Dataset Information

Informatics technology mimics ecology: dense, mutualistic collaboration networks are associated with higher publication rates.

ABSTRACT: Information technology (IT) adoption enables biomedical research. Publications are an accepted measure of research output, and network models can describe the collaborative nature of publication. In particular, ecological networks can serve as analogies for publication and technology adoption. We constructed network models of adoption of bioinformatics programming languages and health IT (HIT) from the literature.We selected seven programming languages and four types of HIT. We performed PubMed searches to identify publications since 2001. We calculated summary statistics and analyzed spatiotemporal relationships. Then, we assessed ecological models of specialization, cooperativity, competition, evolution, biodiversity, and stability associated with publications.Adoption of HIT has been variable, while scripting languages have experienced rapid adoption. Hospital systems had the largest HIT research corpus, while Perl had the largest language corpus. Scripting languages represented the largest connected network components. The relationship between edges and nodes was linear, though Bioconductor had more edges than expected and Perl had fewer. Spatiotemporal relationships were weak. Most languages shared a bioinformatics specialization and appeared mutualistic or competitive. HIT specializations varied. Specialization was highest for Bioconductor and radiology systems. Specialization and cooperativity were positively correlated among languages but negatively correlated among HIT. Rates of language evolution were similar. Biodiversity among languages grew in the first half of the decade and stabilized, while diversity among HIT was variable but flat. Compared with publications in 2001, correlation with publications one year later was positive while correlation after ten years was weak and negative.Adoption of new technologies can be unpredictable. Spatiotemporal relationships facilitate adoption but are not sufficient. As with ecosystems, dense, mutualistic, specialized co-habitation is associated with faster growth. There are rapidly changing trends in external technological and macroeconomic influences. We propose that a better understanding of how technologies are adopted can facilitate their development.

SUBMITTER: Sorani MD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3261203 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Informatics technology mimics ecology: dense, mutualistic collaboration networks are associated with higher publication rates.

Sorani Marco D MD

PloS one 20120118 1

Information technology (IT) adoption enables biomedical research. Publications are an accepted measure of research output, and network models can describe the collaborative nature of publication. In particular, ecological networks can serve as analogies for publication and technology adoption. We constructed network models of adoption of bioinformatics programming languages and health IT (HIT) from the literature.We selected seven programming languages and four types of HIT. We performed PubMed ...[more]

PMID: 22279593

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile health informatics recommendations on competencies and education serve as highly desirable corridors for designing curricula and courses, they cannot show how the content should be situated in a specific and local context. Therefore, global and local perspectives need to be reconciled in a common framework.ObjectivesThe primary aim of this study is therefore to empirically define and validate a framework of globally accepted core competency areas in health informatics and to enrich this framework with exemplar information derived from local educational settings.MethodsTo this end, (i) a survey was deployed and yielded insights from 43 nursing experts from 21 countries worldwide to measure the relevance of the core competency areas, (ii) a workshop at the International Nursing Informatics Conference (NI2016) held in June 2016 to provide information about the validation and clustering of these areas and (iii) exemplar case studies were compiled to match these findings with the practice. The survey was designed based on a comprehensive compilation of competencies from the international literature in medical and health informatics.ResultsThe resulting recommendation framework consists of 24 core competency areas in health informatics defined for five major nursing roles. These areas were clustered in the domains "data, information, knowledge", "information exchange and information sharing", "ethical and legal issues", "systems life cycle management", "management" and "biostatistics and medical technology", all of which showed high reliability values. The core competency areas were ranked by relevance and validated by a different group of experts. Exemplar case studies from Brazil, Germany, New Zealand, Taiwan/China, United Kingdom (Scotland) and the United States of America expanded on the competencies described in the core competency areas.ConclusionsThis international recommendation framework for competencies in health informatics directed at nurses provides a grid of knowledge for teachers and learner alike that is instantiated with knowledge about informatics competencies, professional roles, priorities and practical, local experience. It also provides a methodology for developing frameworks for other professions/disciplines. Finally, this framework lays the foundation of cross-country learning in health informatics education for nurses and other health professionals.

Project description:To ascertain attitudes to resourcing, collaboration and publication in toxicology, a survey was developed and distributed to British Toxicology Society (BTS) members. The survey comprised 14 questions with 5 response options (strongly agree; agree; conflicted; disagree; strongly disagree) and a free text box. One hundred completed surveys were received by the cut-off date for data analysis. Unsurprisingly, 60% of participants disagreed or strongly disagreed that toxicology research is adequately funded in the UK; only 12% agreed with this statement. A similar proportion of participants (53%) disagreed with the statement that funding councils give equal opportunity to toxicology whereas 31% were conflicted on this point. An overwhelming 97% of respondents agreed that collaboration is important in driving toxicology research whereas only 38% agreed that competition is important. When this question was broadened out beyond the discipline of toxicology, a similar profile was seen suggesting that participants held similar views on toxicology versus other types of research. Many respondents were conflicted regarding the role of competition both in toxicology and in other research disciplines. Free text comments suggested that some competition is good to drive quality but can be counterproductive when competing for limited resources. Most participants were in favour of making toxicology research data openly available (86%) and in favour of open access publication (89%) although there were reservations about the cost of open access. Many (60%) thought the current system of peer review is fair but 65% also supported the idea of double-blind peer review (where both reviewer and author are anonymized). Others suggested a step in the opposite direction towards increased transparency (revealing and holding reviewers to account) would be preferable. Overall, there was a broad theme in free text responses that the need for experienced toxicologists has increased at a time when training and investment in the discipline has declined. However, not all respondents held that view with some noting that toxicology both as a research and as an applied discipline is strong within the UK scientific community.

Project description:ObjectivesPublication bias, non-publication, and selective reporting of animal studies limit progress toward the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) that guide ethical animal testing, waste public resources, and result in redundant research, which collectively undermine the public's trust in scientific reliability. In this study, we aimed to 1) validate findings from a previous follow-up study by our team that examined the publication rates of animal studies from protocol to publication and 2) identify incentives for improving publication rates in animal research.MethodsThe researchers responsible for the animal proposals (n = 210) from our previous study were contacted as participants for a Web-based survey between October 2019 and April 2020. Question types varied between free text questions, answer options based on a 5-point Likert scale and closed yes/no questions.ResultsIn total, 78 researchers responsible for 101 of 210 animal study proposals participated, yielding a response rate of 48.1%. Results showed that the publication rate increased from 67% in our follow-up study to 70%. According to a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = "not relevant" to 5 = "extremely relevant"), the most widely accepted suggestions for increasing publication rates were "Publication costs for open access journals are fully covered by funders or universities" (mean 4.02, SD 1.01), "Performance-based allocation of intramural funds for results reporting of animal research not supporting the initial hypothesis (including preprints and repositories)" (mean 3.37, SD 1.05), and "Researchers receive more information from scientific journals that also publish non-significant results" (mean 3.30, SD 1.02).ConclusionWhile the extent of publication and publication practices have been thoroughly investigated for clinical trials, less data is available for animal research to date. Therefore, the study contributes in complementing the picture of publication practice in animal research. Suggestions from our survey may help improve the publication rates of animal studies.

Dataset Information

Informatics technology mimics ecology: dense, mutualistic collaboration networks are associated with higher publication rates.

Publications

Informatics technology mimics ecology: dense, mutualistic collaboration networks are associated with higher publication rates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets