Search

Background: Nanotechnology is a promising strategy to improve existing antileishmanial agents. Objective: To explore the evidence of encapsulated meglumine antimoniate for cutaneous leishmaniasis treatment in animal models. Materials & methods: The studies were recovered from PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, LILACS, WoS and Google according to eligibility criteria following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS) strategy. Study appraisal was assessed using the Animal Research Reporting of In Vivo Experiments, SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) recommendations. Results: Five studies were included. Liposomes, metallic and polymeric nanoparticles were tested in BALB/c mice against Leishmania major, L. tropica or L. amazonensis. Limitations: Few studies were found to meet the eligibility criteria. Conclusion: All formulations had a significant efficacy, similar to the meglumine antimoniate reference treatment concerning the lesion size and parasite burden. The studies had a high and moderate risk of bias, and the confidence in cumulative evidence was considered low. Therefore, we encourage the development of high-quality preclinical studies. Registration: PROSPERO register CRD42020170191.

Cong Xu,1 Yunfeng Fu2 1Department of Hematology, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, 410000, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Blood Transfusion, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, 410000, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Yunfeng Fu Tel/Fax + 86-73188618511Email fuyunfeng@csu.edu.cnBackground: Multiple myeloma is an incurable hematologic malignancy. The discovery of mechanisms may help to find new therapeutic targets and prolong survival. tRNA-related fragments (tRF) and tRNA halves (tiRNA) are small RNA derived from tRNAs and implicated in a wide variety of pathological processes, including cancer initiation and progression. However, there are almost no research reporting the role of these tRNA derived fragments in myeloma as far as we know.Methods: In this study, we proposed the expression profiles of tRFs/tiRNAs in myeloma through RNA-sequencing in new diagnosed myeloma and healthy donors. The expression of selected tRFs/tiRNAs was further validated in clinical specimens by qPCR. Bioinformatic analysis was performed to predict their potential roles in multiple myeloma.Results: A total of 33 upregulated tRFs/tiRNAs and 22 downregulated tRFs/tiRNAs were identified. GO enrichment and KEGG pathway analysis were performed to analyze the functions of one significantly up-regulated and one significantly down-regulated tRNA-derived fragments. tRFs/tiRNAs may be involved in MM initiation and progression.Conclusion: We concluded that tRFs/tiRNAs were dysregulated and could be potential biomarkers for multiple myeloma.Keywords: multiple myeloma, tRNA related fragments, tRNA halves, cancer initiation

The peer review process is essential for quality checks and validation of journal submissions. Although it has some limitations, including manipulations and biased and unfair evaluations, there is no other alternative to the system. Several peer review models are now practised, with public review being the most appropriate in view of the open science movement. Constructive reviewer comments are increasingly recognised as scholarly contributions which should meet certain ethics and reporting standards. The Publons platform, which is now part of the Web of Science Group (Clarivate Analytics), credits validated reviewer accomplishments and serves as an instrument for selecting and promoting the best reviewers. All authors with relevant profiles may act as reviewers. Adherence to research reporting standards and access to bibliographic databases are recommended to help reviewers draft evidence-based and detailed comments.

Peer reviewers are the custodians of sciences and scientific publishing. Previously regarded as a purely altruistic work, with the advent of Publons and Peer Review Week initiatives, reviewers can now get scholarly credits for their accomplishments. The number of skilled peer reviewers is limited. The sheer volume of published literature in today’s world calls for active involvement of a large corpus of reviewers. Asia has a growing workforce of biomedical researchers and scientific authors who are inadequately exposed to the global research reporting and English writing standards. Several global initiatives are underway to groom the next generation of peer reviewers and credit them for their efforts. These need to be expanded and made more accessible to scholars in Asia. Ultimately, this untapped potential may provide quality services to international peer-reviewed journals and create informed researchers and skilled authors.

Purpose This feasibility study explored older adults’ use of a nutrition app called Appetitus (https://apps.apple.com/us/app/appetitt/id1001936854?ign‐mpt=uo%3D2; https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=no.nr.appetitt&hl=e) and addressed their engagement in technology‐mediated self‐monitoring of diet. Undernutrition is a significant challenge among older adults and is associated with poorer health experiences. Digital health for self‐monitoring of diet has the potential to increase awareness of personal nutrition, and the scarcity of research reporting older adults’ ability and willingness to engage in technology‐mediated dietary self‐monitoring warranted this study. Design and Methods An explorative mixed‐methods design combining descriptive analysis of log data with qualitative analysis of interviews with Appetitus users was implemented. Findings Twenty‐five older adults self‐monitored their diet using Appetitus over an 8‐week trial period. Eighty percent of the participants used the app regularly in the trial period. The most engaged users recorded their food consumption daily for 8 weeks. Personal interest in nutrition and commitment to the project facilitated regular use of Appetitus. Poor health and the perception that using a nutrition app lacked personal relevance contributed to irregular self‐monitoring. For inexperienced technology users, participation in this project became a springboard to using tablet technology and the Internet beyond the Appetitus app. Conclusions The majority of the participants regularly used Appetitus for self‐monitoring of diet; they found the tablet technology and Appetitus app easy to use. Clinical Relevance Older adults are able and willing to use self‐monitoring tools. Nutrition apps can empower older adults to make better informed decisions about their diet. Patients’ self‐monitoring can provide valuable and detailed health‐related information to healthcare professionals and mediate patient‐centered care practices.

Background Rigorous simulation-based research is essential to advance the science of nursing education. This article outlines the use of the updated Simulation Research Rubric (SRR) to assess the quality of published simulation research articles. Methods The SRR was used to rate 73 published articles in the Clinical Simulation in Nursing from 2015 to 2017. All articles were reviewed and rated by two reviewers. Results Of the 73 articles reviewed, 15 (20.5%) received a rating of excellent (76%-100%), 39 (53.4%) were rated as good (51%-75%), and 19 (26%) were rated as fair (26%-50%). Inter-rater reliability was 0.92, with a content validity index of 0.95 for the SRR. Conclusions The strengths and weaknesses of two years of published simulation-based research reports were identified. Although the SRR was not intended to be used to evaluate research itself, the rubric can be used as a framework to develop a thorough research proposal, for rating grant proposals, and for teaching students how to critique written research reports.

Objectives Lack of experimental reproducibility has led to growing interest in guidelines to enhance completeness and transparency in research reporting. This retrospective survey sought to determine compliance with Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015 statement in the recent pathology scientific literature. Methods Two raters independently scored 171 pathology diagnostic accuracy studies for compliance with 34 STARD items and subcomponents. Overall adherence was calculated as a proportion after excluding nonapplicable items. Results After excluding nonapplicable items, there was 50% overall adherence to STARD reporting recommendations. In total, 15.44 ± 3.59 items were reported per article (range, 4-28 out of maximum possible of 34). There was substantial heterogeneity in individual item reporting, with greater than 75% reporting in eight of 34 items and less than 25% reporting in 11 of 34 items. Less than 10% of articles reported hypotheses, subgroup analyses for confounding, sample size calculations, subject flow diagrams, study registrations, and links to full study protocols. Significantly more items were reported in articles from journals that endorsed STARD (16.14 vs 14.84, P = .0175). Conclusions These findings demonstrate incomplete reporting of essential items in pathology diagnostic accuracy studies. More vigorous enforcement of reporting checklists might improve adherence to minimum reporting standards.

Objectives When reporting observational studies, authors should explicitly discuss the potential for confounding and other biases, but it is unclear to what extent this is carried out within the psychiatric field. Study Design and Setting We reviewed a random sample of 120 articles in the five psychiatric specialty journals with the highest 5-year impact factor in 2015–2018. We evaluated how confounding and bias was considered in the reporting of the discussion and abstract and assessed the relationship with yearly citations. Results The term “confounding” was explicitly mentioned in the abstract or discussion in 66 articles (55.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 46.1–63.6) and the term “bias” in 68 articles (56.7%; 95% CI: 47.7–65.2). The authors of 25 articles (20.8%; 95% CI: 14.5–28.9) acknowledged unadjusted confounders. With one exception (0.8%, 95% CI: 0.0–4.6), authors never expressed any caution, limitation, or uncertainty in relation to confounding or other bias in their conclusions or in the abstract. Articles acknowledging nonadjusted confounders were not less frequently cited than articles that did not (median 7.9 vs. 5.6 citations per year, P = 0.03). Conclusion Confounding is overall inadequately addressed in the reporting and bias is often ignored in the interpretation of high-impact observational research in psychiatry.

Overview study.Abstracts of systematic reviews have presented 'spin' (i.e. overstated interpretation of study results) and inconsistency with the full text.1. Do abstracts of low back pain reviews contain spin? 2. Do these abstracts consistently represent the full text? 3. Is abstract spin associated with the type of conclusion?We searched the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) on 10th January 2018. Data were extracted from systematic reviews of physiotherapy interventions for low back pain, published between 2015 and 2017. Spin was assessed using a 7-item checklist. We evaluated consistency by comparing information contained in the abstract and the full text using the 7-item checklist with Kappa coefficient analysis. We used logistic regression analysis to evaluate the association between spin in the abstract and type of conclusion. We evaluated methodological quality using the AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews).We included 66 eligible systematic reviews, subdivided into Cochrane (n=9) and non-Cochrane (n=57) reviews. There was some form of spin in 80% of abstracts. Abstracts of non-Cochrane reviews were not consistent with the full text (fair to moderate agreement). Cochrane review abstracts had substantial to almost perfect agreement with the full text. Spin was not associated with the type of conclusion in all systematic reviews (The abstracts of systematic reviews evaluating physiotherapy interventions for low back pain need improvement.

OBJECTIVES: Appropriate use of reporting guidelines of health research ensures that articles present readers with a consistent representation of study relevance, methodology, and results. This study evaluated the use of major reporting guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of health research articles citing four major reporting guidelines indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (up to June 24, 2018). Two independent reviews were performed in a random sample of 200 articles, including clinical trials (N = 50), economic evaluations (N = 50), systematic reviews (N = 50), and animal research studies (N = 50). The use of reporting guidelines to guide the reporting of research studies was considered appropriate. Inappropriate uses included the use of the reporting guidelines as a tool to assess the methodological quality of studies or as a guideline on how to design and conduct the studies. RESULTS: Across all selected reporting guidelines, appropriate use of reporting guidelines was observed in only 39% (95% CI: 32-46%; 78/200) of articles. By contrast, inappropriate use was observed in 41% (95% CI: 34-48%; 82/200), and unclear/other use was observed in 20% (95% CI: 15-26%; 40/200). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately. Authors may require further education around appropriate use of the reporting guidelines in research reporting. We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Dr. Margaret Sampson, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Library Services, in designing the search strategy for this study. LC, FCL, JW, MK, JF and DM contributed to the study design, data collection, extraction, analysis, and manuscript preparation. WC and DH contributed to data collection, extraction, analysis and manuscript preparation. DA contributed to the study design, data collection, extraction and manuscript preparation. Sí

Background The peer review process has been questioned as it may fail to allow the publication of high-quality articles. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy in identifying inadequate reporting in RCT reports by early career researchers (ECRs) using an online CONSORT-based peer-review tool (COBPeer) versus the usual peer-review process. Methods We performed a cross-sectional diagnostic study of 119 manuscripts, from BMC series medical journals, BMJ, BMJ Open, and Annals of Emergency Medicine reporting the results of two-arm parallel-group RCTs. One hundred and nineteen ECRs who had never reviewed an RCT manuscript were recruited from December 2017 to January 2018. Each ECR assessed one manuscript. To assess accuracy in identifying inadequate reporting, we used two tests: (1) ECRs assessing a manuscript using the COBPeer tool (after completing an online training module) and (2) the usual peer-review process. The reference standard was the assessment of the manuscript by two systematic reviewers. Inadequate reporting was defined as incomplete reporting or a switch in primary outcome and considered nine domains: the eight most important CONSORT domains and a switch in primary outcome(s). The primary outcome was the mean number of domains accurately classified (scale from 0 to 9). Results The mean (SD) number of domains (0 to 9) accurately classified per manuscript was 6.39 (1.49) for ECRs using COBPeer versus 5.03 (1.84) for the journal’s usual peer-review process, with a mean difference [95% CI] of 1.36 [0.88–1.84] (p Conclusions Trained ECRs using the COBPeer tool were more likely to detect inadequate reporting in RCTs than the usual peer review processes used by journals. Implementing a two-step peer-review process could help improve the quality of reporting. Trial registration Clinical.Trials.govNCT03119376 (Registered April, 18, 2017).

Objectives To determine the incidence of outcome switching in follow-up publications of randomized controlled trials. Outcome switching leads to bias where treatment benefits are more likely to be overestimated or based on chance. Study design and setting Meta-research study including all follow-up publications 2014-2018 in the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, the Journal of the American Medical Association, and the British Medical Journal. Two independent reviewers compared the primary outcomes of follow-up publications with the original RCT publication and the trial protocol. Results Seventy-eight follow-up publications were identified. Thirty-one (40%) used different primary outcomes in the follow-up publication compared with the original RCT. In seventeen (55%) of these the outcome switch was neither pre-specified nor explained in the journal publication. The incidence of outcome switching in follow-up studies rose to 70% when preceded by outcome switching in the corresponding initial RCT (P Conclusion In this study, outcome switching occurred in 40% of follow-up publications of previously published RCTs. The majority is neither pre-specified nor explained.

To create a classification system for severe, rare, and progressive genetic conditions for use in research reporting.A modified Delphi consensus technique was used to create and reach agreement on a new system of condition categories. Interrater reliability was tested via two rounds of an online survey whereby physicians classified a subset of conditions using our novel system. Overall percentage agreement and agreement above chance were calculated using Fleiss' kappa (κ).Eleven physicians completed the first Delphi, with an overall agreement of 76.4%, the κ value was 0.57 (95% confidence interval 0.51-0.63), indicating moderate agreement (0.41-0.60) above chance. Based on the first survey several categories were described in more detail. The second survey confirmed a classification system with 12 categories, with an overall percentage agreement among the participants of 82.6%. The overall mean κ value was 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.77), indicating substantial agreement (0.61-0.80).Our new system was useful in categorizing a broad range of rare childhood diseases and may be applicable to other rare disease studies; further validation in larger cohorts is required.This novel 12-category classification system can be used in research reporting in rare and progressive genetic conditions.UN NOVEDOSO SISTEMA DE CLASIFICACIÓN PARA REPORTAR CONDICIONES GENÉTICAS RARAS Y PROGRESIVAS: OBJETIVO: Crear un sistema de clasificación para condiciones genéticas severas, raras y progresivas para uso en informes de investigación METODO: Se utilizó una técnica de consenso de Delphi modificada para crear y llegar a un acuerdo sobre un nuevo sistema de categorías de condiciones genéticas. La confiabilidad del sistema entre evaluadores se corroboró por medio de dos rondas de encuestas en linea en la que los médicos clasificaron un subconjunto de condiciones utilizando nuestro nuevo sistema. El porcentaje general de acuerdo y el acuerdo sobre la probabilidad se calcularon utilizando el kappa (κ) de Fleiss. RESULTADOS: Once médicos completaron el primer Delphi, con un acuerdo general de 76,4%, el valor de κ fue 0,57 (intervalo de confianza del 95% 0,51-0,63), lo que indica un acuerdo moderado (0,41-0,60). Sobre la base de la primera encuesta se describieron con más detalle varias categorías. La segunda encuesta confirmó un sistema de clasificación con 12 categorías, con un porcentaje de acuerdo general entre los participantes del 82,6%. El valor medio global de κ fue de 0,71 (intervalo de confianza del 95%: 0,65 a 0,77), lo que indica un acuerdo alto (0,61 a 0,80). INTERPRETACIÓN: Nuestro nuevo sistema de clasificación fue útil para categorizar una amplia gama de enfermedades infantiles raras y puede ser aplicable a otros estudios de enfermedades raras. Sugerimos validación adicional en cohortes más numerosas.UM NOVO SISTEMA DE CLASSIFICAÇÃO PARA PESQUISAS RELATANDO CONDIÇÕES GENÉTICAS RARAS E PROGRESSIVAS: OBJETIVO: Criar um sistema de classificação para condições genéticas severas, raras e progressivas, a ser usado em relatos de pesquisas. MÉTODO: Uma técnica de consenso Delphi modificada foi usada para criar e obter concordância sobre um novo sistema de categorias de condições. A confiabilidade inter-examinadores foi testada em dois momentos por meio de um questionário virtual, pelo qual médicos classificaram um subgrupo de condições usando nosso novo sistema. A porcentagem geral de concordância e a concordância maior que o acaso foram calculadas usando kappa (k) de Fleiss. RESULTADOS: Onze médicos completaram o primeiro Delphi, com concordância geral de 76,4%, valor de k de 0,57 (intervalo de confiança a 95% 0,51-0,63), indicando concordância moderada (0,41-0,60) maior do que o acaso. Com base no primeiro questionário várias categorias foram descritas com maior detalhe. O segundo questionário confirmou um sistema de classificação com 12 categorias, com porcentagem geral de concordância entre os participantes de 82,6%. O valor de k médio geral foi 0,71 (intervalo de confiança a 95% 0,65-0,77), indicando concordância substancial (0,61-0,80). INTERPRETAÇÃO: Nosso novo sistema foi útil em categorizar uma ampla variedade de doenças da infância, e pode ser aplicável ao estudo de outras doenças raras; continuar a validação em coortes maiores é necessário.

Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), a second-generation platelet concentrate, has been the focus of intensive research endeavors over the past 2 decades. Over the years, however, numerous reports have inaccurately reported relative centrifugal force (RCF) values, which has caused considerable confusion in the field. Furthermore, the use of trade names such as leukocyte and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) and advanced platelet-rich fibrin (A-PRF) has further confused many readers, since studies have not always used centrifugation parameters with equal rotor sizes, angulation of tubes, and/or tube design. This has led to considerable misperception in the report of relative centrifugal force. Herein is described necessary parameters pivotal for the future report of RCF in studies related to PRF, which include: 1) dimensions of the rotor (radius at the clot and end of the tube); 2) rotor angulation for the tube holder; 3) revolutions per minute (RPM) and time; 4) RCF value calculated at either the RCF-minimum, RCF-clot, or RCF-maximum; 5) composition and size of tubes used to produce PRF; and 6) centrifugation model used. This editorial aims to minimize confusion in the field and create more transparent research reporting RCF values in future studies.

Background Inaccurate, false or incomplete research publications may mislead readers including researchers and decision-makers. It is therefore important that such problems are identified and rectified promptly. This usually involves collaboration between the research institutions and academic journals involved, but these interactions can be problematic. Methods These recommendations were developed following discussions at World Conferences on Research Integrity in 2013 and 2017, and at a specially convened 3-day workshop in 2016 involving participants from 7 countries with expertise in publication ethics and research integrity. The recommendations aim to address issues surrounding cooperation and liaison between institutions (e.g. universities) and journals about possible and actual problems with the integrity of reported research arising before and after publication. Results The main recommendations are that research institutions should: develop mechanisms for assessing the integrity of reported research (if concerns are raised) that are distinct from processes to determine whether individual researchers have committed misconduct; release relevant sections of reports of research integrity or misconduct investigations to all journals that have published research that was investigated; take responsibility for research performed under their auspices regardless of whether the researcher still works at that institution or how long ago the work was done; work with funders to ensure essential research data is retained for at least 10 years. Journals should: respond to institutions about research integrity cases in a timely manner; have criteria for determining whether, and what type of, information and evidence relating to the integrity of research reports should be passed on to institutions; pass on research integrity concerns to institutions, regardless of whether they intend to accept the work for publication; retain peer review records for at least 10 years to enable the investigation of peer review manipulation or other inappropriate behaviour by authors or reviewers. Conclusions Various difficulties can prevent effective cooperation between academic journals and research institutions about research integrity concerns and hinder the correction of the research record if problems are discovered. While the issues and their solutions may vary across different settings, we encourage research institutions, journals and funders to consider how they might improve future collaboration and cooperation on research integrity cases.

