Search

In our planned study, we shall empirically study the assessment of cited papers within the framework of the anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic. We are interested in the question whether citation decisions are (mainly) driven by the quality of cited references. The design of our study is oriented towards the study by Teplitskiy, Duede [10]. We shall undertake a survey of corresponding authors with an available email address in the Web of Science database. The authors are asked to assess the quality of papers that they cited in previous papers. Some authors will be assigned to three treatment groups that receive further information alongside the cited paper: citation information, information on the publishing journal (journal impact factor), or a numerical access code to enter the survey. The control group will not receive any further numerical information. In the statistical analyses, we estimate how (strongly) the quality assessments of the cited papers are adjusted by the respondents to the anchor value (citation, journal, or access code). Thus, we are interested in whether possible adjustments in the assessments can not only be produced by quality-related information (citation or journal), but also by numbers that are not related to quality, i.e. the access code. The results of the study may have important implications for quality assessments of papers by researchers and the role of numbers, citations, and journal metrics in assessment processes.

Since 2017, the German Society for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology e.V. (GMDS) offers the submission of full papers to the annual meetings, optional in Studies in Health Technologies and Informatics (Stud HIT) or in GMS Medical Informatics, Biometrics, and Epidemiology (MIBE). GMDS’ aim is to increase the attractiveness of the conference and paper submission process in particular for young scientists and to increase the visibility of the conference. A standardized peer review process was established. Since 2017, a 25–35% of the contributions have been submitted as full papers. A total of 177 papers were published in Stud HTI. With an unofficial journal impact factor of 1.088 (2019) and 0.540 (2020), the papers were cited with a frequency similarly to national medical journals or full paper contributions of International medical informatics conferences.

Background: Motor complications are a consequence of the chronic dopaminergic treatment of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and include levodopa-induced dyskinesia (LIDs) and motor fluctuations (MF). Currently, evidence is on lacking whether patients with GBA-associated PD differ in their risk of developing motor complications compared to the general PD population. Objective: To evaluate the association of GBA carrier status with the development of LIDS and MFs from early PD. Methods: Motor complications were recorded prospectively in 884 patients with PD from four longitudinal cohorts using part IV of the UPDRS or MDS-UPDRS. Subjects were followed for up to 11 years and the associations of GBA mutations with the development of motor complications were assessed using parametric accelerated failure time models. Results: In 439 patients from Europe, GBA mutations were detected in 53 (12.1%) patients and a total of 168 cases of LIDs and 258 cases of MF were observed. GBA carrier status was not associated with the time to develop LIDs (HR 0.78, 95%CI 0.47 to 1.26, p = 0.30) or MF (HR 1.19, 95%CI 0.84 to 1.70, p = 0.33). In the American cohorts, GBA mutations were detected in 36 (8.1%) patients and GBA carrier status was also not associated with the progression to LIDs (HR 1.08, 95%CI 0.55 to 2.14, p = 0.82) or MF (HR 1.22, 95%CI 0.74 to 2.04, p = 0.43). Conclusion: This study does not provide evidence that GBA-carrier status is associated with a higher risk of developing motor complications. Publication of studies with null results is vital to develop an accurate summary of the clinical features that impact patients with GBA-associated PD. publishedVersion

Background There are limited evidence-based strategies that have been shown to increase the rate at which peer-reviewed articles are cited. In a previously reported randomized controlled trial, we demonstrated that promotion of article links in an online cross-publisher distribution platform (TrendMD) persistently augments citation rates after 12 months, leading to a statistically significant 50% increase in citations relative to the control. Objective This study aims to investigate if the citation advantage of promoted articles upholds after 36 months. Methods A total of 3200 published articles in 64 peer-reviewed journals across 8 subject areas were block randomized at the subject level to either the TrendMD group (n=1600) or the control group (n=1600) of the study. Articles were promoted in the TrendMD Network for 6 months. We compared the citation rates in both groups after 36 months. Results At 36 months, we found the citation advantage endured; articles randomized to TrendMD showed a 28% increase in mean citations relative to the control. The difference in mean citations at 36 months for articles randomized to TrendMD versus the control was 10.52 (95% CI 3.79-17.25) and was statistically significant (P=.001). Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to demonstrate how a postpublication article promotion intervention can be used to persistently augment citations of peer-reviewed articles. TrendMD is an efficient digital tool for knowledge translation and dissemination to targeted audiences to facilitate the uptake of research.

