Ocean Research Priorities: Similarities and Differences among Scientists, Policymakers, and Fishermen in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mason JG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5421313 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Ocean Research Priorities: Similarities and Differences among Scientists, Policymakers, and Fishermen in the United States.
Mason Julia G JG Rudd Murray A MA Crowder Larry B LB
Bioscience 20170201 5
Understanding and solving complex ocean conservation problems requires cooperation not just among scientific disciplines but also across sectors. A recently published survey that probed research priorities of marine scientists, when provided to ocean stakeholders, revealed some agreement on priorities but also illuminated key differences. Ocean acidification, cumulative impacts, bycatch effects, and restoration effectiveness were in the top 10 priorities for scientists and stakeholder groups. Si ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Research has the potential to influence US social policy; however, existing research in this area lacks a coherent message. The Model for Dissemination of Research provides a framework through which to synthesize lessons learned from research to date on the process of translating research to US policymakers. METHODS:The peer-reviewed and grey literature was systematically reviewed to understand common strategies for disseminating social policy research to policymakers in the United States. We searched Academic Search Premier, PolicyFile, SocINDEX, Social Work Abstracts, and Web of Science from January 1980 through December 2019. Articles were independently reviewed and thematically analyzed by two investigators and organized using the Model for Dissemination of Research. RESULTS:The search resulted in 5225 titles and abstracts for inclusion consideration. 303 full-text articles were reviewed with 27 meeting inclusion criteria. Common sources of research dissemination included government, academic researchers, the peer reviewed literature, and independent organizations. The most frequently disseminated research topics were health-related, and legislators and executive branch administrators were the most common target audience. Print materials and personal communication were the most common channels for disseminating research to policymakers. There was variation in dissemination channels by level of government (e.g., a more formal legislative process at the federal level compared with other levesl). Findings from this work suggest that dissemination is most effective when it starts early, galvanizes support, uses champions and brokers, considers contextual factors, is timely, relevant, and accessible, and knows the players and process. CONCLUSIONS:Effective dissemination of research to US policymakers exists; yet, rigorous quantitative evaluation is rare. A number of cross-cutting strategies appear to enhance the translation of research evidence into policy. REGISTRATION:Not registered.
| S-EPMC7560305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to characterize clinician-scientists in ophthalmology and identify factors associated with successful research funding, income, and career satisfaction.DesignCross-sectional study.MethodsA survey was conducted of clinician-scientists in ophthalmology at US academic institutions between April 17, 2019, and May 19, 2019. Collected information including 1) demographic data; 2) amount, type, and source of startup funding; first extramural grant; and first R01-equivalent independent grant; 3) starting and current salaries; and 4) Likert-scale measurements of career satisfaction were analyzed using multivariate regression.ResultsNinety-eight clinician-scientists in ophthalmology were surveyed across different ages (mean: 48 ± 11 years), research categories, institutional types, geographic regions, and academic ranks. Median startup funding ranged from $50-99k, and median starting salaries ranged from $150-199k. A majority of investigators (67%) received their first extramural award from the National Eye Institute, mainly through K-award mechanisms (82%). The median time to receiving their first independent grant was 8 years, mainly through an R01 award (70%). Greater institutional startup support (P = .027) and earlier extramural grant success (P = .022) were associated with earlier independent funding. Male investigators (P = .001) and MD degreed participants (P = .008) were associated with higher current salaries but not starting salaries. Overall career satisfaction increased with career duration (P = .011) but not with earlier independent funding (P = .746) or higher income (P = .300).ConclusionsSuccess in research funding by clinician-scientists in ophthalmology may be linked to institutional support and earlier acquisition of extramural grants but does not impact academic salaries. Nevertheless, career satisfaction among clinician-scientists improves with time, which is not necessarily influenced by research or financial success.
