahara Africa. Methods: The scoping review method was applied in acknowledged journals indexing platforms including Medline, Embase, Global Health, PubMed, MeSH PsycInfo, Scopus and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles pertaining to telemonitoring as a proxy surrogate method in reinforcing sustainability of HIV/TB prevention/treatment interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. Full papers were assessed and those selected that fosters evidence on telemonitoring/mhealth diagnosis, treatment approaches and strategies in HIV and TB prevention and control were synthesized and analyzed. Results: We found telemonitoring/mhealth approach as a more efficient and sustained proxy in HIV and TB risk reduction strategies for early diagnosis and prompt quality clinical outcomes. It can significantly contribute to decreasing health systems/patients cost, long waiting time in clinics, hospital visits, travels and time off/on from work. Improved integrated HIV and TB telemonitoring systems sustainability hold great promise in health systems strengthening including patient centered early diagnosis and care delivery systems, uptake and retention to medications/services and improving patients’ survival and quality of life. Conclusion: Telemonitoring/mhealth (electronic phone text/video/materials messaging)acceptability, access and uptake are crucial in monitoring and improving uptake, retention,adherence and coverage in both local and national integrated HIV and TB programs and interventions. Moreover, telemonitoring is crucial in patient-providers-health professional partnership, real-time quality care and service delivery, antiretroviral and anti-tuberculous drugs improvement, susceptibility monitoring and prescription choice, reinforcing cost effective HIV and TB integrated therapy model and survival rate.

Writing in these pages, Noland and colleagues recently proposed a methodology for cost-benefit analysis of ‘Road Diets’ (re-design of the cross-section of a four-lane arterial). On the basis of the proposed procedures, the authors conclude that a Road Diet of an empirical case study (in New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA) would provide ‘overwhelming’ benefits. The study team has employed similarly unambiguous language in statements in other public fora. In this paper, I do not take a view of whether Road Diets are in general desirable or not (which will depend heavily on local context). Rather, I demonstrate here that the specification of benefits and costs in the proposed methodology is systematically biased (upwards in the case of ‘benefits’ and downwards in the case of ‘costs’). I also show that the authors mis-interpret public opinion regarding the proposed Road Diet; general public opinion cannot be known on the basis of the evidence that is presented to readers. Finally, it has been previously shown that transportation planners tend to, on average, systematically under-estimate costs and over-estimate benefits. While the authors’ motivations during the study at issue cannot be known, the systematic bias in specifying costs and benefits is consistent with Flyvbjerg’s ‘political-economic hypothesis’, in which it is theorized that planners strategically misrepresent costs and benefits in order to increase the likelihood of a politically-preferred project being advanced. Flyvbjerg suggests making independent peer reviews publicly available as part of a strategy to encourage accountability through transparency; this is the spirit in which the present paper is disseminated.

Carnivores-livestock interactions cause human-wildlife conflicts worldwide. These interactions are present under a wide range of ecological and economic circumstances. This paper studies the relationship between predation mortality and natural mortality, when food availability affects natural mortality of the livestock. Semi-domestic Saami reindeer (Rangifer t. tarandus) herding in Norway is used as a case study. When predation affects reindeer density, food competition among reindeer changes, which changes weights and natural mortality in the reindeer population. An age-structured bio-economic model is presented, where this relationship is taken into account. While predation mortality may be additional to natural mortality in absence of food limitation, it can compensate for natural mortality in situations of food scarcity. Furthermore, due to density dependency in livestock weights, predation may increase the meat value of livestock. The paper analyzes how predation affects livestock production and economic performance under an optimized management scheme. One main result is that predation shifts the optimal harvesting composition towards calf harvesting and, therefore, the optimal stock composition among the different categories of animals. This contrasts findings in the existing bioeconomic literature. Furthermore, a changing harvesting pattern towards calf harvest is an important adjustment that highly limits the negative impact on profit of predation.

