Distinguishing case study as a research method from case reports as a publication type.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Alpi KM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6300237 | biostudies-other | 2019 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Distinguishing case study as a research method from case reports as a publication type.
Alpi Kristine M KM Alpi Kristine M KM Evans John Jamal JJ
Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA 20190101 1
The purpose of this editorial is to distinguish between case reports and case studies. In health, case reports are familiar ways of sharing events or efforts of intervening with single patients with previously unreported features. As a qualitative methodology, case study research encompasses a great deal more complexity than a typical case report and often incorporates multiple streams of data combined in creative ways. The depth and richness of case study description helps readers understand th ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionCase reports on acupuncture-related adverse events (AEs) have been consistently published in the literature. This review aims to assess the current publication status of case reports on acupuncture-related AEs and evaluate their reporting quality in order to identify areas for improvement.MethodsThis study is a systematic review (SR) of case reports. Studies describing cases for acupuncture-related AEs between 2010 and 2023 (until July) were searched in PubMed, Embase, and local databases (China and Korea), as well as by hand-searching references included in published relevant SRs. A bibliometric analysis was conducted to examine the publication trends of the included literature. The appropriateness of the acupuncture described in the cases, the causality assessment between AEs and acupuncture treatment, and the presence of necessary items from the CAse REport guidelines (CARE) checklist were narratively analyzed.ResultsA total of 169 case reports were included in this review. Over the past decade, an average of 12 case reports on acupuncture-related AEs were published annually. However, only 38.2% of the articles provided sufficient information to determine the appropriateness of the acupuncture treatment used in the reported cases, and considerable numbers of the included case reports did not suggest enough information for the assessment of a causal relationship. The majority of cases did not report the timeline (n = 164), patient perspectives (n = 157), and informed consent (n = 121) items from the CARE checklist.DiscussionAcupuncture-related AEs persist in being frequently reported in the literature. Nonetheless, the information concerning acupuncture and causality assessment within these publications is still found to be insufficient. The development of reporting guidelines for future case reports on acupuncture-related AEs is anticipated to promote an academic environment conducive to more comprehensive reporting.
| S-EPMC10569964 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The clinical traits of Kufs disease (KD) type B (CLN13), an adult-onset neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis (NCL), are well established according to the neurological features of the cases reported with mutations in CTSF. The neuroradiological characteristics of this uncommon disease have not yet been outlined. CASE PRESENTATION:We hereby report the brain MRI features in two Caucasian women who carried homozygous mutations in CTSF, providing a short review of the neuroradiological findings of other common NCLs. Together with a brain volume reduction, the two cases showed white matter hyperintensities and thinning of the corpus callosum at onset of the cognitive decline. CONCLUSION:White matter hyperintensities associated with volume reduction of the corpus callosum may be present at the beginning of the behavioural changes in CLN13 and represent further clues for searching mutations in CTSF.
| S-EPMC4491254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Researchers in Europe are increasingly assessed by their publication metrics. To uncover the effect of quantitative assessment on the publication strategies of clinical researchers in Denmark, we interviewed 9 senior researchers at the Department of Clinical Research at the University of Southern Denmark with the lowest and highest values for a, as defined by Hirsch. Our aim is to investigate the importance of these metrics to their academic careers: h-index, number of publications, number of citations, international collaborations, local collaborations, field specific journal publishing and high journal impact factor publishing. To validate our findings we compared their publication record to their statistically analyzed stated publication strategy. Our results indicate two styles of publication strategy used by these senior researchers. Researchers with Low a engage in local collaborations, disseminate knowledge in local media and publish in field specific journals, while researchers with High a engage in international collaborations, invest significant time in publishing in the highest impact journals in their field, and acquire a greater number of citations. Both publication strategies can lead to a successful academic career, yet we have an indication through the h5-index that the practices of the High a group are more likely to nudge the h-index.
