Search

Abstract A research protocol is a document that outlines the proposed research idea and is submitted to funding agencies, institutions, or journals for approval. Writing a research protocol represents a challenge, particularly for early-career researchers. In this guide, we aim to provide detailed guidance with the key components and offer practical tips for crafting a research protocol in line with the various study designs. Specifically, the structure of a research protocol should contain the following items: (1) a title that is specific, catchy, and impressive within the word limitation; (2) an abstract that briefs the critical points of the study; (3) an introduction highlighting the study context from broad to narrow and defining the knowledge gap; (4) a justification underlining the significance of the proposed study; (5) Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART) objective(s) and aim(s); (6) a methodology covering seven sub-items, including [i] study design and settings, [ii] study subjects, [iii] sample size calculation and sampling, [iv] participants recruitment and follow-up, [v] questionnaire development, [vi] potential variables and outcomes, and [vii] data analysis plan; (7) dissemination of the results; (8) ethics and conflict of interests; (9) budgets analysis/ funding disclosure; and (10) references. This guide will give an overview of these steps and provide clear and concise tips on how to successfully draft a scientific protocol. With careful planning and appropriate guidance, it is possible to develop a well-structured and compelling protocol to obtain approval for the conduction of the study or funding from agencies, institutions, or organizations.

Abstract Background A global surplus of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines exists as a result of difficulties in aligning the demand and supply for vaccine manufacturing and delivery. World leaders have accelerated vaccine development, approval, production and distribution as a pragmatic approach to addressing the immediate public health challenges of the first two and a half years of the pandemic. Main body The currently predominant, highly transmissible Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has brought us closer to the threshold required to achieve herd immunity by greatly increasing rates of natural infection. Paradoxically, in parallel with rising vaccination levels in industrialized nations, this indirectly reduces the need for mass vaccine campaigns. Principal concerns that contribute to low vaccination rates which persist in several other countries, particularly of the Global South, are vaccine hesitancy and unequal access to vaccination. Social uncertainty fueled by fake news, misinformation, unfounded lay opinions and conspiracy theories has inevitably led to an erosion of public trust in vaccination. Conclusion To address the current mismatch between supply and demand of COVID-19 vaccines, there should be a focus on three principles: decelerating vaccine production, increasing distribution across communities, and optimizing cost-effectiveness of distribution logistics. Slowing down and switching from large-scale production to effectively ‘made to order’ is a feasible option, which should be commensurate with management capacity. Transparent and evidence-based data should be widely and freely disseminated to the public through multimedia channels to mitigate miscommunication and conspiracy theories. Use of soon-to-expire stockpiles should be prioritized not only to enhance booster dose rollouts in adults but to expand immunization campaigns to children (especially those aged 5–11 years), subject to national approval. Future research should ideally aim to develop vaccines that only require basic, affordable storage and maintenance procedures as opposed to sophisticated and expensive protocols. Graphical Abstract

Abstract Background Students face hardships in determining what are the main points that need more studying in every subject. Checklists are one of the ways that can help students identify the most important pieces of information. Accordingly, in this study, we aimed at examining the impact of using educational checklists on the learning process of postgraduate students at Nagasaki University, Japan. Methods Thirty-one Master's students, who finished a “how to write a research protocol” course were recruited by sending them an invitation email that had an attached link to a previously developed and tested questionnaire on the SurveyMonkey® platform. After signing the electronic informed consent, twenty-two participants (response rate = 71%) finished the survey. The data was analyzed using Microsoft Excel and expressed in the form of frequencies and percentages. Results More than half of the students declared that they know the checklist will be used in the course that we investigated. Only two students used checklists as a means of studying (9%). Twelve students (55%) confirmed that no other courses or lessons in the School of Tropical Medicine and Global Health (TMGH) use checklists. No students found the usage of checklists not easy or not practical to apply. Many students thought the length of the checklist was suitable and not too short (64%), although three students (14%) found it lengthy. Moreover, most students described the checklist as beyond good (86%) and they would recommend using a checklist for teaching other college students (73%). Conclusion Using checklists in education can facilitate the learning process, help in memorization, and deepen the concepts being studied. Further studies are required to examine the impact of checklists in teaching undergraduate students and students from other non-healthcare disciplines.

Background: Diabetes is one of the leading causes of noncommunicable diseases worldwide. It is known to induce cardiovascular remodeling, which can result in a variety of complications, including a considerable increase in aortic stiffness. While studies in Western populations have explored these effects, data on Asians, mainly Vietnamese, are limited. This study aimed to assess aortic elasticity in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients compared to healthy individuals. Methods: This quantitative, cross-sectional study compared aortic elasticity indices between individuals with T2DM and healthy controls in Vietnam. Aortic elasticity indices were assessed for all participants using M-mode echocardiography. Results: A comparison between the healthy and T2DM groups revealed substantial differences in aortic elasticity indices. The aortic stiffness index (ASI) was significantly greater in the T2DM group than in the control group, with median values of 6.10 (3.64–12.47) and 3.79 (2.40–8.50), respectively (p = 0.003). Aortic strain (AS) was substantially lower in the T2DM group than in the control group, with median values of 8.21% (4.24–13.07) and 10.66% (6.01–18.23), respectively (p = 0.039). Furthermore, the median aortic compliance (AC, 10-2mm/mmHg) and aortic distensibility (AD, 10-3mmHg-1) in individuals with T2DM were 4.07 (2.28–7.44) and 3.08 (1.57–5.26), respectively, lower than those in the control group, with median values of 6.40 (3.08–10.75) and 5.33 (2.80–9.79). A longer diabetes duration was linked to a greater ASI (r = 0.43, p < 0.05), while the AS decreased (r = -0.37, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Substantial variations in aorta elasticity indices were found in patients with T2DM using M-mode echocardiography. These differences highlight the impact of T2DM on vascular health. More research is needed to investigate the consequences of these discrepancies and their significance for clinical purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]