As the field of computing education grows and matures, it has become essential to unite computing education and higher education research. Educational research has highlighted that how students study is crucial to their learning progress, and study behaviors have been found to play an important role in students’ academic success. This article presents the main results of a systematic literature review intended to determine what we know about the study behaviors of computing students and the role of educational design in shaping them. A taxonomy of study behaviors was developed and used to clarify and classify the definitions of study behavior, process, strategies, habits, and tactics as well as to identify their relationship to the educational context. The literature search resulted in 107 included papers, which were analyzed according to defined criteria and variables. The review of study behavior terminology found that the same terms are used to describe substantially different study behaviors, and the lack of standard terminology makes it difficult to compare findings from different papers. Furthermore, it was more common for papers to use study behaviors to explain other aspects of students rather than exploring and understanding them. Additionally, the results revealed a tendency to focus on specific educational contexts, predominantly introductory programming courses. Although computing education as a field is well equipped to expand the knowledge about both study behaviors and their connection to the educational context, the lack of common terminology and theories limits the impact. The taxonomy of study behaviors in computing education proposed in this article can contribute to contextualizing the research in such a way that researchers and educators across institutional borders can compare and utilize results. Last, the article outlines some areas for future research and recommendations for practice.

To learn about novel software engineering (SE) trends, where do you refer to? In order to document and disseminate their experience / knowledge, many SE practitioners prepare technical materials and share them online as blog posts, white papers and videos. Such materials are often called “grey literature” because they are not formally peer reviewed. By contrast, SE researchers write technical papers that are peer-reviewed and published as academic literature. We observe that, in general, these two communities mostly read literature that is only written by and published within their respective communities. This situation has led to a form of “knowledge divide” between the two communities that, we believe, hurts both communities. By characterizing and contrasting the two types of literature, grey and academic, we discuss how each literature can complement the other and can lead to a richer and more integrated knowledge exchange and dissemination in SE.

Publication following thorough peer review has been one the essential drivers of scientific progress. While the emergence of open access journals has spread knowledge to a wider audience, a few publishers have started to exploit the model of being specifically paid by authors. They have published so-called predatory journals that have sacrificed scientific scrutiny in favor of revenue. Papers in such journals may bear illegitimate conclusions and thus hamper scientific progress. Here, we did not only explain predatory journals in general, we also elaborated on an example and thereby demonstrated how exactly these journals may deviate from scientific standards. Namely, a manufacturer of bacterial endotoxin tests published in a potentially predatory journal and neglected relevant literature, ill-referenced other papers and made use of judgmental, non-scientific language. Apparently, said manufacturer aimed to shed doubt in recombinant DNA technology (here recombinant Factor C) for bacterial endotoxin testing and, thus, restrict its competitors’ access to this market. In turn, this may prevent the development of more accurate, reliable, rapid and affordable bacterial endotoxin tests und in turn hamper progress in pharmaceutical development and manufacturing.

Stress-activated p38 kinases control a plethora of functions and their dysregulation has been linked to development of steatosis, obesity, immune disorders and cancer. Therefore, they have been identified as potential targets for novel therapeutic strategies. There are four p38 family members (p38α, p38β, p38γ, and p38δ) that are activated by MKK3 and MKK6. Here we demonstrate that lack of MKK6 reduces the life span in mice. Longitudinal study of cardiac function in Mkk6-/- mice showed that young mice have cardiac hypertrophy which progresses to cardiac dilatation and fibrosis with age. Mechanistically, lack of MKK6 blunts p38α activation while causing MKK3-p38γ/δ hyperphosphorylation and increased mTOR signaling, resulting in cardiac hypertrophy. Cardiac hypertrophy in Mkk6-/- mice is reverted by knocking out either p38γ or p38δ, or by inhibiting mTOR pathway with rapamycin. In conclusion, we have identified a key role for the MKK3/6-p38γ/δ pathway in the development of cardiac hypertrophy, which has important implications for the clinical use of p38α inhibitors in the long-term treatment since they might result in cardiotoxicity.eLife’s Review ProcesseLife works to improve the process of peer review so that it more effectively conveys the assessment of expert reviewers to authors, readers and other interested parties. In the future we envision a system in which research is first published as a preprint and the outputs of peer review are the primary way research is assessed, rather than journal title.Our editorial process produces two outputs: i) an assessment by peers designed to be posted alongside a preprint for the benefit of the readers; ii) detailed feedback on the manuscript for the authors, including requests for revisions and suggestions for improvement.Therefore we want to change how we construct and write peer reviews to make them useful to both authors and readers in a way that better reflects the work you put into reading and thinking about a paper.eLife reviews now have three parts: An evaluation summary (in two or three sentences) that captures the major conclusions of the review in a concise manner, accessible to a wide audience.A public review that details the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript before you, and discusses whether the authors’ claims and conclusions are justified by their data.A set of private recommendations for the authors that outline how you think the science and its presentation could be strengthened.All three sections will be used as the basis for an eLife publishing decision, which will, as always, be made after a consultation among the reviewers and editor. Each of the public reviews will be published (anonymously) alongside the preprint, together with a response from the authors if they choose. In the case of papers we reject after review, the authors can choose to delay posting until their paper has been published elsewhere.If this is your first time going through this new process, we ask that you take some time to read our Reviewer Guide, which discusses how we see each section will be used, what it should contain, and what we hope it accomplishes. And we remind you that, with the shift of reviews from private correspondence to public discourse, it is more important than ever that reviews are written in a clear and constructive manner appropriate for a public audience and mindful of the impact language choices might have on the authors.