| S-EPMC6992234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To analyse the research activity and publication output of surgical trainee research collaboratives in the UK. SETTING:Surgical trainee research collaboratives in the UK. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 24 collaboratives were included in this study from 33 identified organisations. We excluded one group that focused purely on systematic review of the literature and eight groups for which we could not identify suitable data sources (website or trainee committee contact). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME:Primary data-points were identified for each collaborative including surgical subspeciality, numbers and types of projects. For published articles, secondary outcomes including study population size, journal impact factor, number of citations and evidence level were collected. RESULTS:A total of 24 collaboratives met our inclusion criteria with a portfolio of 80 projects. The project types included audit (46%), randomised clinical trial (16%), surveys (16%), cohort studies (10%), systematic reviews (2.5%) and other or unidentifiable (9.5%). A total of 35 publications were identified of which just over half (54%) were original research articles. The median size of studied population was 540 patients with a range from 108 to 3138. The published works provided a varied compilation of evidence levels ranging from 1b (individual RCT) to 5 (expert opinion) with a median level of 2b (individual cohort study). The West Midlands Research Collaborative had the highest number of publications (13), citations (130) and h-index (5). CONCLUSIONS:The experience of UK-based trainee research collaboratives provides useful insights for trainees and policymakers in global healthcare systems on the value and feasibility of trainee-driven high quality surgical research.
| S-EPMC4746473 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the time to publication of primary research and evidence syntheses funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme published as a monograph in Health Technology Assessment and as a journal article in the wider biomedical literature.Study designRetrospective cohort study.SettingPrimary research and evidence synthesis projects funded by the HTA Programme were included in the cohort if they were registered in the NIHR research programmes database and was planned to submit the draft final report for publication in Health Technology Assessment on or before 9 December 2011.Main outcome measuresThe median time to publication and publication at 30 months in Health Technology Assessment and in an external journal were determined by searching the NIHR research programmes database and HTA Programme website.ResultsOf 458 included projects, 184 (40.2%) were primary research projects and 274 (59.8%) were evidence syntheses. A total of 155 primary research projects had a completion date; the median time to publication was 23 months (26.5 and 35.5 months to publish a monograph and to publish in an external journal, respectively) and 69% were published within 30 months. The median time to publication of HTA-funded trials (n=126) was 24 months and 67.5% were published within 30 months. Among the evidence syntheses with a protocol online date (n=223), the median time to publication was 25.5 months (28 months to publication as a monograph), but only 44.4% of evidence synthesis projects were published in an external journal. 65% of evidence synthesis studies had been published within 30.0 months.ConclusionsResearch funded by the HTA Programme publishes promptly. The importance of Health Technology Assessment was highlighted as the median time to publication was 9 months shorter for a monograph than an external journal article.
| S-EPMC3845050 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEthnographic approaches offer a method and a way of thinking about implementation. This manuscript applies a specific case study method to describe the impact of the longitudinal interplay between implementation stakeholders. Growing out of science and technology studies (STS) and drawing on the latent archaeological sensibilities implied by ethnographic methods, the STS case-study is a tool for implementors to use when a piece of material culture is an essential component of an innovation.MethodsWe conducted an ethnographic process evaluation of the clinical implementation of tele-critical care (Tele-CC) services in the Department of Veterans Affairs. We collected fieldnotes and conducted participant observation at virtual and in-person education and planning events (n = 101 h). At Go-Live and 6-months post-implementation, we conducted site visits to the Tele-CC hub and 3 partnered ICUs. We led semi-structured interviews with ICU staff at Go-Live (43 interviews with 65 participants) and with ICU and Tele-CC staff 6-months post-implementation (44 interviews with 67 participants). We used verification strategies, including methodological coherence, appropriate sampling, collecting and analyzing data concurrently, and thinking theoretically, to ensure the reliability and validity of our data collection and analysis process.ResultsThe STS case-study helped us realize that we must think differently about how a Tele-CC clinician could be noticed moving from communal to intimate space. To understand how perceptions of surveillance impacted staff acceptance, we mapped the materials through which surveillance came to matter in the stories staff told about cameras, buttons, chimes, motors, curtains, and doorbells.ConclusionsSTS case-studies contribute to the literature on longitudinal qualitive research (LQR) in implementation science, including pen portraits and periodic reflections. Anchored by the material, the heterogeneity of an STS case-study generates questions and encourages exploring differences. Begun early enough, the STS case-study method, like periodic reflections, can serve to iteratively inform data collection for researchers and implementors. The next step is to determine systematically how material culture can reveal implementation barriers and direct attention to potential solutions that address tacit, deeply rooted challenges to innovations in practice and technology.
