Search

ObjectivesA rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, published evidence on the optimal methods of planning, doing, and sharing the results of these reviews is lacking. The Priority III study aimed to identify the top 10 unanswered questions on rapid review methodology to be addressed by future research.Study Design and SettingA modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was adopted. This approach used two online surveys and a virtual prioritization workshop with patients and the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders to identify and prioritize unanswered questions.ResultsPatients and the public, researchers, reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders identified and prioritized the top 10 unanswered research questions about rapid review methodology. Priorities were identified throughout the entire review process, from stakeholder involvement and formulating the question, to the methods of a systematic review that are appropriate to use, through to the dissemination of results.ConclusionThe results of the Priority III study will inform the future research agenda on rapid review methodology. We hope this will enhance the quality of evidence produced by rapid reviews, which will ultimately inform decision-making in the context of healthcare.

Long-standing affective science theories conceive the perception of emotional stimuli either as discrete categories (for example, an angry voice) or continuous dimensional attributes (for example, an intense and negative vocal emotion). Which position provides a better account is still widely debated. Here we contrast the positions to account for acoustics-independent perceptual and cerebral representational geometry of perceived voice emotions. We combined multimodal imaging of the cerebral response to heard vocal stimuli (using functional magnetic resonance imaging and magneto-encephalography) with post-scanning behavioural assessment of voice emotion perception. By using representational similarity analysis, we find that categories prevail in perceptual and early (less than 200 ms) frontotemporal cerebral representational geometries and that dimensions impinge predominantly on a later limbic–temporal network (at 240 ms and after 500 ms). These results reconcile the two opposing views by reframing the perception of emotions as the interplay of cerebral networks with different representational dynamics that emphasize either categories or dimensions. Are vocal emotions perceived as categories (for example, anger) or as dimensions (for example, an intense negative emotion)? Here, using functional magnetic resonance imaging and magneto-encephalography, Giordano et al. find that categories prevail in early (less than 200 ms) neural representations, whereas dimensions emerge later (240 ms and more than 500 ms).

Background: The value of rapid reviews in informing health care decisions is more evident since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. While systematic reviews can be completed rapidly, rapid reviews are usually a type of evidence synthesis in which components of the systematic review process may be simplified or omitted to produce information more efficiently within constraints of time, expertise, funding or any combination thereof. There is an absence of high-quality evidence underpinning some decisions about how we plan, do and share rapid reviews. We will conduct a modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership to determine the top 10 unanswered research questions about how we plan, do and share rapid reviews in collaboration with patients, public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers and funders. Methods: An international steering group consisting of key stakeholder perspectives (patients, the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers and funders) will facilitate broad reach, recruitment and participation across stakeholder groups. An initial online survey will identify stakeholders’ perceptions of research uncertainties about how we plan, do and share rapid reviews. Responses will be categorised to generate a long list of questions. The list will be checked against systematic reviews published within the past three years to identify if the question is unanswered. A second online stakeholder survey will rank the long list in order of priority. Finally, a virtual consensus workshop of key stakeholders will agree on the top 10 unanswered questions. Discussion: Research prioritisation is an important means for minimising research waste and ensuring that research resources are targeted towards answering the most important questions. Identifying the top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities will help target research to improve how we plan, do and share rapid reviews and ultimately enhance the use of high-quality synthesised evidence to inform health care policy and practice.

Background\ud There is a mismatch between research questions which are considered to be important by patients, carers and healthcare professionals and the research performed in many fields of medicine. No relevant studies which have assessed research priorities in healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) that have involved patients' and carers' opinions were identified in the literature.\ud \ud Aim\ud The Healthcare-Associated Infections Priority Setting Partnership was established to identify the top research priorities in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of HCAI in the UK, considering the opinions of all these groups.\ud \ud Methods\ud The methods broadly followed the principles of the James Lind Alliance (JLA) priority setting activity.\ud \ud Findings\ud In total, 259 unique valid research questions were identified from 221 valid responses to a consultation of patients, carers and healthcare professionals after seeking their opinions for research priorities. The steering committee of the priority setting partnership rationalized these to 50 unique questions. A literature review established that for these questions there were no recent high-quality systematic reviews, high-quality systematic reviews which concluded that further studies were necessary, or the steering committee considered that further research was required despite the conclusions of recent systematic reviews. An interim survey ranked the 50 questions, and the 10 main research priorities were identified from the top 32 questions by consensus at a final priority setting workshop of patients, carers and healthcare professionals using group discussions.\ud \ud Conclusions\ud A priority setting process using JLA methods and principles involving patients, carers and healthcare professionals was used to identify the top 10 priority areas for research related to HCAI. Basic, translational, clinical and public health research would be required to address these uncertainties.

Contains fulltext : 200061.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Research on Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) should support patients, caregivers/parents (carers) and clinicians to make important decisions in the consulting room and eventually to improve the lives of patients with JIA. Thus far these end-users of JIA-research have rarely been involved in the prioritisation of future research. MAIN BODY: Dutch organisations of patients, carers and clinicians will collaboratively develop a research agenda for JIA, following the James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology. In a 'Priority Setting Partnership' (PSP), they will gradually establish a top 10 list of the most important unanswered research questions for JIA. In this process the input from clinicians, patients and their carers will be equally valued. Additionally, focus groups will be organised to involve young people with JIA. The involvement of all contributors will be monitored and evaluated. In this manner, the project will contribute to the growing body of literature on how to involve young people in agenda setting in a meaningful way. CONCLUSION: A JIA research agenda established through the JLA method and thus co-created by patients, carers and clinicians will inform researchers and research funders about the most important research questions for JIA. This will lead to research that really matters.

Whether the human brain represents emotional stimuli as discrete categories or continuous dimensions is still widely debated. Here we directly contrasted the power of categorical and dimensional models at explaining behavior and cerebral activity in the context of perceived emotion in the voice. We combined functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and magneto-encephalography (MEG) to measure with high spatiotemporal precision the dynamics of cerebral activity in participants who listened to voice stimuli expressing a range of emotions. The participants also provided a detailed perceptual assessment of the stimuli. By using representational similarity analysis (RSA), we show that the participants’ perceptual representation of the stimuli was initially dominated by discrete categories and an early (500ms). Our results thus show that both categorical and dimensional models account for patterns of cerebral responses to emotions in voices but with a different timeline and detail as to how these patterns evolve from discrete categories to progressively refined continuous dimensions.One Sentence Summary: Emotions expressed in the voice are instantly categorized in cortical processing and their distinct qualities are refined dimensionally only later on.

There is extensive evidence pointing to an early, automatic segmentation of written words into their constituent units (farm-er, wit-ness); however, less is known about the potential role of contextual information in modulating this analysis. We adapted the standard masked priming paradigm to include an overt semantic prime in order to examine whether semantic context influences morpho-orthographic segmentation of complex words. In particular, we asked how the context will affect processing of semantically opaque forms (witness), where the embedded stem (wit) is incompatible with the meaning of the whole form. Results showed no masked priming facilitation for opaque forms in the presence of a semantic prime, indicating that context can influence early morphological analysis. Priming was found for both semantically transparent and opaque forms (farmer-farm, witness-wit) when there was no semantically-related context, consistent with the literature and an account positing early blind segmentation. These findings provide an important update to the long-standing debate on early morphological processing in written word recognition.

Rapid and automatic processing of grammatical complexity is argued to take place during speech comprehension, engaging a left-lateralised fronto-temporal language network. Here we address how neural activity in these regions is modulated by the grammatical properties of spoken words. We used combined magneto- and electroencephalography (MEG, EEG) to delineate the spatiotemporal patterns of activity that support the recognition of morphologically complex words in English with inflectional (-s) and derivational (-er) affixes (e.g. bakes, baker). The mismatch negativity (MMN), an index of linguistic memory traces elicited in a passive listening paradigm, was used to examine the neural dynamics elicited by morphologically complex words. Results revealed an initial peak 130-180 ms after the deviation point with a major source in left superior temporal cortex. The localisation of this early activation showed a sensitivity to two grammatical properties of the stimuli: 1) the presence of morphological complexity, with affixed words showing increased left-laterality compared to non-affixed words; and 2) the grammatical category, with affixed verbs showing greater left-lateralisation in inferior frontal gyrus compared to affixed nouns (bakes vs. beaks). This automatic brain response was additionally sensitive to semantic coherence (the meaning of the stem vs. the meaning of the whole form) in fronto-temporal regions. These results demonstrate that the spatiotemporal pattern of neural activity in spoken word processing is modulated by the presence of morphological structure, predominantly engaging the left-hemisphere’s fronto-temporal language network, and does not require focused attention on the linguistic input.