Objectives: To explore alcohol consumption among older Norwegian adults with symptoms of cognitive decline, assess the agreement between the reports of older adults and their next of kin regarding a person’s alcohol consumption, and explore clinical and sociodemographic variables associated with agreement. Method: Alcohol consumption was measured among 3608 older adults consulting specialist health care for symptoms of cognitive decline. Agreement between the participant and their next of kin regarding the participant’s alcohol consumption was assessed with a weighted kappa (κ). A logistic regression analysis for hierarchical data was used to explore variables associated with agreement. Results: Both the participants and their next of kin reported that more than 20% of the participants consumed alcohol 1–3 times a week, and that approximately 10% consumed alcohol four or more times a week. The agreement between the participant’s and their next of kin’s report regarding the participant’s alcohol consumption was high (κ = .852), and variables associated with agreement were no cognitive decline, not drinking alcohol during the last year or ever as reported by the participant, and low agitation scores on a psychiatric assessment. Conclusion: This paper found alcohol consumption among older adults with symptoms of cognitive decline that was above the national average in Norway. This is also the first paper to demonstrate that a next of kin can be a reliable source of information regarding older adults’ alcohol consumption. Health personnel should consider these findings when performing medical assessments or developing interventions for older adults.

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.

Peer review is an essential part in ensuring the quality of papers published in scientific journals. Good reviews are beneficial for both authors and journal editors by providing authors with the opportunity to improve their manuscripts and editors with valuable comments to aid themselves to make their decisions. Despite a plethora of research articles on general guidelines for peer reviewing, it is difficult to find papers on English expressions peer reviewers can use, in particular for non-native English-speaking peer reviewers. Therefore, this article provides “down-to-earth” guidance for non-native English-speaking reviewers to construct better quality reviews. To this end, I suggest useful English expressions to help peer reviewers, whose mother tongue is not English, enhance the quality of their reviews.

The current COVID-19 pandemic situation has stimulated an unplanned clinical research paradigm which is evident from the surge of clinical trial registrations and the increasing number of COVID-related publications. We aimed to explore the standards for research conduction, publications and retraction of articles related to COVID-19 pharmacotherapy research during the pandemic. We analysed data from the contemporary literatures on studies reporting pharmacological agents for COVID-19 using MEDLINE, PubMed, WHO database and Google Scholar between January 01, 2020 and March 20, 2021. The initial search revealed a total of 61,801 articles. Based on the inclusion criteria, a total of 124 studies related to various pharmacological agents were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies were reported from the United States ( n = 30, 24%). Of the 124 studies, 50 (40%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Immunomodulatory drugs-related ( n = 17, 34%) and COVID-19 vaccine-related studies ( n = 14, 28%) were the main topics in the relevant RCTs. The median days for dissemination of findings in journals were 114 days (IQR 61–189). A comparative analysis revealed that RCTs were disseminated earlier (median 79 days; IQR 52–131) when compared to observational studies (median = 144 days; IQR 69–206) ( p = 0.003). Six papers were retracted from high impact journals; in which the average period till publication was 33 days. Retraction of papers occurred within 10–48 days. Expedited reviews, research approval and early publications of COVID-19 related pharmaceutical studies could have an impact on the quality of publications. However, the huge number of publications in short time creates confusion for readers during the early phases of the pandemic. Retraction of papers is alarming but ensures research integrity and correctness of scientific information. These abbreviated processes could affect patient care and public awareness. It is imperative to follow rapid but rigours ethical standards for research approval and peer-review process for publications during health pandemics.

Selecting a target journal is a universal decision faced by authors of scientific papers. Components of the decision, including expected turnaround time, journal acceptance rate, and journal impact factor, vary in terms of accessibility. In this study, I collated recent turnaround times and impact factors for 82 journals that publish papers in the field of fisheries sciences. In addition, I gathered acceptance rates for the same journals when possible. Findings indicated clear among-journal differences in turnaround time, with median times-to-publication ranging from 79 to 323 days. There was no clear correlation between turnaround time and acceptance rate nor between turnaround time and impact factor; however, acceptance rate and impact factor were negatively correlated. I found no field-wide differences in turnaround time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, though some individual journals took significantly longer or significantly shorter to publish during the pandemic. Depending on their priorities, authors choosing a target journal should use the results of this study as guidance toward a more informed decision.

The age factor plays a key role to the successful rates of ARTs protocols. The practical answer to this problem would be the acceptance of an egg, donated by a younger woman, who wants to undergo ovary stimulation, thus offering her cell to a female recipient. This review aims to investigate the psychological adjustment of parents who have used gamete donation, as well as its effect on the psychological adjustment of children in case of disclosing the children’s donor origin. The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for peer reviewed papers, focusing on parents’ psychological adjustment after gamete donation. Key search inclusion criteria included all papers published in English (between 2005 and 2019) relating to investigate the psychological adjustment of parents after gamete donation, as well as its effect on the psychological adjustment of children in case of disclosing the children’s donor origin. These families are possibly expected to be affected by the circumstances of the birth, especially in case of gamete donation or surrogacy, in terms of parents’ thoughts, feelings and behavior towards the child.

Preprints are manuscripts posted on a public server that do not yet have formal certification of peer review from a scholarly journal. The increasingly prominent online repositories for these preprints provide a means of rapidly making scientific results accessible to all with an Internet connection. We here describe the catalysis and subsequent development of a successful new process to solicit preprints for consideration for publication inProceedings B.We present preliminary comparisons between the focal topics and geographic origin of submitting authors of papers submitted in the traditional (non-solicited) route versus solicited preprints. This analysis suggests that the solicitation process seems to be achieving one of the primary goals of the preprint solicitation endeavour: broadening the scope of the papers featured inProceedings B. We also use an informal survey of the early-career scientists that are or have been involved with the Preprint Editorial Team to find that these scientists view their participation positively with respect to career development and knowledge in their field. The inclusion of early-career researchers from across the world in the preprint solicitation process could also translate into social justice benefits by providing a career-building opportunity and a window into the publishing process for young scientists.

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. Type of peer review: Double-blind review, the process is as follows: ➢ In the title page the authors’ details (names and affiliations) are deleted. ➢ Any refer to previous work should be in a passive way with replacement of authors names with “Anonymous” word. ➢ Remove references to funding sources ➢ Do not include acknowledgments • Conference submission management system: iKNiTOcshttps://icmep.conferences.ekb.eg • Number of submissions received: 20 • Number of submissions sent for review: 20 • Number of submissions accepted: 6 • Number of withdrawn papers due to the change of conference date because of covid-19: 3 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 30 % • Average number of reviews per paper: 2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 3 • Any additional info on review process: none • Contact person for queries: Prof. Dr. Gamal Mabrouk Abdelhamid gmabrouk@mtc.edu.eg, gmabrouk@hotmail.com

IntroductionMeasures of health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) are increasingly important for evaluating healthcare interventions and treatments, understanding the burden of disease, identifying health inequities, allocating health resources and for use in epidemiological studies. Although many HRQoL measures developed for use in adult populations are robust, they are not necessarily designed, or appropriate, to measure HRQoL for children/youth. Furthermore, the appropriateness of HRQoL measures for use with Indigenous child/youth populations has not been closely examined. The aims of this scoping review are to (1) identify and describe empirical studies using HRQoL measures among children/youth (aged 8–17 years) from Indigenous populations within the Pacific Rim, (2) summarise the study designs and modes of HRQoL measure administration, (3) describe the key dimensions of the identified HRQoL measures used among Indigenous populations, including specifically among Māori and (4) map the HRQoL measure dimensions to commonly used Māori models of health.Methods and analysisThe scoping review framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines will be followed for best practice and reporting. An iterative search of peer-reviewed published empirical research reporting the use of child/youth HRQoL measures among Indigenous populations will be conducted. This literature will be identified across the following five databases: Ovid (Medline), PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and CINHAL. The search will be restricted to papers published in English between January 1990 and June 2020. Two reviewers will independently review the papers in two stages. A third reviewer will resolve any discrepancies that arise. A data charting form will be completed using data extracted from each paper.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was not required for this scoping review. Dissemination will include publication of the scoping review in a peer-reviewed journal. This scoping review will inform a larger research project (HRC 20/166).

As a response to the call for reimagining early childhood education for social sustainability in the future, this conceptual paper aims to suggest revisiting and strengthening the case to include intentional intergenerational engagements and programmes in kindergartens as approaches towards sustainable futures for children. In this paper, we argue that we must talk about intergenerational solidarity on all levels, including in early childhood education and care settings, and that it must be deliberate and by design. Learning from cultural–historical concepts and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, intergenerational programmes in early years settings are to be presented as intentional initiatives and opportunities for interrelated and collaborating actors and institutions to bring younger children and older adults together. We present a conceptual framework that features conflicts and opportunities within overlapping and congruent spaces to understand conditions for various intergenerational practices and activities in different places, and to promote intergenerational dialogues, collaborations and shared knowledge, contributing to a relational and socially sustainable future for which we aim.