| S-EPMC7866713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examine gender differences among the six PhD student cohorts 2004-2009 at the California Institute of Technology using a new dataset that includes information on trainees and their advisors and enables us to construct detailed measures of teams at the advisor level. We focus on the relationship between graduate student publications and: (1) their gender; (2) the gender of the advisor, (3) the gender pairing between the advisor and the student and (4) the gender composition of the team. We find that female graduate students co-author on average 8.5% fewer papers than men; that students writing with female advisors publish 7.7% more. Of particular note is that gender pairing matters: male students working with female advisors publish 10.0% more than male students working with male advisors; women students working with male advisors publish 8.5% less. There is no difference between the publishing patterns of male students working with male advisors and female students working with female advisors. The results persist and are magnified when we focus on the quality of the published articles, as measured by average Impact Factor, instead of number of articles. We find no evidence that the number of publications relates to the gender composition of the team. Although the gender effects are reasonably modest, past research on processes of positive feedback and cumulative advantage suggest that the difference will grow, not shrink, over the careers of these recent cohorts.
| S-EPMC4711938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the frequency of discrepancies in retracted reports of clinical trials with those in adjacent unretracted reports in the same journal.DesignBlinded case-control study.SettingJournals in PubMed.Population50 manuscripts, classified on PubMed as retracted clinical trials, paired with 50 adjacent unretracted manuscripts from the same journals. Reports were randomly selected from PubMed in December 2012, with no restriction on publication date. Controls were the preceding unretracted clinical trial published in the same journal. All traces of retraction were removed. Three scientists, blinded to the retraction status of individual reports, reviewed all 100 trial reports for discrepancies. Discrepancies were pooled and cross checked before being counted into prespecified categories. Only then was the retraction status unblinded for analysis.Main outcome measureTotal number of discrepancies (defined as mathematically or logically contradictory statements) in each clinical trial report.ResultsOf 479 discrepancies found in the 100 trial reports, 348 were in the 50 retracted reports and 131 in the 50 unretracted reports. On average, individual retracted reports had a greater number of discrepancies than unretracted reports (median 4 (interquartile range 2-8.75) v 0 (0-5); P<0.001). Papers with a discrepancy were significantly more likely to be retracted than those without a discrepancy (odds ratio 5.7 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 14.5); P<0.001). In particular, three types of discrepancy arose significantly more frequently in retracted than unretracted reports: factual discrepancies (P=0.002), arithmetical errors (P=0.01), and missed P values (P=0.02). Results from a retrospective analysis indicated that citations and journal impact factor were unlikely to affect the result.ConclusionsDiscrepancies in published trial reports should no longer be assumed to be unimportant. Scientists, blinded to retraction status and with no specialist skill in the field, identify significantly more discrepancies in retracted than unretracted reports of clinical trials. Discrepancies could be an early and accessible signal of unreliability in clinical trial reports.
| S-EPMC4575810 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Dietary supplement use is increasing despite lack of evidence of benefits, or evidence of harm. Press releases issued by the supplements industry might contribute to this situation by using 'spin' (strategies to hype or denigrate findings) to distort the results of clinical studies. We assessed press releases issued in response to publication of clinical studies on dietary supplements. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analyzed 47 supplements industry press releases and 91 non-industry press releases and news stories, generated in response to 46 clinical studies of dietary supplements published between 1/1/2005 and 5/31/2013. The primary outcome was 'spin' content and direction. We also assessed disposition towards use of dietary supplements, reporting of study information, and dissemination of industry press releases. More supplements industry press releases (100%) contained 'spin' than non-industry media documents (55%, P<0.001). Hyping 'spin' scores were higher in industry than non-industry media documents for studies reporting benefit of supplements (median 'spin' score 3.3, 95% CI 1.0-5.5 vs 0.5, 0-1.0; P<0.001). Denigratory 'spin' scores were higher in industry than non-industry media documents for studies reporting no effect (6.0, 5.0-7.0 vs 0, 0-0; P<0.001) or harm (6.0, 5.5-7.5 vs 0, 0-0.5; P<0.001) from a supplement. Industry press releases advocated supplement use in response to >90% of studies that reported no benefit, or harm, of the supplement. Industry press releases less frequently reported study outcomes, sample size, and estimates of effect size than non-industry media documents (all P<0.001), particularly for studies that reported no benefit of supplements. Industry press releases were referenced by 148 news stories on the websites of 6 organizations that inform manufacturers, retailers and consumers of supplements. CONCLUSIONS: Dietary supplements industry press releases issued in response to clinical research findings are characterized by 'spin' that hypes results that are favourable to supplement use and denigrates results that are not.
| S-EPMC4081644 | biostudies-literature