| S-EPMC8184629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIndividuals with phenylalanine hydroxylase (PAH) deficiency lack an enzyme needed to metabolize the amino acid, phenylalanine. This leads to an increase of phenylalanine in the blood, which is associated with changes in cognitive and psychological functioning. Skilled clinical management is essential for preventing complications and providing comprehensive care to patients. In the last decade, the American College of Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) and a group of European experts developed separate guidelines to provide recommendations for the management and care of persons with PAH deficiency. The purpose of this paper was to compare and contrast these guidelines in order to understand the different approaches to PAH deficiency care.MethodsWe examined the procedures used to develop both guidelines, then evaluated key areas in PAH deficiency care which included screening, diagnostic approaches, dietary treatment (initiation and duration), ongoing phenylalanine level/ nutritional monitoring, neurocognitive screening, adherence issues in treatment, and special populations (women and maternal PKU, late or untreated PAH deficiency, and transitioning to adult services). We conducted a scoping review of four key topics in PAH deficiency care to explore recent research studies performed since the publication of the guidelines.ResultsThe ACMG and European expert group identified limited numbers of high quality studies to use as evidence for their recommendations. The ACMG and European guidelines had many similarities in their respective approaches PAH deficiency care and recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and management for persons with PAH deficiency. There were also a number of differences between the guidelines regarding the upper range for phenylalanine levels in adolescents and adults, the types of instruments used and frequency of neuropsychiatric examinations, and monitoring of bone health. Treatment adherence can be associated with a number of challenges, such as aversions to medical foods and formulas, as well as factors related to educational, social, and psychosocial issues. From the scoping review, there were many new studies addressing issues in treatment and management including new research on sapropterin adherence and increased dietary protein tolerance and pegvaliase on the reduction in phenylalanine levels and hypersensitivity reactions.ConclusionsIn the last decade, ACMG and European experts developed comprehensive guidelines for the clinical management of phenylalanine hydroxylase deficiency. The guidelines offered background and recommendations for clinical care of patients with PAH deficiency throughout the lifespan. New research evidence is available and updates to guidelines can keep pace with new developments. Evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and treatment are important for providing expert care to patients.
| S-EPMC7519570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims to prioritise the themes identified from the three gap analyses performed by a combination of scientists, clinicians, patients and members of the public to determine areas in breast cancer care where research is lacking. We also aimed to compare the priorities of areas of agreed research need between patients, the public, clinicians and scientists.DesignA cross-section of patients, public, clinicians and scientists completed a prioritisation exercise to rank the identified themes where research is lacking in breast cancer care.ParticipantsPatients, clinicians and scientists who have experienced, managed or worked in the field of breast cancer and members of the public.MethodsThe research areas identified in the Breast Cancer Campaign, Association of Breast Surgery and North West Breast Research Collaborative gap analyses were outlined as 22 themes in lay terminology. Patients, members of the public, clinicians and scientists were invited to complete the prioritisation exercise, on paper or electronically, ranking the themes from 1 to 22. Comparisons were made with arithmetic mean ranking.ResultsOf the 510 prioritisation exercises completed, 179 (35%) participants were patients, 162 (32%) public, 43 (8%) scientists and 122 (24%) clinicians. The theme ranked of highest priority overall was 'better prevention' (arithmetic mean rank 6.4 (SE 0.23)). 'Better prevention' was ranked top or second by patients, public and clinicians (7 (0.39), 4.7 (0.34) and 6.8 (0.5), respectively), however, scientists ranked this as their sixth most important factor (7.7 (0.92)). The public and clinicians had good agreement with patients (r=0.84 and r=0.75, respectively), whereas scientists had moderate agreement with patients (r=0.65). Certain themes were ranked significantly differently by participant groups. Compared with clinicians, patients prioritised research into 'alternative to mammograms', 'diagnostic (cancer) blood test' and 'rare cancers' (OR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.5), p=0.002, OR 2.1 (95% CI 1.3 to 3.5), p=0.004 and OR 1.7 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.8), p=0.03). Compared with scientists, patients deprioritised 'better laboratory models' (OR 0.4 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.8), p=0.01).ConclusionThis study demonstrates that patients, public, clinicians and scientists have different research priorities, with scientists being a particular outlier. This highlights the need to ensure the engagement of patients and public in research funding prioritisation decisions.