A systematic review of studies providing evidence of the linkage between human factors (HF) in the design and management of operations to production quality performance was conducted. 71 peer reviewed research papers were found to provide evidence of the HF-Quality relationship. These studies identified 178 design factors relating to quality. These included 1) Product Design (54), 2) Production Process Design (75), and 3) Workstation Design aspects (49). In addition 26 Individual quality risk factors were identified. Of the studies identified, about half studied the effects on the human finding associations with the operator workload and fatigue indicators and quality performance. These intermediary variables may provide insight into the mechanism by which HF flaws in the design of production lead to quality deficits in running manufacturing. These results provide useful information for operations managers and production system design teams to secure higher quality performance in their systems by applying human factors.

Objective Although the representation of women in science has improved, women remain underrepresented in scientific publications. This study compares women and men in scholarly dissemination through the AMIA Annual Symposium. Materials and Methods Through a retrospective observational study, we analyzed 2017–2020 AMIA submissions for differences in panels, papers, podium abstracts, posters, workshops, and awards for men compared with women. We assigned a label of woman or man to authors and reviewers using Genderize.io, and then compared submission and acceptance rates, performed regression analyses to evaluate the impact of the assumed gender, and performed sentiment analysis of reviewer comments. Results Of the 4687 submissions for which Genderize.io could predict man or woman based on first name, 40% were led by women and 60% were led by men. The acceptance rate was smilar. Although submission and acceptance rates for women increased over the 4 years, women-led podium abstracts, panels, and workshops were underrepresented. Men reviewers increased the odds of rejection. Men provided longer reviews and lower reviewer scores, but women provided reviews that had more positive words. Discussion Overall, our findings reflect significant gains for women in the 4 years of conference data analyzed. However, there remain opportunities to improve representation of women in workshop submissions, panel and podium abstract speakers, and balanced peer reviews. Future analyses could be strengthened by collecting gender directly from authors, including diverse genders such as non-binary. Conclusion We found little evidence of major bias against women in submission, acceptance, and awards associated with the AMIA Annual Symposium from 2017 to 2020. Our study is unique because of the analysis of both authors and reviewers. The encouraging findings raise awareness of progress and remaining opportunities in biomedical informatics scientific dissemination.

The Sustainable Development Goals mandate that by 2030, all children should have access to quality early child development opportunities, healthcare and pre-primary education (United Nations, 2015). Yet validated measures of ECD in low and middle income countries (LMICs) are rare. To address this gap, a Systematic Review (SR) of measures available to profile the development of children between the ages of 0-5 years in LMICs was undertaken. Drawing on education, psychology and health databases, we identified reliable, valid or measures adapted for use in LMICs for either assessments of children’s development or their learning environments. The inclusion criteria were (1) peer reviewed papers published between January 2009 and May 2019; (2) assessment tools used to measure cognitive/language development or the early years or home environment in at least one LMIC; (3) report of the psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the tool, and/or description of the cultural adaptability/translation process undertaken before applying it to a LMIC. Two hundred and forty-nine available records published in the last decade in peer-review journals and nine relevant systematic literature reviews were identified. Fifty-seven records were qualitatively synthesized based on their psychometric properties and cultural adaptation. Forty-three tools were reviewed utilising twelve criteria. Five elements of analysis present in Table 2 and 3 (study, population tested, validity, reliability and cultural adaptability/translation) focused on the tools’ psychometric properties and previous application in LMICs. A further seven dimensions outlined in Tables 4 and 5 identified specific characteristics of the tools from target age, administration method, domains, battery, accessibility, language and country/institution. We suggest these twelve key considerations for the selection of measurement tools that are applicable to effectively assess ECD in LMICs.

Background An aim of the funded learning disability project was to learn more about the knowledge base of the hospice staff around learning disabilities at end-of-life/bereavement; whilst also exploring how hospice care was perceived by those working in the learning disability community. National reports and research (LeDeR programme, 2018; Hunt et al., 2019; Heslop, Blair, Fleming et al., 2013; Oliver, 2017) have highlighted the need to improve end-of-life care and bereavement support for people with learning disabilities, so we explored our learning disability landscape through a survey. Aims To understand and identify the needs of those supporting people with learning disabilities from a hospice and learning disability perspective. Explore levels of confidence of varying health and social care professionals when talking about death, dying and bereavement to someone with a learning disability. Compare and contrast experiences and gaps in knowledge and experiences between hospice and learning disability carers. Inform the content and process of the training programme. Actions The project steering group collaboratively developed a survey to establish baseline data and increase knowledge. The survey shared with hospice staff and local learning disability organisations. Survey thematically analysed outcomes to illustrate similarities and differences within and across data sets. The data directly informed the three-session training programme. Outcomes Over 100 responses received, with a near equal split of hospice/non-hospice. The replies are being thematically analysed. The data directly informed the content and process of the training programme. The project is currently being prepared as a paper for publication in a peer reviewed journal to maximise dissemination of outcomes. Conclusion Learning is key in any project. By conducting the survey, we have learnt much about people’s levels of confidence, their understanding, and their training needs. The results of the survey have already influenced the project and when shared more widely, will help us develop a more compassionate community around people with learning disabilities.