Peer-to-peer approaches refer to a participatory style of teaching and learning, which increasingly gain popularity as inclusive and participatory interventions to encourage changes towards more sustainable energy practices. However, this prominence has not been matched by evidence on the effectiveness of such approaches. By investigating the design and implementation of the peer-to-peer project useITsmartly, which centred on the topic of energy efficient and sustainable ICT use, this paper focuses on the effectiveness of this peer-to-peer approach as inclusive participatory intervention. Drawing on the environmental justice literature, it addresses particularly the second-level effectiveness, that is the impact peer-to-peer exercises have on the peer educators themselves in terms of capacity building and empowerment. The paper evaluates the preparation, recruitment, training and multiplication phases of the approach and concludes that it is essential to invest enough time and resources to truly recognize the peer educators and their lifestyles and practices, and enable them to participate in the peer education on their own terms. If not, lack of motivation and skills of the peer educators as well as too much focus on quantitative targets may compromise the actual purpose of the peer-to-peer approach and turn it into a top-down exercise.

Publication and researcher bias is common in software engineering experiments.Our model shows how these biases lead to a high proportion of incorrect results.Increased statistical power is a key factor to improve the trustworthiness. ContextThe trustworthiness of research results is a growing concern in many empirical disciplines. AimThe goals of this paper are to assess how much the trustworthiness of results reported in software engineering experiments is affected by researcher and publication bias, given typical statistical power and significance levels, and to suggest improved research practices. MethodFirst, we conducted a small-scale survey to document the presence of researcher and publication biases in software engineering experiments. Then, we built a model that estimates the proportion of correct results for different levels of researcher and publication bias. A review of 150 randomly selected software engineering experiments published in the period 20022013 was conducted to provide input to the model. ResultsThe survey indicates that researcher and publication bias is quite common. This finding is supported by the observation that the actual proportion of statistically significant results reported in the reviewed papers was about twice as high as the one expected assuming no researcher and publication bias. Our models suggest a high proportion of incorrect results even with quite conservative assumptions. ConclusionResearch practices must improve to increase the trustworthiness of software engineering experiments. A key to this improvement is to avoid conducting studies with unsatisfactory low statistical power.

Initial internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs for anxiety disorders in children and young people (CYP) have been developed and evaluated, however these have not yet been widely adopted in routine practice. The lack of guidance and formalized approaches to the development and dissemination of iCBT has arguably contributed to the difficulty in developing iCBT that is scalable and sustainable beyond academic evaluation and that can ultimately be adopted by healthcare providers. This paper presents a consensus statement and recommendations from a workshop of international experts in CYP anxiety and iCBT (#iCBTLorentz Workshop Group) on the development, evaluation, engagement and dissemination of iCBT for anxiety in CYP., Highlights • This paper gives a consensus statement and recommendations for research on iCBT for anxiety in youth • We discuss considerations regarding the development, evaluation, engagement and dissemination of iCBT for anxiety in youth • ICBT for youth anxiety should be initially evaluated with a RCT, while further iterations could use other research designs • Consistent measures relating to youth anxiety and iCBT usage should be employed, as well as precise reporting of iCBT programs • Dissemination of iCBT for youth anxiety into routine clinical practice should be considered from the start of development