| S-EPMC11367287 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The presentation, pathology, and prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) in Asian patients have not been studied in large cohorts. We hypothesized that the clinicopathological features of PNETs of Chinese patients might be different from those of US patients. The objectives of this study were to address whether PNETs in Chinese patients exhibit unique clinicopathological features and natural history, and can be graded and staged using the WHO/ENETS criteria. This is a retrospective review of medical records of patients with PNETs in multiple academic medical centers in China (7) and the United States (2). Tumor grading and staging were based on WHO/ENETS criteria. The clinicopathological features of PNETs of Chinese and US patients were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to find associations between survival and patient demographics, tumor grade and stage, and other clinicopathological characteristics. A total of 977 (527 Chinese and 450 US) patients with PNETs were studied. In general, Chinese patients were younger than US patients (median age 46 vs 56 years). In Chinese patients, insulinomas were the most common (52.2%), followed by nonfunctional tumors (39.7%), whereas the order was reversed in US patients. Tumor grade distribution was similar in the 2 countries (G1: 57.5% vs 55.0%; G2: 38.5% vs 41.3%; and G3: 4.0% vs 3.7%). However, age, primary tumor size, primary tumor location, grade, and stage of subtypes of PNETs were significantly different between the 2 countries. The Chinese nonfunctional tumors were significantly larger than US ones (median size 4 vs 3?cm) and more frequently located in the head/neck region (54.9% vs 34.8%). The Chinese and US insulinomas were similar in size (median 1.5?cm) but the Chinese insulinomas relatively more frequently located in the head/neck region (48.3% vs 26.1%). Higher grade, advanced stage, metastasis, and larger primary tumor size were significantly associated with unfavorable survival in both countries. Several clinicopathological differences are found between Chinese and US PNETs but the PNETs of both countries follow a similar natural history. The WHO tumor grading and ENETS staging criteria are applicable to both Chinese and US patients.
| S-EPMC4998644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Processed municipal sewage sludges (MSS) are an abundant, unwanted by-product of wastewater treatment, increasingly applied to agriculture and forestry for inexpensive disposal and soil conditioning. Due to their high organic carbon and lipid contents, MSS not only is rich in carbon and nutrients but also represents a "sink" for recalcitrant, hydrophobic, and potentially bioaccumulative compounds. Indeed, many organics sequestered and concentrated in MSS meet the US Environmental Protection Agency's definition of being persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT). In a strategic effort, our research team at the Biodesign Institute has created the National Sewage Sludge Repository (NSSR), a large repository of digested MSSs from 164 wastewater treatment plants from across the USA, as part of the Human Health Observatory (H2O) at Arizona State University (ASU). The NSSR likely represents the largest archive of digested MSS specimens in the USA. The present study summarizes key findings gleaned thus far from analysis of NSSR samples. For example, we evaluated the content of toxicants in MSS and computed estimates of nationwide inventories of mass produced chemicals that become sequestrated in sludge and later are released into the environment during sludge disposal on land. Ongoing efforts document co-occurrence of a variety of PBT compounds in both MSS and human samples, while also identifying a large number of potentially harmful MSS constituents for which human exposure data are still lacking. Finally, we summarize future opportunities and invite collaborative use of the NSSR by the research community. The H2O at ASU represents a new resource and research tool for environmental scientists and the larger research community. As illustrated in this work, this repository can serve to (i) identify and prioritize emerging contaminants, (ii) provide spatial and temporal trends of contaminants, (iii) inform and evaluate the effectiveness of environmental policy-making and regulations, and (iv) approximate, ongoing exposures and body burdens of mass-produced chemicals in human society.
| S-EPMC4232481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diabetes mellitus is one of the major non-communicable diseases (NCD) with increasing prevalence in China. There is a lack of high-quality research focusing on prevention and management of diabetes in low and middle income countries (LMICs) compared to developed countries. This comparative study aims to describe the characteristics of diabetes research conducted in China and the USA. The study included 800 studies on diabetes mellitus from both countries. Compared with studies in the USA, studies in China were more likely to be laboratory-based primary research (50.5% versus 30.8%), more likely to use animal subjects (47% versus 27.5%), more likely to focused on risk factors (22.7% versus. 14.7%), more likely to be case-controlled studies (17.7% versus 10.0%), and more likely to evaluate pharmacological treatments (36.5% versus 20.7%). Further, compared with studies in the USA, studies in China were less likely to involve patients (42.7% versus 60.7%), less likely to be clinical trials (6.2% versus 14.5%), less likely to be cohort studies (8.8% versus. 26.0%), and less likely to evaluate disease management interventions (3.3% versus 13.3%). Clinical studies in China should be more patient-based to facilitate more effective control and management of diabetes.