BackgroundRegistries and data sources contain information that can be used on an ongoing basis to improve quality of care and outcomes of people with diabetes. As a specific task of the EU Bridge Health project, we carried out a survey of diabetes-related data sources in Europe.ObjectivesWe aimed to report on the organization of different sources of diabetes information, including their governance, information infrastructure and dissemination strategies for quality control, service planning, public health, policy and research.MethodsSurvey using a structured questionnaire to collect targeted data from a network of collaborating institutions managing registries and data sources in 17 countries in the year 2017.ResultsThe 18 data sources participating in the study were most frequently academic centres (44.4%), national (72.2%), targeting all types of diabetes (61.1%) covering no more than 10% of the target population (44.4%). Although population-based in over a quarter of cases (27.8%), sources relied predominantly on provider-based datasets (38.5%), fewer using administrative data (16.6%). Data collection was continuous in the majority of cases (61.1%), but 50% could not perform data linkage. Public reports were more frequent (72.2%) as well as quality reports (77.8%), but one third did not provide feedback to policy and only half published ten or more peer reviewed papers during the last 5 years.ConclusionsThe heterogeneous implementation of diabetes registries and data sources hampers the comparability of quality and outcomes across Europe. Best practices exist but need to be shared more effectively to accelerate progress and deliver equitable results for people with diabetes.

Last year, we wrote to you of our dedication and vision for this journal "to be antiracist at every level," outlining the following 6 initiatives "to reshape the Journal to pursue this vision:" (1) Issuing a Call for Papers "on racism and its impacts on child development and children's mental health;" (2) updating our Guide for Authors "to emphasize that we will evaluate articles submitted to the Journal on whether their study designs and discussions consider and address human diversity in the context of their research questions and hypotheses; (3) assembling a special collection of "Journal articles on bias, bigotry, racism, and mental health disparities;" (4) accelerating "our efforts to make our editorial board inclusive and representative of our community of scientists and practitioners as well as the communities we all serve;" (5) engaging in "continuing education and dialogue as an Editorial Board that will include antiracism training;" and (6) critically examining "our editorial and peer review process to ensure it is antiracist.1 In this Editors' Note, we write to update you on our progress.

Many pharmaceutical companies have recently elected to stop maintaining good laboratory practices (GLP) status of their R&D sites. Similar discussions have also been engaged in the (agro)chemical industry. This opinion paper examines the pros and cons of maintaining facility GLP status for the purposes of performing the pathology interpretation or peer reviews of GLP studies internally. The toxicologic pathologist provides gross and histomorphologic evaluation and interpretation of nonclinical exploratory and regulatory studies during drug and (agro)chemical development. This assessment significantly contributes to human risk assessment by characterizing the toxicological profile and discussing the human relevance of the findings. The toxicologic pathologist is a key contributor to compound development decisions (advancement or termination) and in the development of de-risking strategies for backup compounds, thus playing a critical role in helping to reduce the late attrition of drugs and chemicals. Maintaining GLP compliance is often perceived as a costly and cumbersome process; a common and short-term strategy to reduce the costs is to outsource regulatory toxicity studies. However, there are significant advantages in maintaining the GLP status for toxicologic pathology activities in-house including the sustainable retention of internal pathology expertise that has maintained the necessary training needed to manage GLP studies. [Box: see text]

IntroductionDespite the use of a wide variety of improvement tools and approaches, healthcare organisations continue to struggle in several key areas. Complexity-informed approaches have the potential to offer health and social care a new paradigm for understanding, designing, implementing and evaluating solutions, yet so far has failed to gain the traction anticipated some years ago. There is a growing need for high quality syntheses of the existing knowledge base in this area and given the diversity of theory and approaches, a scoping review is the best approach to curate this knowledge.MethodsA scoping review of relevant literature from January 2000 to present, using the refined Arksey and O’Malley six-stage framework will be conducted. This protocol will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews. A three-step search strategy will be used. An initial search of databases will be undertaken to identify key search terms followed by an analysis of retrieved papers title and abstract text words, and of index terms used to describe the articles. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms will then be undertaken across all included databases. Third, the reference lists of identified reports and articles will be searched. Authors of primary articles will be contacted and a search for grey material performed. Finally, a complete search strategy of one major database will be included.Ethics and disseminationAs this is a scoping review, ethical approval is not required. The results of the scoping review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national and international conferences and will guide a large research project investigating teamwork. All data will be stored in accordance with best General Data Protection Regulation practice.RegistrationThis scoping review protocol has been registered with Open Science Framework.