Objective To explore the current status of gerodontology in the undergraduate dental curriculum. Background Internationally, there is recognition for the need to include gerodontology in dental education due to accelerating numbers of older dentate people. There is wide variation in the content and method of delivery of gerodontology in undergraduate curricula of dental schools. Methods A scoping review framework was chosen to identify existing gaps and key concepts in the research on current undergraduate gerodontology education. Arksey and O'Malley's framework was used with the qualitative data analysis software NVivo to identify comparable information on geriatric dental education. Results Five themes were highlighted in the studies including (1) gerodontology curriculum content, (2) attitudes, skills and knowledge of undergraduate dental students, (3) didactic teaching, (4) elective and compulsory teaching, and (5) extra-mural learning. The review found large variations in methodologies, presentation of data and findings. All studies emphasised a need for greater inclusion of gerodontology content in the undergraduate dental curriculum. Conclusion The review found limited research reporting on the educational outcomes of gerodontology in dental curricula with a lack of comprehensive information to inform gerodontology content in dental schools. This review has highlighted the need for national and international guidelines to ensure mandatory inclusion of sufficient and specific gerodontology training to prepare graduates for a growing dentate frail and care-dependent population.

As cannabis becomes legalized in many jurisdictions around the world, its popularity is increasing. Despite the presence of several publications reporting cannabis-induced acute pancreatitis, the mechanism and pathophysiology of this entity are poorly understood. This case report highlights the course of a 28-year-old male who presented to the hospital with complaints of abdominal and back pain. Because his lipase was elevated, he met the revised Atlanta criteria for a diagnosis of mild acute pancreatitis. After excluding more common causes, it was determined that his pancreatitis was likely due to cannabis use. This case adds to the body of research reporting on cannabis-induced acute pancreatitis. In the future, we hope to see strict diagnostic criteria and further research to elucidate the mechanism and pathophysiology of this entity.

Background. Over the past decades, there has been a rapid change in the gender ratio of medical doctors, whereas gender differences in academia remain apparent. In transplantation research, a field already understaffed with female doctors and researchers, there is little published data on the development in proportion, citations, and funding of female researchers over the past years. Methods. To evaluate the academic impact of female doctors in transplantation research, we conducted a bibliometric analysis (01 January 1999 to 31 December 2018) of high-impact scientific publications, subsequent citations, and funding in this field. Web of Science data was used in combination with software R-Package “Gender,” to predict gender by first names. Results. For this study, 15 498 (36.2% female; 63.8% male) first and 13 345 (30.2% female; 69.8% male) last author gender matches were identified. An increase in the percentage of female first and last authors is seen in the period 1999–2018, with clear differences between countries (55.1% female authors in The Netherlands versus 13.1% in Japan, for example). When stratifying publications based on the number of citations, a decline was seen in the percentage of female authors, from 34.6%–30.7% in the first group (≤10 citations) to 20.8%–23.2% in the fifth group (>200 citations), for first (P < 0.001) and last (P = 0.014) authors, respectively. From all first author name-gender matches, 6574 (41.6% female; 58.4% male, P < 0.001) publications reported external funding, with 823 (35.5% female; 64.5% male, P = 0.701) reported funding by pharmaceutical companies and 1266 (36.6% female; 63.4% male, P < 0.001) reporting funding by the National Institutes of Health. Conclusions. This is the first analysis of gender bias in scientific publications, subsequent citations, and funding in transplantation research. We show ongoing differences between male and female authors in citation rates and rewarded funding in this field. This requires an active approach to increase female representation in research reporting and funding rewarding.

Background There are increasing calls for patient involvement in sharing health research results, but no evidence-based recommendations to guide such involvement. Our objectives were to: (1) conduct a systematic review of the evidence on patient involvement in results sharing, (2) propose evidence-based recommendations to help maximize benefits and minimize risks of such involvement and (3) conduct this project with patient authors. Methods To avoid research waste, we verified that no systematic reviews were registered or published on this topic. We co-created, with patients, a PRISMA-P–compliant protocol. We included peer-reviewed publications reporting the effects of patient involvement in preparing peer-reviewed publications or results summaries from health research studies. We searched (9/10/2017) MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and secondary information sources (until 11/06/2018). We assessed the risk of bias in eligible publications and extracted data using standardized processes. To evaluate patient involvement in this project, we co-created a Patient Authorship Experience Tool. Results All nine eligible publications reported on patient involvement in preparing publications; none on preparing results summaries. Evidence quality was moderate. A qualitative synthesis of evidence indicated the benefits of patient involvement may outweigh the risks. We have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks when involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications. The recommendations focus on practical actions patient and non-patient authors can take before (10 recommendations), during (7 recommendations) and after (4 recommendations) manuscript development. Using the Patient Authorship Experience Tool, both patient and non-patient authors rated their experience highly. Conclusions Based on a systematic review, we have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications.

The ARRIVE (Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines were endorsed by the Shock Society in 2012, but to date there has been no systematic evaluation of research reporting quality for Shock. We systematically assessed 100 randomly selected animal-based research articles published between 2014 and 2018 for reporting quality and statistical practice, compared with 40 pre-ARRIVE studies. More than half of surveyed papers omitted verifiable ethical oversight information and basic animal descriptive information. Few papers reported best-practice methods, such as sample size justification (10%), randomization (43%), randomization method (7%), blinding (23%). Only one paper reported effect sizes to interpret study results. Most troubling was inadequate reporting of welfare-related information (anesthesia, analgesia, humane endpoints, euthanasia). Almost a decade after ARRIVE endorsement, our findings show that reporting deficiencies have persisted with little sign of correction. There is a clear need for investigators to increase transparency of research methods reporting, and drastically improve skills in experimental design. Improvement in standards and greater attention paid to reporting will lead to improvement in reproducibility, replicability, and research quality. It is incumbent upon the research community to improve reporting practices; accurate and transparent reporting is integral to producing rigorous and ethical science.

