Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
9,809,924
result(s) for
"Research on research"
Sort by:
UFO : the inside story of the US government's search for alien life here - and out there
This thrilling story of science, the Cold War, Nazi research, atomic anxieties, secret spy planes and the space race draws on original archival research, declassified documents and interviews to present a narrative history of humanity's hunt for alien life, including the military and CIA's secret, decades-long quest to study UFOs.
Book
Reporting guidelines used varying methodology to develop recommendations
We investigated the developing methods of reporting guidelines in the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network's database.
In October 2018, we screened all records and excluded those not describing reporting guidelines from further investigation. Twelve researchers performed duplicate data extraction on bibliometrics, scope, development methods, presentation, and dissemination of all publications. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the findings.
Of the 405 screened records, 262 described a reporting guidelines development. The number of reporting guidelines increased over the past 3 decades, from 5 in the 1990s and 63 in the 2000s to 157 in the 2010s. Development groups included 2–151 people. Literature appraisal was performed during the development of 56% of the reporting guidelines; 33% used surveys to gather external opinion on items to report; and 42% piloted or sought external feedback on their recommendations. Examples of good reporting for all reporting items were presented in 30% of the reporting guidelines. Eighteen percent of the reviewed publications included some level of spin.
Reporting guidelines have been developed with varying methodology. Reporting guideline developers should use existing guidance and take an evidence-based approach, rather than base their recommendations on expert opinion of limited groups of individuals.
•Many reporting guideline developers do not follow current available guidance.•Reporting guideline developers should take an evidence-based approach.•Our findings can support strategies to promote adherence to reporting guidelines.•A strict definition of reporting guideline could help users fulfil their needs.
Journal Article
We are all whalers : the plight of whales and our responsibility
\"Marine scientist Michael J. Moore says we are all whalers, but we don't have to be. Eating fish leads to North Atlantic right whales' entanglement and death. Buying goods made around the world requires global shipping routes, which do not accurately consider right whale breeding and feeding sites, leading to collision. To explain this, Moore conveys to readers scenes from over thirty years' worth of fieldwork, performing whale necropsies for animals stranded on beaches, working as an independent researcher alongside whalers using explosive harpoons, and tracking injured pregnant whales to deliver antibiotics. Despite these sometimes disturbing experiences, Moore has written a hopeful book. He uses these stories to show we can change and to tell us how; the technology for rope-less fishing and tracking whale migrations already exist to protect both right whales and the people who depend on shipping and fishing for their livelihoods\"-- Provided by publisher.
BOOK
A tutorial on methodological studies: the what, when, how and why
Background
Methodological studies – studies that evaluate the design, analysis or reporting of other research-related reports – play an important role in health research. They help to highlight issues in the conduct of research with the aim of improving health research methodology, and ultimately reducing research waste.
Main body
We provide an overview of some of the key aspects of methodological studies such as what they are, and when, how and why they are done. We adopt a “frequently asked questions” format to facilitate reading this paper and provide multiple examples to help guide researchers interested in conducting methodological studies. Some of the topics addressed include: is it necessary to publish a study protocol? How to select relevant research reports and databases for a methodological study? What approaches to data extraction and statistical analysis should be considered when conducting a methodological study? What are potential threats to validity and is there a way to appraise the quality of methodological studies?
Conclusion
Appropriate reflection and application of basic principles of epidemiology and biostatistics are required in the design and analysis of methodological studies. This paper provides an introduction for further discussion about the conduct of methodological studies.
Journal Article
The Serengeti rules : the quest to discover how life works and why it matters
\"How does life work? How does nature produce the right numbers of zebras and lions on the African savanna, or fish in the ocean? How do our bodies produce the right numbers of cells in our organs and bloodstream? In [this book], ... Sean Carroll tells the stories of the pioneering scientists who sought the answers to such simple yet profoundly important questions, and shows how their discoveries matter for our health and the health of the planet we depend upon\"--Dust jacket flap.
Book
Towards a Research Agenda for Promoting Responsible Research Practices
This opinion piece aims to inform future research funding programs on responsible research practices (RRP) based on three specific objectives: (1) to give a sketch of the current international discussion on responsible research practices (RRPs); (2) to give an overview of current initiatives and already obtained results regarding RRP; and (3) to give an overview of potential future needs for research on RRP. In this opinion piece, we have used seven iterative methodological steps (including literature review, ranking, and sorting exercises) to create the proposed research agenda. We identified six main themes that we believe need attention in future research: (1) responsible evaluation of research and researchers, (2) the influence of open science and transparency on RRP, (3) research on responsible mentoring, supervision, and role modeling, (4) the effect of education and training on RRP, (5) checking for reproducibility, and (6) responsible and fair peer review. These themes have in common that they address aspects of research that are mostly on the level of the scientific system, more than on the level of the individual researcher. Some current initiatives are already gathering substantial empirical evidence to start filling these gaps. We believe that with sufficient support from all relevant stakeholders, more progress can be made.