| S-EPMC6720953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo bring together stakeholders in the United Kingdom to establish national priorities for research in single-ventricle heart conditions.MethodsThis study comprised two surveys and a workshop. The initial public online survey asked respondents up to three questions they would like answered for research. Responses were classified as unanswered, already answered, or unable to be answered by scientific research. In the follow-up survey, unanswered questions were divided into categories and respondents were asked to rank categories and questions by priority. A stakeholder workshop attended by patients, parents, healthcare professionals, researchers, and charities was held to determine the final list of research priorities.ResultsA total of 128 respondents posed 344 research questions, of which 271 were classified as unanswered, and after removing duplicates, 204 questions remained, which were divided into 20 categories. In the second survey, 56 (49.1%) respondents successfully ranked categories and questions. A total of 39 participants attended the workshop, drawing up a list of 30 research priorities across nine priority categories. The nine priority categories are: Associated co-morbidities; Brain & neurodevelopment; Exercise; Fontan failure; Heart function; Living with a single ventricle heart condition; Management of the well-functioning Fontan circulation; Surgery & perioperative care; and Transplantation, mechanical support & novel therapies.ConclusionsThrough a multi-stage process, we engaged a wide range of interested parties to establish a list of research priorities in single-ventricle heart conditions. This provides a platform for clinicians, researchers, and funders in the United Kingdom and elsewhere to address the most important questions and improve outcomes in these rare but high-impact CHDs.
| S-EPMC6435189 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Women remain underrepresented on faculties of medicine and the life sciences more broadly. Whether gender differences in self presentation of clinical research exist and may contribute to this gender gap has been challenging to explore empirically. The objective of this study was to analyze whether men and women differ in how positively they frame their research findings and to analyze whether the positive framing of research is associated with higher downstream citations. DESIGN:Retrospective observational study. DATA SOURCES:Titles and abstracts from 101?720 clinical research articles and approximately 6.2 million general life science articles indexed in PubMed and published between 2002 and 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Analysis of article titles and abstracts to determine whether men and women differ in how positively they present their research through use of terms such as "novel" or "excellent." For a set of 25 positive terms, we estimated the relative probability of positive framing as a function of the gender composition of the first and last authors, adjusting for scientific journal, year of publication, journal impact, and scientific field. RESULTS:Articles in which both the first and last author were women used at least one of the 25 positive terms in 10.9% of titles or abstracts versus 12.2% for articles involving a male first or last author, corresponding to a 12.3% relative difference (95% CI 5.7% to 18.9%). Gender differences in positive presentation were greatest in high impact clinical journals (impact factor >10), in which women were 21.4% less likely to present research positively. Across all clinical journals, positive presentation was associated with 9.4% (6.6% to 12.2%) higher subsequent citations, and in high impact clinical journals 13.0% (9.5% to 16.5%) higher citations. Results were similar when broadened to general life science articles published in journals indexed by PubMed, suggesting that gender differences in positive word use generalize to broader samples. CONCLUSIONS:Clinical articles involving a male first or last author were more likely to present research findings positively in titles and abstracts compared with articles in which both the first and last author were women, particularly in the highest impact journals. Positive presentation of research findings was associated with higher downstream citations.
| S-EPMC7190066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RationaleTo improve the effectiveness of tuberculosis (TB) control programs in the United States by identifying cost-effective priorities for screening for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI).ObjectivesTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of LTBI screening using the tuberculin skin test (TST)and interferon-g release assays (IGRAs).MethodsA Markov model of screening for LTBI with TST and IGRA in risk-groups considered in current LTBI screening guidelines.Measurements and main resultsIn all risk-groups, TST and IGRA screening resulted in increased mean life expectancy, ranging from 0.03–0.24 life-months per person screened. IGRA screening resulted in greater life expectancy gains than TST. Screening always cost more than not screening, but IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST in some groups. Four patterns of cost-effectiveness emerged, related to four risk categories. (1) Individuals at highest risk of TB reactivation (close contacts and those infected with HIV): the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IGRA compared with TST was less than $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. (2) The foreign-born: IGRA was cost-saving compared with TST and cost-effective compared with no screening (ICER ,$100,000 per QALY gained). (3) Vulnerable populations (e.g., homeless, drug user, or former prisoner): the ICER of TST screening was approximately $100,000–$150,000 per QALY gained, but IGRA was not cost-effective. (4) Medical comorbidities (e.g., diabetes): the ICER of screening with TST or IGRA was greater than $100,000 per QALY.ConclusionsLTBI screening guidelines could make progress toward TB elimination by prioritizing screening for close contacts, those infected with HIV, and the foreign-born regardless of time living in the United States. For these groups, IGRA screening was more cost-effective than TST screening.
| S-EPMC3175546 | biostudies-literature