It is a non‐trivial task for research‐centric courses in the software engineering curriculum to compete and engage students on the same level as the practical, software development courses. Practical software development courses and projects are inherently motivating to students, as they provide necessary elements such as agency, relatedness, and the strong sense of competence upon completing software engineering tasks. In contrast, reading research articles and technical white papers feels dry and non‐engaging. Nevertheless, a well‐balanced MSc programme curriculum covers both, learning through construction and practical courses as well as research courses. The main motivation for the development of game‐centric approaches to the research aspects of curriculum is to improve students’ interest and engagement with those courses. In this paper, we present the methodology and initial evaluations from three gamification strategies used in the Master's degree programme. These are: the game of reading and discussing research articles (GoRaD), the game of arguing and counter‐arguing, and combining research and practice. The paper presents our experimentation and initial evaluations of the use of those strategies, as well as plans for future development and enhancements. © 2018 The Authors. Computer Applications in Engineering Education Published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Software startups have long been a significant driver in economic growth and innovation. The on-going failure of the major number of startups calls for a better understanding of state-of-the-practice of startup activities. Objective With a focus on engineering perspective, this study aims at identifying the change in focus of research area and thematic concepts operating startup research. A systematic mapping study on 74 primary papers (in which 27 papers are newly selected) from 1994 to 2017 was conducted with a comparison with findings from previous mapping studies. A classification schema was developed, and the primary studies were ranked according to their rigour. We discovered that most research has been conducted within the SWEBOK knowledge areas software engineering process, management, construction, design, and requirements, with the shift of focus towards process and management areas. We also provide an alternative classification for future startup research. We find that the rigour of the primary papers was assessed to be higher between 2013–2017 than that of 1994–2013. We also find an inconsistency of characterizing startups. Future work can focus on certain research themes, such as startup evolution models and human aspects, and consolidate the thematic concepts describing software startups. © 2018. This is the authors’ accepted and refereed manuscript to the article. Locked until 19.6.2020 due to copyright restrictions. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Peer review of scholarly papers is seen to be a critical step in the publication of high quality outputs in reputable journals. However, it appears that there are few incentives for researchers to agree to conduct suitable reviews in a timely fashion and in some cases unscrupulous practices are occurring as part of the production of academic research output. Innovations in internet-based technologies mean that there are ways in which some of the challenges can be addressed. In particular, this paper proposes a new currency system using the BlockChain as its basis that provides a number of solutions. Potential benefits and problems of using the technology are discussed in the paper and these will need further investigation should the idea develop further. Ultimately, the currency could be used as an alternative publication metric for authors, institutions and journals.

The peer review process is central to the scientific method, the advancement and spread of research, as well as crucial for individual careers. However, the single-blind review mode currently used in most Software Engineering (SE) venues is susceptible to apparent and hidden biases, since reviewers know the identity of authors. We perform a study on the benefits and costs that are associated with introducing double- blind review in SE venues. We surveyed the SE community’s opinion and interviewed experts on double-blind reviewing. Our results indicate that the costs, mostly logistic challenges and side effects, outnumber its benefits and mostly regard difficulty for authors in blinding papers, for reviewers in understanding the increment with respect to previous work from the same authors, and for organizers to manage a complex transition. While the surveyed community largely consents on the costs of DBR, only less than one-third disagree with a switch to DBR for SE journals, all SE conferences, and, in particular, ICSE; the analysis of a survey with authors of submitted papers at ICSE 2016 run by the program chairs of that edition corroborates our result.

In recent years however, more re-identification attacks have been attempted by researchers elsewhere in the world.Further findings are that most research in this area has been conducted on Global datasets by American researchers. The publication of increasing amounts of anonymised open source data has resulted in a worryingly rising number of successful re-identification attacks. This has a number of privacy and security implications both on an individual and corporate level.This paper uses a systematic literature review to investigate the depth and extent of this problem as reported in peer reviewed literature. Using a detailed protocol,seven research portals were explored, 10,873 database entries were searched, from which a subset of 220 papers were selected for further review. From this total, 55 papers were selected as being within scope and to be included in the final review.The main review findings are that 72.7% of all successful re-identification attacks have taken place since 2009. Most attacks use multiple datasets. The majority of them have taken place on global datasets such as social networking data, and have been conducted by US based researchers. Furthermore, the number of datasets can be used as an attribute.Because privacy breaches have security, policy and legal implications (e.g. data protection, Safe Harbor etc.), the work highlights the need for new and improved anonymisation techniques or indeed, a fresh approach to open source publishing.

This paper explores the application of learning designs featuring formalised and structured technology enhanced peer learning. These include student produced learning elements, peer review discussions and peer assessment in the BSc/MSc level summer course Restoration of European Ecosystems and Freshwaters (REEF), the Master thesis preparation seminars for the Master of Public Health (MPH) and the MOOC course Global Environmental Management (GEM). The application of student produced learning elements and peer review discussions is investigated by analyzing quotes from course evaluations and performing focus group interviews. The application of peer assessment is investigated by analyzing the agreement of peer assessment between students assessing the same assignment. Our analyses confirm previous research on the value of peer learning and peer assessment and we argue that there could also be a huge benefit from developing learning design patterns that facilitate informal peer learning and reinforce knowledge sharing practices. This paper explores the application of learning designs featuring formalised and structured technology enhanced peer learning. These include student produced learning elements, peer review discussions and peer assessment in the BSc/MSc level summer course Restoration of European Ecosystems and Freshwaters (REEF), the Master thesis preparation seminars for the Master of Public Health (MPH) and the MOOC course Global Environmental Management (GEM). The application of student produced learning elements and peer review discussions is investigated by analyzing quotes from course evaluations and performing focus group interviews. The application of peer assessment is investigated by analyzing the agreement of peer assessment between students assessing the same assignment. Our analyses confirm previous research on the value of peer learning and peer assessment and we argue that there could also be a huge benefit from developing learning design patterns that facilitate informal peer learning and reinforce knowledge sharing practices.

After participating in a group peer-review exercise at a workshop presented by Academic Medicine and MedEdPORTAL editors at the 2015 Association of American Medical Colleges Medical Education Meeting, the authors realized that the way their work group reviewed a manuscript was very different from the way by which they each would have reviewed the paper as an individual. Further, the group peer-review process yielded more robust feedback for the manuscript's authors than did the traditional individual peer-review process. This realization motivated the authors to reconvene and collaborate to write this Commentary to share their experience and propose the expanded use of group peer review in medical education scholarship.The authors consider the benefits of a peer-review process for reviewers, including learning how to improve their own manuscripts. They suggest that the benefits of a team review model may be similar to those of teamwork and team-based learning in medicine and medical education. They call for research to investigate this, to provide evidence to support group review, and to determine whether specific paper types would benefit most from team review (e.g., particularly complex manuscripts, those receiving widely disparate initial individual reviews). In addition, the authors propose ways in which a team-based approach to peer review could be expanded by journals and institutions. They believe that exploring the use of group peer review potentially could create a new methodology for skill development in research and scholarly writing and could enhance the quality of medical education scholarship.

In the 10 years since the term was coined 'design fiction' has become an increasingly common approach in HCI research. The practice involves working with 'diegetic prototypes', that is prototypes that need not exist in reality, but instead exist from within a 'story world'. Although fictional aspects are not unusual in HCI prototyping methods (e.g. storyboards, personas, Wizard-of-Oz), the breadth and flexibility of design fiction poses new challenges. This paper originally featured quotes from peer reviews of design fiction orientated papers that have previously been submitted to ACM SIGCHI conferences in order to highlight inherent challenges when reviewing research that may be based upon or include elements of fiction. In response to the SIGCHI Executive Committee's request to not directly quote reviewers the quotes have now been redacted. This somewhat changes the paper's tone and also makes very clear that publishing discussions relating to peer reviews (or the reviews themselves) is extremely challenging.

Summary Background: This accompanying editorial is an introduction to the focus theme of “chronic disease registries - trends and challenges”. Methods: A call for papers was announced on the website of Methods of Information in Medicine in April 2016 with submission deadline in September 2016. A peer review process was established to select the papers for the focus theme, managed by two guest editors. Results: Three papers were selected to be included in the focus theme. Topics range from contributions to patient care through implementation of clinical decision support functionality in clinical registries; analysing similar-purposed acute coronary syndrome registries of two countries and their registry-to- SNOMED CT maps; and data extraction for speciality population registries from electronic health record data rather than manual abstraction. Conclusions: The focus theme gives insight into new developments related to disease registration. This applies to technical challenges such as data linkage and data as well as data structure abstraction, but also the utilisation for clinical decision making.

Background Journal editors have exercised their control over submitted papers having a high similarity index. Despite widespread suspicion of possible plagiarism on a high similarity index, our study focused on the real effect of the similarity index on the value of a scientific paper. Methods This research examined the percent values of the similarity index from 978 submitted (420 published) papers in the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology since 2012. Thus, this study aimed to identify the correlation between the similarity index and the value of a paper. The value of a paper was evaluated in two distinct phases (during a peer-review process vs. after publication), and the value of a published paper was evaluated in two aspects (academic citation vs. social media appearance). Results Yearly mean values of the similarity index ranged from 16% to 19%. There were 254 papers cited at least once and 179 papers appearing at least once in social media. The similarity index affected the acceptance/rejection of a paper in various ways; although the influence was not linear and the cutoff measures were distinctive among the types of papers, both extremes were related to a high rate of rejection. After publication, the similarity index had no effect on academic citation or social media appearance according to the paper. Conclusions The finding suggested that the similarity index no longer had an influence on academic citation or social media appearance according to the paper after publication, while the similarity index affected the acceptance/rejection of a submitted paper. Proofreading and intervention for finalizing the draft by the editors might play a role in achieving uniform quality of the publication.