Although several guidelines for best practices in EEG preprocessing have been released, even those studies that strictly adhere to those guidelines contain considerable variation in the ways that the recommended methods are applied. An open question for researchers is how sensitive the results of EEG analyses are to variations in preprocessing methods and parameters. To address this issue, we analyze the effect of preprocessing methods on downstream EEG analysis using several simple signal and event-related measures. Signal measures include recording-level channel amplitudes, study-level channel amplitude dispersion, and recording spectral characteristics. Event-related methods include ERPs and ERSPs and their correlations across methods for a diverse set of stimulus events. Our analysis also assesses differences in residual signals both in the time and spectral domains after blink artifacts have been removed. Using fully automated pipelines, we evaluate these measures across 17 EEG studies for two ICA-based preprocessing approaches (LARG, MARA) plus two variations of Artifact Subspace Reconstruction (ASR). Although the general structure of the results is similar across these preprocessing methods, there are significant differences, particularly in the low-frequency spectral features and in the residuals left by blinks. These results argue for detailed reporting of processing details as suggested by most guidelines, but also for using a federation of automated processing pipelines and comparison tools to quantify effects of processing choices as part of the research reporting.

It is important to assess the effectiveness of simulation through research. This pilot project used the Simulation Research Rubric developed in 2014 to appraise the quality of published simulation research. Sixty-nine simulation-based research articles published in the Clinical Simulation in Nursing journal in 2013 to 2014 were scored by an eight-member team using the Simulation Research Rubric. Of the 69 articles reviewed, 15 (21.8%) received a rating of excellent (76%-100%), 47 (68.1%) were rated as good (51%-75%), and 7 (10.1%) were rated as fair (26%-50%). In conclusion, the strengths and weaknesses of two years of published simulation-based research reports were identified. Recommendations were made to improve reporting, which may strengthen the evidence guiding simulation in education and practice. In addition, results may be used to guide the design of published research in the future.

There is a plethora of published research reporting the wealth and breadth of biopsychosocial benefits of physical activity; however, a recent Cochrane systematic review concluded insufficient evidence for current population level physical activity interventions, citing scalability as a major contributory factor, with many of the interventions failing to reach a substantial proportion of the community. The current study aimed to conduct a pilot evaluation of a technology-enabled, gamification-based intervention called Beat the Street and sought to examine the impact of the Beat the Street intervention on self-reported physical activity.In total, n = 329 people completed the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (I-PAQ-SF) in full at baseline (before the intervention) and follow-up (immediately following the 7-week intervention).Overall, participants increased their weekly walking by +180 minutes per week (P 0.001) and their weekly physical activity by +335 minutes per week (P 0001). Vigorous activity increased by +48 minutes per week (P = 0.004) and moderate activity increased by +60 minutes per week (P 0.001).The findings provide preliminary evidence that the Beat the Street intervention may be a promising approach to increasing physical activity at a community-wide level and warrants further investigation.

Despite many people being forensically hospitalized worldwide, there is limited research reporting on their views of the care they receive. To describe consumer satisfaction and areas for improvement, we utilized our forensic psychiatric hospital's consumer survey. Eleven years of surveys, including a total of 541 surveys, were analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The majority of the forensic inpatients believed that their views were valued in their care and treatment. Most felt physically and emotionally safe at the hospital and believed that staff knew how to support them in times of distress. The majority felt that their culture and spirituality were respected. However, some areas for improvement were also noted, such as regarding staff attitudes. This consumer survey demonstrated a reasonably high level of satisfaction with forensic inpatient care, over the course of eleven years, despite this population of people being subject to lengthy hospitalisations. Satisfaction surveys of people in forensic inpatient units can be a regular part of forensic care and can help guide improvements in their care.

To explore trends in published protocols of systematic reviews (SRs) and to analyze how SRs with published protocols differ from those without.We searched PubMed up to December 31, 2016 to identify SR protocols. We also searched for the corresponding SR for each protocol published in 2012 and 2013 and matched this with an SR without published protocol by year and journal.The number of protocols published increased from 42 in 2012 to 404 in 2016; 125 were published in 2012 and 2013. One-third of SRs remained unpublished after 3-5 years. We included 80 SRs with protocols and 80 controls. SRs with protocols reported their methods more comprehensively than their controls, but their median time from search to submission was longer (325 vs. 122 days; P 0.001). Almost two-thirds of the SRs with protocols and about 10% of the controls could be found in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).Time from search to submission was longer for SRs with published protocols, while at the same time SRs with published protocols were better elaborated and reported. As quality, transparency, and currency are cornerstones of SRs, we suggest critically discussing the current practice of publishing SR protocols.

Following a review of extant reporting standards for scientific publication, and reviewing 10 years of experience since publication of the first set of reporting standards by the American Psychological Association (APA; APA Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards, 2008), the APA Working Group on Quantitative Research Reporting Standards recommended some modifications to the original standards. Examples of modifications include division of hypotheses, analyses, and conclusions into 3 groupings (primary, secondary, and exploratory) and some changes to the section on meta-analysis. Several new modules are included that report standards for observational studies, clinical trials, longitudinal studies, replication studies, and N-of-1 studies. In addition, standards for analytic methods with unique characteristics and output (structural equation modeling and Bayesian analysis) are included. These proposals were accepted by the Publications and Communications Board of APA and supersede the standards included in the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010). (PsycINFO Database Record

Assessing references in the review process of academic research is a common requirement. One of the criteria in the credibility of the works is to support arguments with solid and peer-reviewed resources from the literature. Having non peer-reviewed resources in the references can degrade the work and this may be a reason for rejection or retraction, later. Recently, works taking such resources as reference appear more often with increasing number of blogs and Wikipedia usage; hence, the motivation of this study is to investigate given credit to such works. As the case study, investigation is done in the huge online database of ScienceDirect. Queries to extract number of works housing such references are run per research fields classified in the database. The results show there are considerable number of examples where blogs and Wikipedia are seen as resources to be used in academic papers. This finding is limited to the case study and it is too early to declare that blogs and Wikipedia can be used as references; however, a de facto adoption exits in some research fields.

OBJECTIVEThe 30-day readmission rate has emerged as an important marker of the quality of in-hospital care in several fields of medicine. This review aims to summarize available research reporting readmission rates after cranial procedures and to establish an association with demographic, clinical, and system-related factors and clinical outcomes.METHODSThe authors conducted a systematic review of several databases; a manual search of the Journal of Neurosurgery, Neurosurgery, Acta Neurochirurgica, Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences; and the cited references of the selected articles. Quality review was performed using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) criteria. Findings are reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.RESULTSA total of 1344 articles published between 1947 and 2015 were identified; 25 were considered potentially eligible, of which 12 met inclusion criteria. The 30-day readmission rates varied from 6.9% to 23.89%. Complications arising during or after neurosurgical procedures were a prime reason for readmission. Race, comorbidities, and longer hospital stay put patients at risk for readmission.CONCLUSIONSAlthough readmission may be an important indicator for good care for the subset of acutely declining patients, neurosurgery should aim to reduce 30-day readmission rates with improved quality of care through systemic changes in the care of neurosurgical patients that promote preventive measures.