We estimated the seroprevalence of anti‐severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antibodies in residents of African countries and explored its associated factors. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, DOAJ and Google Scholar databases for peer reviewed articles and pre‐prints that reported anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody seroprevalence of general or specific human populations resident in Africa. The eligible studies were evaluated using Joana Briggs Institute prevalence critical appraisal tool. Twenty‐three studies involving 27,735 individuals were included in our paper. The pooled seroprevalence of anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies in Africa was 22% (95%CI: 14–31) with very high heterogeneity (I 2 = 100%, p

Research in computing is becoming increasingly concerned with understanding and mitigating unintended consequences of technology developments. However, those concerns are rarely reflected in how we submit, review, and publish our own work. Specifically, in talking about how our new apps, devices, and algorithms will change the world, we focus almost exclusively on positive consequences. There have been calls to require some speculation about negative impacts as part of the peer review process. This workshop will explore how to think about and report potential negative consequences in our papers in a way thatâ s practical, inclusive, and achievable. The aim is to draw on scholarship around creative-yet-grounded speculation about technology futures and to consider how these might be applied to publication and peer review. The workshop aims to inspire the CHI conference and the computing research community to meaningfully consider and act upon the potential negative implications of their work.

Reports of "positive" results in early phase trials as presented at ASH presumably herald therapeutic advances, or at a minimum, a larger, potentially confirmatory, randomized trial. However, the predictive value of an ASH abstract reporting positive results in AML for subsequent clinical utility seems low (Estey 2006, ASH). Furthermore, not all results presented at ASH are published in peer-reviewed journals, and selectively publishing positive results leads to publication bias. Moreover, truly negative studies may be scientifically more rigorous and accurate than positive studies given the unequivocal findings. The extent of publication bias is unknown as is the frequency with which positive or negative abstracts lead to subsequent investigation in phase III and the reasons why positive phase II studies might not progress to phase III. We downloaded all 2013 - 2015 ASH abstracts (N = 17,251) and evaluated all abstracts reporting phase II clinical trials (N = 371) of novel drugs and therapeutic regimens presented at ASH in these years, covering investigational treatments of MM, CLL, AML, DLBCL, MDS, NHL, ALL, CML, MCL, SLL, other lymphomas and POEMS. We first scored abstracts "positive", "negative" or "inconclusive". Criteria for a positive abstract were words/phrases such as "encouraging", "promising", "could represent a novel therapeutic option" and "warrants investigation in a randomized trial". Negative abstracts included terms such as "does not support further research" and "demonstrates no clinical activity". The remainder were scored as inconclusive. Using this approach, we scored 296/371 (80%) abstracts as positive, 37/371 (10%) as negative, and 38/371 (10%) as inconclusive. 292/371 abstracts (79%) were published in peer-reviewed journals. The abstract conclusion (positive, negative or inconclusive) was not associated with publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Most frequently, studies were published in Blood (34/292 [11.6%]) and British Journal of Haematology (39/292 [13.4%]) . In Blood, 91% (31/34) of the studies were positive. British Journal of Haematology published significantly more negative studies than Blood (26%, Fisher Exact p = 0.02). Abstracts reporting studies with larger sample sizes tended to be published more often (p = 0.066). Differences exist between the abstract conclusion and later peer-reviewed publications. Of positive ASH abstracts, 6% changed to a negative conclusion in the peer-reviewed publication. Similarly, 6.5% of the initial negative abstract later reversed to a positive conclusion. 53% of positive abstracts did not lead to phase III studies, as registered on clinicaltrials.gov. Subsequently, regimens described in positive peer-reviewed publications did not proceed to phase III research in 48%. To explore why, we sent questionnaires to the first and/or last authors of positive studies not prompting phase III trials. 52% responded. Failure of positive phase II trials to proceed to phase III was due to the decision by the pharmaceutical company to halt clinical investigation (44%), lack of any intent to study the drug in phase III in the first place (40%), insufficient funding (35%), insufficient efficacy (despite the "positive" abstract; 33%) and safety concerns (4%) (Figure). Additional reasons for not proceeding to phase III were the availability of newer regimens, the rarity of the disease, or when regulatory approval had already been obtained after phase II. In conclusion, "positive" and "negative" ASH abstracts are published as full papers equally often, although the positive ones may be published more often in journals with higher "impact factors". More than half of the regimens presented in positive ASH abstracts remain unevaluated in randomized phase III trials. A separate problem is the likely tendency to disproportionately submit (and/or accept) positive, rather than negative, studies to ASH in the first place. We believe our findings raise issues in clinical research that may not be in the best interest of patients. This demands more consideration than it currently receives. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Ossenkoppele: Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie, AGIOS, BMS/Celgene Astellas,AMGEN, Gilead,Servier,JAZZ,Servier Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rowe: Biosight Inc.: Consultancy.

