Community voices: policy proposals to promote inclusion in academia through the lens of women in science.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Teichmann SA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9279379 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Primarily from a measurement standpoint, we question some basic beliefs and procedures characterizing the scientific study of human behavior. The relations between observed and unobserved variables are key to an empirical approach to building explanatory theories and we are especially concerned about how the former are used as proxies for the latter. We believe that behavioral science can profitably reconsider the prevailing version of this arrangement because of its vulnerability to limiting idiosyncratic aspects of observed/unobserved variable relations. We describe a general measurement approach that takes into account idiosyncrasies that should be irrelevant to the measurement process but can intrude and may invalidate it in ways that distort and weaken relations among theoretically important variables. To clarify further our major concerns, we briefly describe one version of the measurement approach that fundamentally supports the individual as the primary unit of analysis orientation that we believe should be preeminent in the scientific study of human behavior.
| S-EPMC4990147 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9719555 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tendons connect muscles to bones, ensuring joint movement. With advanced age, tendons become more prone to degeneration followed by injuries. Tendon repair often requires lengthy periods of rehabilitation, especially in elderly patients. Existing medical and surgical treatments often fail to regain full tendon function.The development of novel treatment methods has been hampered due to limited understanding of basic tendon biology. Recently, it was discovered that tendons, similar to other mesenchymal tissues, contain tendon stem/progenitor cells (TSPCs) which possess the common stem cell properties.The current strategies for enhancing tendon repair consist mainly of applying stem cells, growth factors, natural and artificial biomaterials alone or in combination. In this review, we summarise the basic biology of tendon tissues and provide an update on the latest repair proposals for tendon tears. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2017;2:332-342. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.160075.
| S-EPMC5549180 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3419162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo test effects of the Community of Voices choir intervention on the health, well-being, and health care costs of racial/ethnically diverse older adults.MethodTwelve Administration-on-Aging-supported senior centers were cluster randomized into two groups: the intervention group started the choir immediately and a wait-list control group began the choir 6 months later. The choir program was designed for community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older. The multimodal intervention comprises activities that engage participants cognitively, physically, and socially. Outcome measures assessed these three domains as well as health care utilization and costs. The intention-to-treat comparison was at 6 months.ResultsThe sample (N = 390) had a mean age of 71.3 years (SD = 7.2); 65% were nonwhite. Six-month retention was 92%. Compared to controls, intervention group members experienced significantly greater improvements in loneliness (p = .02; standardized effect size [ES = 0.34] and interest in life (p = .008, ES = 0.39). No significant group differences were observed for cognitive or physical outcomes or for health care costs.DiscussionFindings support adoption of community choirs for reducing loneliness and increasing interest in life among diverse older adults. Further efforts need to examine the mechanisms by which engagement in choirs improves aspects of well-being and reduces health disparities among older adults, including potential longer-term effects.Clinicaltrials.gov registrationNCT01869179 registered January 9, 2013.
| S-EPMC7328053 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. There are no approved therapies, and the results of clinical trials have been difficult to compare due to inconsistent definitions of relevant disease parameters in patients with NASH. The natural course of the disease has not been rigorously characterized, particularly with respect to the contributions of underlying obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other comorbidities and the treatments provided for these comorbidities. Efforts to perform analyses of pooled data are limited by heterogeneous case definitions used across studies to define disease states. There remains a major unmet need in the field to develop standardized definitions for populations for interventional trials. Such definitions are expected to impact how endpoints for clinical trials are constructed. The Liver Forum is a multistakeholder effort including US and European regulatory agencies, academic investigators, professional and patient representative organizations, and industry to catalyze therapeutic development for NASH by developing potential solutions to barriers to development. The Case Definitions Working Group was established by The Liver Forum to evaluate the validity of case definitions for populations to be included in clinical trials for NASH from a regulatory science perspective. Based on such analyses, specific recommendations are provided noting the strengths and weaknesses of the case definitions along with knowledge gaps that require additional study. (Hepatology 2018;67:2001-2012).
| S-EPMC5906171 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAchieving diversity, inclusion, and gender equity remains an elusive challenge for many institutions worldwide and is understudied in Canadian academic health science centres.MethodsMcMaster University's Department of Medicine undertook surveys and analyses to determine whether there was inequity in leadership positions and salaries, or unprofessional behaviour within the department. Measures of academic productivity in relation to gender for both educators and researchers were analyzed. The department began shifting policies to foster greater gender diversity and inclusion. A revision of the leadership selection process, incorporating tenets of equity and a new game theory-based strategy called Diversitive Agreement Versus Nash Equilibrium (DAvNE) was evaluated.ResultsThe department's survey revealed underrepresentation of women and people of colour in leadership positions, with perceived barriers to their promotion. Both women and people of colour reported experiencing unprofessional behaviour directed toward them. A gender gap in base salary was observed, with female full professors being paid less. No difference in academic productivity was seen between male and female educators or researchers. The leadership competitions conducted under new selection processes emphasizing diversity resulted in 66% of participating women securing a leadership position, in comparison to 25% of participating men. People of colour made up 27% of members participating in these leadership competitions, but none was successful in obtaining a position.ConclusionsDiversity and inclusion disparities in the Department of Medicine at McMaster University indicate a need for further efforts and innovation to bring about greater gender and racial equity.