Conventions have been reported to describe walking and turning gait. No such descriptions appear for the 180° standing turn and as such there are inconsistencies in the literature reporting on this movement. The complexity of explaining the standing turning motion, variation in number of steps when turning, and differing strategies used means conventions will make research reporting easier to comprehend and less likely for errors in interpretation. We propose definitions of the 180° standing turning motion and steps used to complete a turn for able-bodied and pathological populations to encourage consistency in reporting. It is recommended that the definitions be applied in future research on standing turns.

Children with chronic medical conditions are requiring transition services to prepare for transfer of care. There has been little data on what qualifies as a successful transition or how to measure this goal. The purpose of this review was to identify measurable patient-level outcomes for transitioning youth with chronic illness from pediatric to adult health care. An integrative literature search was conducted using CINAHL and OVID Medline. Key words included transition to adult care and health transition. Research articles published between 2002 and 2015 and reported on measurable patient-level outcomes in youth with chronic illnesses were included. The initial search yielded 556 articles and 19 articles were selected. Most of the research reporting on outcomes after transfer is nonexperimental using secondary data. Additionally, there is inconsistency in the use of term transition. In the specific outcomes identified, there is little uniformity in measurement both in terms of timing and standardization of measurement. Further research is needed on outcomes after transfer that includes standardized measures and time intervals in order to evaluate successful transition services. This research is essential for health care providers who are instrumental in supporting young people during this high risk period.

Several guidelines have been published with the goal of increasing the usefulness of reports of clinical research. Although such guidelines may clarify key features of study design, the way in which rehabilitation treatments themselves are described continues to be problematic and limits the ability to replicate research, synthesize evidence across studies, or apply these treatments in practice. Lohse et al report little improvement in the description of rehabilitation treatments in recent years, with particular limitations in the description of comparison or standard-of-care treatments. This commentary explores the kind of published treatment descriptions that would be most useful in supporting evidence synthesis and clinical implementation and examines the degree to which a developing conceptual framework—the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System—might support improvements in research reporting.

Background: Contraception is important for reproductive autonomy, yet many Latinas do not use contraception consistently despite research reporting a desire to do so. Factors varying in priority and value come into play during contraceptive decision making. When measuring these, relevant survey items may vary by populations. Aim: This study focused on developing an ethnically responsive, patient-centered, content-valid survey for measuring factors that influence contraceptive decision making among immigrant Latinas. Method: Nonpregnant self-identified Latinas ages 15 to 24 years in Baltimore, MD, were recruited from a family planning facility. Using the theory of planned behavior as a theoretical framework and prior formative research, initial survey items were drafted (Step 1). Content validation and cognitive interviewing procedures (Step 2 and Step 3) were used to develop final items. Results: Final items (27) were content-validated by the target population; items reflect important factors and relevant contexts affecting contraceptive decision making among Latinas in Baltimore. Discussion: These theory-based items provide an important contribution to the literature because they measure and explore factors related to contraceptive decision making in an understudied population. Providers might consider these factors during counseling to build patient-centered communication. These items might serve to measure responses to theory of planned behavior–based interventions designed to improve the contraceptive counseling of Latinas.

Background Research reporting guidelines are increasingly commonplace and shown to improve the quality of published health research and health outcomes. Despite severe health inequities among Indigenous Peoples and the potential for research to address the causes, there is an extended legacy of health research exploiting Indigenous Peoples. This paper describes the development of the CONSolIDated critERtia for strengthening the reporting of health research involving Indigenous Peoples (CONSIDER) statement. Methods A collaborative prioritization process was conducted based on national and international statements and guidelines about Indigenous health research from the following nations (Peoples): Australia (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders), Canada (First Nations Peoples, Métis), Hawaii (Native Hawaiian), New Zealand (Māori), Taiwan (Taiwan Indigenous Tribes), United States of America (First Nations Peoples) and Northern Scandinavian countries (Sami). A review of seven research guidelines was completed, and meta-synthesis was used to construct a reporting guideline checklist for transparent and comprehensive reporting of research involving Indigenous Peoples. Results A list of 88 possible checklist items was generated, reconciled, and categorized. Eight research domains and 17 criteria for the reporting of research involving Indigenous Peoples were identified. The research reporting domains were: (i) governance; (ii) relationships; (iii) prioritization; (iv) methodologies; (v) participation; (vi) capacity; (vii) analysis and findings; and (viii) dissemination. Conclusions The CONSIDER statement is a collaborative synthesis and prioritization of national and international research statements and guidelines. The CONSIDER statement provides a checklist for the reporting of health research involving Indigenous peoples to strengthen research praxis and advance Indigenous health outcomes.

ObjectiveThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement has been developed as a guideline for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Despite the prevalent use of the PRISMA statement in medicine and nursing, no studies have examined authors’ perception of it. The purpose of this study is to explore the perception of the PRISMA statement of authors who published reviews, meta-analyses, or both in nursing journals.DesignCross-sectional descriptive study.MethodsAn online survey was conducted among authors who published reviews, meta-analyses, or both in nursing journals between 2011 and 2017. The selected authors’ email addresses were extracted from the PUBMED database. A questionnaire—with a 10-point Likert scale (1—not important at allto 10—very important)—was developed to elicit their responses regarding their perception of not only the PRISMA statement as a whole, but also the individual items therein.ResultsInvitations were sent to 1960 valid email addresses identified, with 230 responses (response rate: 11.7%) and 181 completed responses (completion rate: 9.2%). The average perceived importance of the PRISMA statement was 8.66 (SD=1.35), while the perceived importance for the individual items ranged from 7.74 to 9.32. Six items were rated significantly higher than the average rating, whereas one item was rated significantly lower.ConclusionMost respondents perceived the PRISMA statement as important. Items related to information sources, selection, search-flow presentation, summary of findings, limitations and interpretation were deemed more important while the registration was deemed less so.

The four grand challenges of imaging research—increasing evidence levels, enhancing global collaboration, improving research reporting quality, and sharing trial data—can be addressed, utilizing the tail wind of digital transformation, by consolidating actions of all stakeholders, with the ultimate goal of evidence-based, reproducible, generalizable, and broadly accepted results that will improve the quality and consistency of patient care.

Background: The living systematic review (LSR) is an emerging approach for improved evidence synthesis that uses continual updating to include relevant new evidence as soon as it is published. The objectives of this study are to: 1) assess the methods of conduct and reporting of living systematic reviews using a living study approach; and 2) describe the life cycle of living systematic reviews, i.e., describe the changes over time to their methods and findings. Methods: For objective 1, we will begin by conducting a cross-sectional survey and then update its findings every 6 months by including newly published LSRs. For objective 2, we will conduct a prospective longitudinal follow-up of the cohort of included LSRs. To identify LSRs, we will continually search the following electronic databases: Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. We will also contact groups conducting LSRs to identify eligible studies that we might have missed. We will follow the standard systematic review methodology for study selection and data abstraction. For each LSR update, we will abstract information on the following: 1) general characteristics, 2) systematic review methodology, 3) living approach methodology, 4) results, and 5) editorial and publication processes. We will update the findings of both the surveys and the longitudinal follow-up of included LSRs every 6 months. In addition, we will identify articles addressing LSR methods to be included in an ‘LSR methods repository’. Conclusion: The proposed living methodological survey will allow us to monitor how the methods of conduct, and reporting as well as the findings of LSRs change over time. Ultimately this should help with ensuring the quality and transparency of LSRs.