The study deals with research performance assessment issues as important aspects of research management and research quality. The case of Kazakhstan clearly demonstrates the impact of the prevailing bibliometric-centered approach. The aim of this study is to suggest an inclusive scale of individual research performance assessment. The method used is a quantitative study of the opinions of researchers and academics on the range of research related activities they traditionally carry out. The study expands the knowledge base on academic human resource management, and can be of high relevance for substantiating the criteria of performance assessment of researchers by HR managers of universities and public research institutions. The research results can be helpful for setting and complying with individual and institutional criteria for research performance evaluation. Policy highlights A Survey among 264 researchers in Kazakh universities and public research institutions (response rate: 63%) asked them to rate their activities in five groups: supervising activity, professional advancement, publications, public recognition, and scientific & organizational activities. The results demonstrate that their priorities correspond to national and international priorities: publishing papers in local and international peer-reviewed journals indexed in WoS and Scopus, and monographs. Findings revealed that “Supervising” and “Professional Advancement” activities have the highest importance among all criteria groups. Respondents gave the highest preference to participating at overseas and international conferences, seminars and workshops, thus expressing their desire to disseminate their research findings internationally and to build international links. Scientific & organizational activities are the core activities which correlate to all other activities. And the role of S&O criteria is definitely underestimated in the performance assessment of researchers. The current research performance evaluation system in Kazakhstan is dominantly based on bibliometrics and is one-sided and biased. An inclusive scale of individual research performance assessment needs to be developed, considering researchers’ ideas and preferences.

Background Early warning tools identify patients at risk of deterioration in hospitals. Electronic medical records in hospitals offer real-time data and the opportunity to automate early warning tools and provide real-time, dynamic risk estimates. Objective This review describes published studies on the development, validation, and implementation of tools for predicting patient deterioration in general wards in hospitals. Methods An electronic database search of peer reviewed journal papers from 2008-2020 identified studies reporting the use of tools and algorithms for predicting patient deterioration, defined by unplanned transfer to the intensive care unit, cardiac arrest, or death. Studies conducted solely in intensive care units, emergency departments, or single diagnosis patient groups were excluded. Results A total of 46 publications were eligible for inclusion. These publications were heterogeneous in design, setting, and outcome measures. Most studies were retrospective studies using cohort data to develop, validate, or statistically evaluate prediction tools. The tools consisted of early warning, screening, or scoring systems based on physiologic data, as well as more complex algorithms developed to better represent real-time data, deal with complexities of longitudinal data, and warn of deterioration risk earlier. Only a few studies detailed the results of the implementation of deterioration warning tools. Conclusions Despite relative progress in the development of algorithms to predict patient deterioration, the literature has not shown that the deployment or implementation of such algorithms is reproducibly associated with improvements in patient outcomes. Further work is needed to realize the potential of automated predictions and update dynamic risk estimates as part of an operational early warning system for inpatient deterioration.

IntroductionKnee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent condition with associated high disability and healthcare costs. Evidence of major gaps in the implementation of evidence-based interventions in people with knee OA led several healthcare systems to implement models of care (MoCs) in order to improve knowledge translation and guaranty their economic sustainability. Nevertheless, there are few studies that analyse the existing body of evidence of MoCs for patients with knee OA in primary healthcare settings. Therefore, we aim to identify MoCs developed for patients with knee OA implemented in primary healthcare and, analyse their core components and outcomes. This scoping review will create knowledge about the components and outcomes of these MoCs which, in the future, will facilitate their transferability to practice.Methods and analysisWe will include studies that developed and implemented an MoC for people with knee OA in primary healthcare. We will use the PCC mnemonic, being ‘Population’—people with Knee OA, ‘Concept’—the MoCs and ‘Context’—the primary healthcare setting. We will conduct the search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, as well as grey literature databases and relevant institutions and organisations websites, for articles published after 2000. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. We will evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies with the Mixed Methods Appraisal tool and apply a data abstraction form to describe and interpret the evidence.Ethics and disseminationAs a secondary analysis, this scoping review does not require ethical approval. Findings will be published in peer-review journal, presented in scientific conferences and as a summary through primary healthcare units.