| S-EPMC8712627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Lisbon Strategy was adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the European Union (EU) in 2000. By moving science into a central position for the development of a European knowledge-based economy and society, its adoption at political level seems to have been a powerful catalyst for the increased involvement of scientists in science policy in the EU. Recognising the need for scientists to act collectively in order to contribute to shape the future of science policy in Europe, a pioneering group of European science organisations leaders and representatives, as well as other scientists, initiated a European, interdisciplinary, inclusive movement leading to the creation of the European Research Council (ERC) to support basic research of the highest quality. Having scientists' campaign for the funding of bottom-up research by the EU Framework Programmes exclusively on scientific grounds, and for an ERC, was a unique event in the recent history of European science policy. For the first time, the scientific community acted collectively and across disciplinary or national boundaries as a political actor for the sake of a better science policy for Europe. As is often the case when first-hand experience is gained through the creation of a new organization, novel forms of collaboration arise. The European biomedical community has recently proposed the creation of a strategic action plan for health research (the European Council of Health Research; EuCHR), provisionally translated at present into a Scientific Panel for Health (SPH) research in Horizon 2020, the EU's research-funding programme for the period 2014-2020. The creation of such Scientific Panel should be viewed as an important contribution by the biomedical community as a major political agreement has been reached on the need for a comprehensive and long-term scientific strategy to accelerate research and facilitate innovation at EU level. It is our belief that describing and analyzing the process leading to the creation of the ERC and SPH (2002-2014) should be widely shared with the research community in general, as this may contribute to the understanding of the evolving relations between scientists and science-policy making.
| S-EPMC5528628 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAchieving universal health coverage (UHC) in the context of limited resources will require prioritising the most vulnerable and ensuring health policies and services are responsive to their needs. One way of addressing this is through the engagement of marginalised voices in the priority setting process. Public engagement approaches that enable group level deliberation as well as individual level preference capturing might be valuable in this regard, but there are limited examples of their practical application, and gaps in understanding their outcomes, especially with rural populations.ObjectiveTo address this gap, we implemented a modified priority setting tool (Choosing All Together-CHAT) that enables individuals and groups to make trade-offs to demonstrate the type of health services packages that may be acceptable to a rural population. The paper presents the findings from the individual choices as compared to the group choices, as well as the differences among the individual choices using this tool.MethodsParticipants worked in groups and as individuals to allocate stickers representing the available budget to different health topics and interventions using the CHAT tool. The allocations were recorded at each stage of the study. We calculated the median and interquartile range across study participants for the topic totals. To examine differences in individual choices, we performed Wilcoxon rank sum tests.ResultsThe results show that individual interests were mostly aligned with societal ones, and there were no statistically significant differences between the individual and group choices. However, there were some statistically significant differences between individual priorities based on demographic characteristics like age.DiscussionThe study demonstrates that giving individuals greater control and agency in designing health services packages can increase their participation in the priority setting process, align individual and community priorities, and potentially enhance the legitimacy and acceptability of priority setting. Methods that enable group level deliberation and individual level priority setting may be necessary to reconcile plurality. The paper also highlights the importance of capturing the details of public engagement processes and transparently reporting on these details to ensure valuable outcomes.Public contributionThe facilitator of the CHAT groups was a member from the community and underwent training from the research team. The fieldworkers were also from the community and were trained and paid to capture the data. The participants were all members of the rural community- the study represents their priorities.
| S-EPMC10726206 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver the past decade, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) has implemented multicomponent interventions to increase the uptake of sex and gender in grant applications. Interventions included mandatory reporting on applicant forms, development of resources for applicants and evaluators, and grant review requirements. Here, we aim to inform science policy implementation by describing the 10-year outcomes and lessons learned from these interventions.MethodsThis is a prospective longitudinal study. The population is all applicants across 15 investigator-initiated CIHR competitions from 2011 to 2019 and grant evaluators from 2018 to 2019. Quantitative data were derived from applicants' and grant evaluators' mandatory reporting of sex and gender integration in the grants management database. The application was the unit of analysis. Trends in sex and gender uptake in applications were plotted over time, stratified by research area. Univariate logistic regression was used to assess associations between the sex of the applicant and the uptake of sex and gender, and the latter with funding success. Qualitative review of the quality and appropriateness of evaluators' comments informed the development of discipline-specific training to peer review committee members. Feedback was compiled from a subset of evaluators on the perceived usefulness of the educational materials using a brief questionnaire.ResultsSince 2011, 39,390 applications were submitted. The proportion that reported integration of sex rose from 22 to 83%, and gender from 12 to 33%. Population health research applications paid the greatest attention to gender (82%). Across every competition, applications with female principal investigators were more likely to integrate sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-1.63) and gender (OR 2.40, 95% CI 2.29-2.51) than those who identified as male. Since 2018, applications that scored highly for the integration of sex (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.50-2.50) and gender (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.83-3.50) were more likely to be funded. Qualitative observations revealed persistent conflation of the terms sex and gender. Eighty-six percent of evaluators appreciated the tailored discipline-specific coaching.ConclusionsA number of policy interventions improved sex and gender uptake in grant applications, with higher success rates observed over time for applications that integrated sex and gender. Other funders' action plans around sex and gender integration may be informed from our experiences of the timing, type and targets of the different interventions, specifically those directed at evaluators.
| S-EPMC8205200 | biostudies-literature