Inappropriate authorship and other fraudulent publication strategies are pervasive. Here, I deal with contribution disclosures, authorship disputes versus plagiarism among collaborators, kin co-authorship, gender bias, authorship trade, and fake peer review (FPR). In contrast to underserved authorship and other ubiquitous malpractices, authorship trade and FPR appear to concentrate in some Asian countries that exhibit a mixed academic pattern of rapid growth and poor ethics. It seems that strong pressures to publish coupled with the incessantly growing number of publications entail a lower quality of published science in part attributable to a poor, compromised or even absent (in predatory journals) peer review. In this regard, the commitment of Publons to strengthen this fundamental process and ultimately ensure the quality and integrity of the published articles is laudable. Because the many recommendations for adherence to authorship guidelines and rules of honest and transparent research reporting have been rather ineffective, strong deterrents should be established to end manipulated peer review, undeserved authorship, and related fakeries.

The medical community uses a variety of data standards for clinical and research reporting needs. ISO 11179 Common Data Elements (CDEs) is one such standard that provides robust data point definitions. The Biomedical Research Integrated Domain Group (BRIDG) model is a domain analysis model that provides a contextual framework for biomedical and clinical research data. Manually mapping the CDEs to the BRIDG model can facilitate mapping the CDEs to other standards. Unfortunately, the error-prone, labor-intensive manual mapping process creates a significant barrier for researchers who use CDEs. In this paper, we present our preliminary work to develop a semi-automated algorithm to map CDEs to likely BRIDG classes. First, we extended and improved our previously developed artificial neural network (ANN) alignment algorithm. We then used a collection of 1,284 CDEs mapped to BRIDG classes as the gold standard to train and obtain the appropriate weights of six CDE attributes. Finally, we recommended a list of candidate BRIDG classes to which the CDE of interest may belong. Preliminary testing has proven the effectiveness and efficiency of our proposed methodology in mapping CDEs to BRIDG classes.

BackgroundThe accuracy of statistical reporting that informs medical and public health practice has generated extensive debate, but no studies have evaluated the frequency or accuracy of effect size (the magnitude of change in outcome as a function of change in predictor) reporting in prominent health journals.ObjectiveTo evaluate effect size reporting practices in prominent health journals using the case study of ORs.DesignArticles published in the American Journal of Public Health (AJPH), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and PLOS One from 1 January 2010 through 31 December 2019 mentioning the term ‘odds ratio’ in all searchable fields were obtained using PubMed. One hundred randomly selected articles that reported original research using ORs were sampled per journal for in-depth analysis.Main outcomes and measuresWe report prevalence of articles using ORs, reporting effect sizes from ORs (reporting the magnitude of change in outcome as a function of change in predictor) and reporting correct effect sizes.ResultsThe proportion of articles using ORs in the past decade declined in JAMA and AJPH, remained similar in NEJM and increased in PLOS One, with 6124 articles in total. Twenty-four per cent (95% CI 20% to 28%) of articles reported the at least one effect size arising from an OR. Among articles reporting any effect size, 57% (95% CI 47% to 67%) did so incorrectly. Taken together, 10% (95% CI 7% to 13%) of articles included a correct effect size interpretation of an OR. Articles that used ORs in AJPH more frequently reported the effect size (36%, 95% CI 27% to 45%), when compared with NEJM (26%, 95% CI 17.5% to 34.7%), PLOS One (22%, 95% CI 13.9% to 30.2%) and JAMA (10%, 95% CI 3.9% to 16.0%), but the probability of a correct interpretation did not statistically differ between the four journals (χ2=0.56, p=0.90).ConclusionsArticles that used ORs in prominent journals frequently omitted presenting the effect size of their predictor variables. When reported, the presented effect size was usually incorrect. When used, ORs should be paired with accurate effect size interpretations. New editorial and research reporting standards to improve effect size reporting and its accuracy should be considered.

Abstract. Several studies have shown that Continuous Performance Tests (CPT) can diagnose Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) better than other tests. Research reporting comparisons of two or more CPT-type tests is scarce. The purpose of the study was to compare the Mathematics Continuous Performance Test (MATH-CPT) with another CPT-type test (CPT II) and a questionnaire (the Brown Scale). The comparison was carried out by looking at correlations among subscales and checking the precision of detecting ADHD. Ninety-five high school and college students participated in the study, 41 with ADHD were the research group and 54 were the control group. The participants performed the two tests and answered the questionnaire. The results showed that the MATH-CPT correctly identified 74.50% of the participants of both groups as compared to the 71.60% of the CPT II. Correlations between the two CPT-type tests were moderate; however, they were similar to correlations found in other studies comparing similar tools. The MATH-CPT, final attention formula, showed significant correlations with the Brown scales, while the CPT II, confidence index associated with ADHD assessment, showed nonsignificant correlations with the questionnaire. The study indicated that MATH-CPT can be used with a clinical population of ADHD and for research purposes.

Early gross motor development is a major indicator of global milestones in the first year of life, affecting the walking ability of a child. There has been limited research reporting on early motor development and the age of independent walking of orphaned infants compared to typical home-raised infants. The purpose of this study was to compare the mean scores of early gross motor movement at 4, 6 and 8months of age and at the age of walking attainment of typically raised infants and orphaned infants. In addition, we looked to compare the walking age between these same infants.This cross-sectional study recruited 59 typical home-raised infants and 62 orphans. Their gross motor development was assessed using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). The age of walking attainment was also prospectively monitored and ascertained. The Student's independent t-test was used to analyse the differences of the AIMS scores at 4, 6 and 8months of age and at the age of independent walking between the two groups.The orphans showed significantly lower AIMS scores at 4, 6 and 8months of age and the age of independent walking (P-value0.05). The orphan group had a 5-month older mean age of walking attainment (15.0±4.2months) compared with typical home-raised infants (9.9±1.4months).Orphans have delays in early gross motor development and walk independently at an older age, compared with home-raised infants.