Journal Article
The majority of reporting guidelines are not developed with the Delphi method: a systematic review of reporting guidelines
Previous guidance of reporting guidelines recommends incorporating the Delphi method to integrate the opinions of experts for consensus when developing reporting guidelines. The purpose of this study was to clarify whether reporting guidelines typically use the Delphi method, what factors may be associated with the use of Delphi, and the reporting quality of Delphi.
We included all reporting guidelines (n = 244) in the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency of health Research (EQUATOR) Network published after January 1, 2011. We assessed the trends and factors associated with conducting Delphi and the reporting quality of Delphi against current reporting guidelines.
Of 244, 62 (25%) used Delphi for consensus building. The proportion of reporting guidelines that used Delphi was less than 10% in 2011 and 2012 and 29% in 2019. The year of publication, number of authors, and multiple and simultaneous publications were associated with the use of Delphi. The reporting quality of the Delphi method was moderate in most reporting guidelines developed with Delphi.
The use of Delphi in reporting guidelines is insufficient. Users and reviewers should carefully appraise the consensus building in the guidelines.
We applied a prespecified protocol to conduct this study (Banno M, Tsujimoto Y, Kataoka Y. Reporting quality of the Delphi technique in reporting guidelines: a protocol for a systematic analysis of the EQUATOR Network Library. BMJ Open. 2019; 9:e024942). The study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) (Trial registration number: UMIN000032685, URL: https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000037271).
Journal Article
Marine scientific research and the regulation of modern ocean data collection activities under UNCLOS
\"The scope of marine scientific research has long been debated due to a lack of definition of the term in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The introduction of new forms and methods of ocean data collection adds another layer of legal uncertainty in this field. Marine Scientific Research and the Regulation of Modern Ocean Data Collection Activities Under UNCLOS thus strives to identify the possible limits of the existing legal framework, mainly the UNCLOS marine scientific research regime, and the ways in which the identified gaps can be bridged. In the analysis, Chuxiao Yu carries out two case studies: one on access to marine genetic resources and the other on operational oceanographic activities\"-- Provided by publisher.
BOOK
Maximising value from a United Kingdom Biomedical Research Centre: study protocol
Background
Biomedical Research Centres (BRCs) are partnerships between healthcare organisations and universities in England. Their mission is to generate novel treatments, technologies, diagnostics and other interventions that increase the country’s international competitiveness, to rapidly translate these innovations into benefits for patients, and to improve efficiency and reduce waste in healthcare. As NIHR Oxford BRC (Oxford BRC) enters its third 5-year funding period, we seek to (1) apply the evidence base on how best to support the various partnerships in this large, multi-stakeholder research system and (2) research how these partnerships play out in a new, ambitious programme of translational research.
Methods
Organisational case study, informed by the principles of action research. A cross-cutting theme, ‘Partnerships for Health, Wealth and Innovation’ has been established with multiple sub-themes (drug development, device development, business support and commercialisation, research methodology and statistics, health economics, bioethics, patient and public involvement and engagement, knowledge translation, and education and training) to support individual BRC research themes and generate cross-theme learning.
The ‘Partnerships’ theme will support the BRC’s goals by facilitating six types of partnership (with patients and citizens, clinical services, industry, across the NIHR infrastructure, across academic disciplines, and with policymakers and payers) through a range of engagement platforms and activities. We will develop a longitudinal progress narrative centred around exemplar case studies, and apply theoretical models from innovation studies (Triple Helix), sociology of science (Mode 2 knowledge production) and business studies (Value Co-creation). Data sources will be the empirical research studies within individual BRC research themes (who will apply separately for NHS ethics approval), plus documentary analysis and interviews and ethnography with research stakeholders. This study has received ethics clearance through the University of Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee.
Discussion
We anticipate that this work will add significant value to Oxford BRC. We predict accelerated knowledge translation; closer alignment of the innovation process with patient priorities and the principles of responsible, ethical research; reduction in research waste; new knowledge about the governance and activities of multi-stakeholder research partnerships and the contexts in which they operate; and capacity-building that reflects the future needs of a rapidly-evolving health research system.
Journal Article