Malaria is a leading cause of death in Nigeria and remains a public health concern because of the increasing resistance of the disease to antimalarial drugs. Pregnant women and children under five years of age are the most vulnerable. Efforts to eradicate malaria is often frustrated due to some various sociodemographic factors and medical factors. One of the vital therapeutic factors is misdiagnosis. Hence, the paper applied different data mining models to diagnose malaria using fifteen symptoms of patients that attended a hospital in Nigeria. The data were obtained from a peer reviewed data article that comprises 337 subjects at Federal Polytechnic Ilaro Medical Centre, Ogun State. The independent variables are 15 symptoms, age, and sex, while the target or dependent is the outcome. The outcome is the result of the diagnosis, which is positive for negative for malaria. Eight machine learning tools were applied to the data on the Orange Software platform. Weak non-significant correlations were obtained between the 15 symptoms and the outcome, and hence no pattern was observed. However, the application of data mining tools revealed a hidden pattern that correctly predicted the outcome using the subjects' symptoms, age, and sex. 6 out of the 8 machine learning models were adjudged to perform well using different performance metrics. The Adaptive boosting model gave a percent 100% precision in the classification, and logistic regression was the least. Furthermore, a percent performance of Adaboost implies that the model correctly predicted all the 221 true negatives and 116 true positives with a misclassification (misdiagnosis) of zero. Classify using only the 15 symptoms reduced the predictive accuracy of the 6 models. Nevertheless, Adaboost performance was the best with a classification accuracy of 98.2%, precision of 96.6%, and an error rate of just 1.8%. Again, logistic regression performance was the least. The present work has presented a strong relationship between age and sex and the outcome. Adaboost model can be used to design decision support systems or rapid diagnostic tools that utilise the internet or mobile devices as platforms in the diagnosis of malaria. The application of the present work as potentials in reduction of misdiagnosis incidences, reducing the mortality due to malaria and improving the overall public health of people residing in malaria endemic areas.

PurposePeer reviewer evaluations of academic papers are known to be variable in content and overall judgements but are important academic publishing safeguards. This article introduces a sentiment analysis program, PeerJudge, to detect praise and criticism in peer evaluations. It is designed to support editorial management decisions and reviewers in the scholarly publishing process and for grant funding decision workflows. The initial version of PeerJudge is tailored for reviews from F1000Research's open peer review publishing platform.Design/methodology/approachPeerJudge uses a lexical sentiment analysis approach with a human-coded initial sentiment lexicon and machine learning adjustments and additions. It was built with an F1000Research development corpus and evaluated on a different F1000Research test corpus using reviewer ratings.FindingsPeerJudge can predict F1000Research judgements from negative evaluations in reviewers' comments more accurately than baseline approaches, although not from positive reviewer comments, which seem to be largely unrelated to reviewer decisions. Within the F1000Research mode of post-publication peer review, the absence of any detected negative comments is a reliable indicator that an article will be ‘approved’, but the presence of moderately negative comments could lead to either an approved or approved with reservations decision.Originality/valuePeerJudge is the first transparent AI approach to peer review sentiment detection. It may be used to identify anomalous reviews with text potentially not matching judgements for individual checks or systematic bias assessments.

Accepted manuscript version, licensed CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Final version published in International Journal of Medical Informatics, 129, 253-259, is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.06.011. Background: Qualitative studies have provided important insights into how hospital pharmacists’ work changes when electronic medication management (EMM) systems are introduced. Quantitative studies of work practice change are rare. Despite the use of EMM systems internationally, there are no cross-country comparative studies of their impact on health professionals’ work. We aimed to quantify and compare the type and magnitude of changes in hospital pharmacists’ work pre- and post-EMM implementation in two countries. Methods: Parallel, direct observational, time and motion studies of pharmacists in Australia and England pre- and post-EMM implementation. 20 pharmacists were observed: 9 in an Australian 440-bed hospital (155 h); and 11 pharmacists in a 500-bed English hospital (258 h). The Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) software was used to collect observational data. Proportions of observed time in 11 tasks by study period (pre- versus post-EMM) and site, time spent with others or alone, and using different tools (e.g computers, paper) were calculated. Magnitude of changes between pre- and post-EMM by task and country were determined using z-tests for proportions adjusting for multiple testing. Results: At baseline, Australian and English pharmacists spent the greatest proportion of time in medication review. Post-EMM, time in medication review (Australia 21.6%–27.5%; England 27.1%–33.8%) and history-taking (Australia 7.6%–13.3%; England 19.5%–28.9%) significantly increased. Despite country differences in these tasks at baseline, the magnitude of changes did not significantly differ. English pharmacists increased time engaged in medication discussions with patients post-EMM (from 5.9% to 10.8%; p = 0.01). The Australian rate did not change (18.0%–27.2%; p = 0.09), but was higher at baseline. Post-EMM, Australian pharmacists spent 63.4% of time working alone, compared to 92.0% for English pharmacists. Conclusions: EMM systems impacted the same core areas of work and had a similar magnitude of effect on pharmacists’ work in both countries. Anticipated reductions in medication review and history taking were not observed.

This study answers a call for more qualitative research on project management to unveil “what goes on in social construction of projects and project management”. More precisely, we focus on how trust and control are balanced in an inter-organizational project collaboration in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Our findings suggest that balancing trust and control is a significant part of the project manager role. We claim that this area is both neglected in education and training and under-researched. The aim of the paper is to provide more knowledge on the trust-control dilemma in project management. Our qualitative approach provides rich empirical examples of dilemma situations and how balancing trust and control take place in a real-life project management context. The data was collected between 2010 and 2013 and consists of observational data from project meetings, document analysis and interviews.

Scientific peer review is pivotal to maintain quality standards for academic publication. The effectiveness of the reviewing process is currently being challenged by the rapid increase of paper submissions in various conferences. Those venues need to recruit a large number of reviewers of different levels of expertise and background. The submitted reviews often do not meet the conformity standards of the conferences. Such a situation poses an ever-bigger burden on the meta-reviewers when trying to reach a final decision. In this work, we propose a human-AI approach that estimates the conformity of reviews to the conference standards. Specifically, we ask peers to grade each other’s reviews anonymously with respect to important criteria of review conformity such as sufficient justification and objectivity. We introduce a Bayesian framework that learns the conformity of reviews from both the peer grading process, historical reviews and decisions of a conference, while taking into account grading reliability. Our approach helps meta-reviewers easily identify reviews that require clarification and detect submissions requiring discussions while not inducing additional overhead from reviewers. Through a large-scale crowdsourced study where crowd workers are recruited as graders, we show that the proposed approach outperforms machine learning or review grades alone and that it can be easily integrated into existing peer review systems.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought changes to the way medical care is delivered to keep health workers safe while simultaneously managing available resources. The well-being of patients and healthcare workers is crucial and has become a topic of debate as the world faces adjusts to the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, there is need to consider innovative methods of delivering medical care. Telehealth and digital health care which is the provision of medical care via Information Communication Technology (ICT) with highspeed telecommunications systems, has increasingly becoming popular in providing medical care services can be adopted to reduce infections during quarantine and social distancing practices. Specifically, by means of document and literature review this paper discusses the role of telehealth and digital care solutions, types and application of telehealth, and current policies for COVID-19. More importantly, findings from the article present the human, infrastructure, and institutional determinants that influence the adoption of telehealth and digital care solutions during the pandemic. The findings discuss how telehealth and digital care technologies can benefit the society. This study provides implications to informs medical staffs on the potential of digital technologies to provide support during and after the pandemic.