There is a substantial body of research reporting evidence of associations between various forms of childhood adversity and psychosis, across the spectrum from experiences to disorder. This has been extended, more recently, to include studies of cumulative effects, of interactions with other factors, of specific effects, and of putative biological and psychological mechanisms. In this paper we evaluate this research and highlight the remaining methodological issues and gaps that temper, but do not dismiss, conclusions about the causal role of childhood adversity. We also consider the emerging work on cumulative, synergistic, and specific effects and on mechanisms; and discuss the broader implications of this line of research for our understanding of psychosis. We conclude that the current balance of evidence is that childhood adversities – particularly exposure to multiple adversities involving hostility and threat – do, in some people, contribute to the onset of psychotic experiences and psychotic disorders.

Many health promotion practitioners and researchers use the self-report International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) to estimate physical activity (PA) level. Reporting days/week and minutes/day engaging in PA can be challenging for participants. Thus, the purpose of this study was to develop a streamlined, enhanced scoring method of the IPAQ that could reduce participant burden and improve research reporting. IPAQ data from 1471 U.S. university students (79% White, 58% female) at 8 universities were scored using IPAQ traditional short-form scoring algorithm (IPAQ-TSA) to generate metabolic equivalents (METS/minute/week) and an IPAQ Streamlined Scoring Algorithm (IPAQ-SSA) without minutes/day using weighted exercise intensity and days/week. IPAQ-TSA and IPAQ-SSA measures categorize participants into high, moderate, or low PA level based on their PA patterns. Spearman rank correlations between IPAQ-SSA and IPAQ METS (r = 0.69, p

Background Internationally, speech and language therapists (SLTs) are involving parents and providing home tasks in intervention for phonology-based speech sound disorder (SSD). To ensure that SLTs’ involvement of parents is guided by empirical research, a review of peer-reviewed published evidence is needed. Aims To provide SLTs and researchers with a comprehensive appraisal and analysis of peer-reviewed published intervention research reporting parent involvement and the provision of home tasks in intervention studies for children with phonology-based SSD. Methods & Procedures A systematic search and review was conducted. Academic databases were searched for peer-reviewed research papers published between 1979 and 2013 reporting on phonological intervention for SSD. Of the 176 papers that met the criteria, 61 were identified that reported on the involvement of parents and/or home tasks within the intervention. These papers were analysed using a quality appraisal tool. Details regarding the involvement of parents and home tasks were extracted and analysed to provide a summary of these practices within the evidence base. Main Contribution Parents have been involved in intervention research for phonology-based SSD. However, most of the peer-reviewed published papers reporting this research have provided limited details regarding what this involved. This paucity of information presents challenges for SLTs wishing to integrate external evidence into their clinical services and clinical decision-making. It also raises issues regarding treatment fidelity for researchers wishing to replicate published intervention research. Conclusions & Implications The range of tasks in which parents were involved, and the limited details reported in the literature, present challenges for SLTs wanting to involve parents in intervention. Further high-quality research reporting more detail regarding the involvement of parents and home tasks in intervention for SSD is needed.

The availability of routinely collected health data, such as health administrative data, electronic health records, prescription records and disease registries, has increased in the information age. This has led to an explosion of reports of comparativeness effectiveness research using such data. Guidelines for the REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Data (RECORD) will improve the completeness and transparency of reporting of research using routinely collected health data. The Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research has endorsed these guidelines. In this commentary, the RECORD checklist is reprinted and members of the RECORD working committee reflect on the importance of these reporting guidelines for the field of comparative effectiveness research.

Recently, based on voice cepstral analysis, Benba et al. (IEEE T. Neur. Sys. Reh., vol. 24, pp. 1100-1108, 2016) have reported discrimination between patients with Parkinson's disease and different neurological disorders with high classification accuracy up to 90%. Using the same approach, we were able to experimentally separate two groups of normal healthy speakers with 96% classification accuracy and showed that the method proposed by Benba et al. may not be appropriate for discrimination between different neurological diseases. In particular, voice cepstral analysis appears to be sensitive to specific speakers' characteristics such as gender or age. Our findings emphasize several assumptions that can be considered as basic necessary conditions for research reporting speech data in progressive neurodegenerative diseases.

Recent research reporting successful translation of stem cell therapies to patients have enriched the hope that such regenerative strategies may one day become a treatment for a wide range of vexing diseases. In fact, the past few years witnessed, a rather exponential advancement in clinical trials revolving around stem cell-based therapies. Some of these trials resulted in remarkable impact on various diseases. In this review, the advances and challenges for the development of stem-cell-based therapies are described, with focus on the use of stem cells in dentistry in addition to the advances reached in regenerative treatment modalities in several diseases. The limitations of these treatments and ongoing challenges in the field are also discussed while shedding light on the ethical and regulatory challenges in translating autologous stem cell-based interventions, into safe and effective therapies.

The aim was to assess the influence of corticosteroid therapy (CST) on orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). A narrative review of studies performed in animal models. Indexed databases were searched up to and including May 2018 to address the following focused question: "Does CST affect OTM?" The following eligibility criteria were imposed: (a) original studies; (b) presence of a control group (OTM without CST); (c) intervention: effect of CST on OTM; and (d) statistical analysis. Quality assessment was performed using the Animal Research Reporting In Vivo Experiment (ARRIVE) guidelines. Case series, case reports, commentaries, historic reviews and letters to the Editor were excluded. Ten studies performed on animal models were included. The experimental duration ranged between 3 and 49 days. Two studies reported that CST decreases the magnitude of OTM, two studies showed no significant influence of CST on OTM, and two studies found that CST increases OTM. Two studies reported CST significantly decreases bone density and increases bone resorption during OTM. In one study, CST significantly decreased orthodontically induced root resorption. The minimum, median and highest scores (out of 20) based on ARRIVE guidelines were 7, 15.5 and 18, respectively. The influence of CST on OTM in animal models remains debatable.

This study assessed the subjective experience of participating in a clinical trial, specifically positive and negative experiences and the experience of audio recording assessment sessions. The study was cross-sectional from a single blinded randomised controlled trial. Forty participants with a primary diagnosis of non-organic psychosis completed baseline and 12-week follow-up questionnaires assessing their experiences. Participants rated research interviews as moderately helpful in facilitating their therapy and talking to the interviewer as moderately helpful at baseline and 12-week follow-up. Self-report ratings of the degree of self-realisation promoted by the research questionnaires were significantly higher at 12-week follow-up compared to baseline. Participants adjusted quickly to being audio recorded and rated interviews as not at all disruptive and not at all to slightly intrusive. On average there were neutral emotional reactions, positive gains and minimal inconveniences as a result of participation. The main reasons for taking part were: ‘To help myself’, ‘I was curious’ and ‘To help others’. The findings offer support to previous research reporting that individuals with mental health problems find participating in clinical trials a beneficial experience. This may alleviate concerns that participation in similar studies may be personally intrusive or harmful.