Project description:The KEP was launched in 2012 to produce 50 epigenomic sets on Korean chronic diseases related target cells with the participation on Internationsl Human Epigenome Consortium(IHEC) of which focus is constructing 1000 reference epigenome map on 250 human cell type. The objective of the KEP was to provide a comprehensive epigenomic map of Korean chronic disease-related target tissues. Single cells were isolated from the pancreas, fat and kidney. Islet, ductal, acinar, and beta cells from the pancreas were purified into a single homogenous cell type using flow-assisted cell sorting technique. Adipocytes and pre-adipocytes were purified from fat, using Percoll gradient centrifugation technique. Mesangial, distal tubule, proximal tubule, podocytes, and collecting duct cells from the kidney were collected using mechanical sieving and immunostaining methods. Each cell type was derived from normal tissue or those with diabetes, obesity, or chronic kidney disease. Sixty reference epigenome datasets of pancreatic, fat, kidney cells were produced. Cell types such as the islets, and beta from the pancreas, adipocytes, pre-adipocytes from fat tissue, podocyte, mesangial, tubules from kidney were used for primary target to produce a Korean metabolic reference epigenome. And the bisulfite converted-whole genome sequencing, Infinium 450k DNA methylation bead array, mRNA, miRNA-Sequencing were performed to produce a comprehensive epigenomic map. The aim of roadmap reports is preparation of Long-term and Mid-term Technology Roadmaps for Korean Human Epigenome Project towards a competitive execution of International Epigenome Project and successful expansion of the research outcomes. Roadmap reports reviewed on recent technological development of DNA methylation and histone modification analysis, emerging new trends in epigenome medicine, plans for hardware and software analysis systems aimed to epigenome analysis, medical expert opinion on target cells and isolation scheme, bioinformatics expert opinion on analytical tools, new ideas for a putative epigenome studies, trends in single cell epigenome analysis. In conclusion, roadmap report suggested several projects for the future KNIH epigenome research in collaboration with epigenome research group. These are including refocusing the goals of KNIH-driven research in identification of disease mechanism, development of new studies on GWAS-EWA, higher priority on the epigenomic studies of human primary cells, establishment of collaborative relationship with tissue banking centers, establishment of mapping centers and data analysis portals, establishment of Korean Epigenome Research Consortium, establishment of steering committee governing both research and funding, launching of additional funding for epigenomic researches.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The mechanisms and pathways to impacts from public health research in the UK have not been widely studied. Through the lens of one funder (NIHR), our aims are to map the diversity of public health research, in terms of funding mechanisms, disciplinary contributions, and public health impacts, identify examples of impacts, and pathways to impact that existing reporting mechanisms may not otherwise have captured, and provide illustrations of how public health researchers perceive the generation of non-academic impact from their work. METHODS:A total of 1386 projects were identified as 'public health research' by the NIHR and listed in the NIHR Public Health Overview database (2000-2016). From these, a subset of 857 projects were matched as potentially having begun reporting impacts via an external data-gathering platform (Researchfish). Data on the 857 projects were analyzed quantitatively, and nine projects were selected to investigate further through semi-structured interviews with principal investigators. Two workshops took place to validate emerging and final findings and facilitate analysis. RESULTS:In addition to the NIHR School for Public Health Research and the NIHR Public Health Research Programme, 89% of projects contained in the NIHR Public Health Overview portfolio as 'public health research' are funded via other NIHR research programmes, suggesting significant diversity in disciplines contributing to public health research and outcomes. The pathways to impact observed in our in-depth case studies include contributing to debates on what constitutes appropriate evidence for national policy change, acknowledging local 'unintended' impacts, building trusted relationships with stakeholders across health and non-health sectors and actors, collaborating with local authorities, and using non-academic dissemination channels. CONCLUSIONS:Public health as a discipline contributes substantially to impact beyond academia. To support the diversity of these impacts, we need to recognise localized smaller-scale impacts, and the difference in types of evidence required for community and local authority-based impacts. This will also require building capacity and resources to enable impact to take place from public health research. Finally, support is required for engagement with local authorities and working with non-health sectors that contribute to health outcomes.

Project description:ObjectiveScientific authorship is a vital marker of achievement in academic careers and gender equity is a key performance metric in research. However, there is little understanding of gender equity in publications in biomedical research centres funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). This study assesses the gender parity in scientific authorship of biomedical research.DesignDescriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective bibliometric study.SettingNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).DataData comprised 2409 publications that were either accepted or published between April 2012 and March 2017. The publications were classified as basic science studies, clinical studies (both trial and non-trial studies) and other studies (comments, editorials, systematic reviews, reviews, opinions, book chapters, meeting reports, guidelines and protocols).Main outcome measuresGender of authors, defined as a binary variable comprising either male or female categories, in six authorship categories: first author, joint first authors, first corresponding author, joint corresponding authors, last author and joint last authors.ResultsPublications comprised 39% clinical research (n=939), 27% basic research (n=643) and 34% other types of research (n=827). The proportion of female authors as first author (41%), first corresponding authors (34%) and last author (23%) was statistically significantly lower than male authors in these authorship categories (p<0.001). Of total joint first authors (n=458), joint corresponding authors (n=169) and joint last authors (n=229), female only authors comprised statistically significant (p<0.001) smaller proportions, that is, 15% (n=69), 29% (n=49) and 10% (n=23) respectively, compared with male only authors in these joint authorship categories. There was a statistically significant association between gender of the last author with gender of the first author (p<0.001), first corresponding author (p<0.001) and joint last author (p<0.001). The mean journal impact factor (JIF) was statistically significantly higher when the first corresponding author was male compared with female (Mean JIF: 10.00 vs 8.77, p=0.020); however, the JIF was not statistically different when there were male and female authors as first authors and last authors.ConclusionsAlthough the proportion of female authors is significantly lower than the proportion of male authors in all six categories of authorship analysed, the proportions of male and female last authors are comparable to their respective proportions as principal investigators in the BRC. These findings suggest positive trends and the NIHR Oxford BRC doing very well in gender parity in the senior (last) authorship category. Male corresponding authors are more likely to publish articles in prestigious journals with high impact factor while both male and female authors at first and last authorship positions publish articles in equally prestigious journals.

Dataset Information

Korea National Research Institute of Health(KNIH)

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets