A Pilot and Feasibility Study on a Mindfulness-Based Intervention Adapted for LGBTQ+ Adolescents

(1) Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and other gender and sexual minority-identified (LGBTQ+) adolescents face mental and physical health disparities compared to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) may be a potential method to intervene upon health disparities in this population. This pilot study explores the initial acceptability and feasibility, along with the descriptive health changes of an online MBI, Learning to Breathe-Queer (L2B-Q), which was adapted to meet the needs of LGBTQ+ adolescents. (2) Methods: Twenty adolescents completed baseline and post-intervention assessments of mental health, stress-related health behaviors, physical stress, and LGBTQ+ identity indicators. In addition, the adolescents participated in a post-intervention focus group providing qualitative feedback regarding the acceptability of L2B-Q. (3) Results: L2B-Q demonstrated feasible recruitment and assessment retention, acceptability of content with areas for improvement in delivery processes, and safety/tolerability. From baseline to post-intervention, adolescents reported decreased depression and anxiety and improved intuitive eating, physical activity, and LGBTQ+ identity self-awareness with moderate-to-large effects. (4) Conclusions: These findings underscore the need and the benefits of adapted interventions among LGBTQ+ youth. L2B-Q warrants continued optimization and testing within the LGBTQ+ adolescent community.

Mapping the relationship and influence of school internal factors with an eye towards students' science academic outcomes

The present research sought to explore the relationship between school internal factors and their influence on students' academic outcomes in science subjects at the secondary school level in Punjab, Pakistan. A quantitative survey method was employed, utilizing a self-administered questionnaire to collect data on school internal factors, including laboratories, curriculum, and teacher quality, and students' science academic outcomes. The study sampled 210 secondary schools across Punjab, encompassing 630 science teachers specializing in biology, physics, and chemistry. Three hypotheses were formulated and tested. The constructs' underlying structure was examined through both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, using the PLS-PM Path Modeling approach to support these analyses. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) revealed that the measurement model demonstrated internal consistency. The path analysis results indicated that laboratories, curriculum, and teacher quality significantly and positively influence students' academic outcome in science subjects. The study concludes that enhancing the resourcefulness of science educators is crucial, particularly through the provision of support materials for science teaching and learning. This support enables students to engage in experimental learning, develop critical thinking skills, and explore innovative approaches to problem-solving. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the importance of regularly reviewing and updating the secondary school curriculum to ensure its quality. The recruitment of certified teachers with advanced degrees in relevant fields and the provision of ongoing professional development for educators are also recommended to improve academic outcomes in science.

Investigating the links between questionable research practices, scientific norms and organisational culture

BACKGROUND

This study investigates the determinants of engagement in questionable research practices (QRPs), focusing on both individual-level factors (such as scholarly field, commitment to scientific norms, gender, contract type, and career stage) and institution-level factors (including industry type, researchers' perceptions of their research culture, and awareness of institutional policies on research integrity).

METHODS

Using a multi-level modelling approach, we analyse data from an international survey of researchers working across disciplinary fields to estimate the effect of these factors on QRP engagement.

RESULTS

Our findings indicate that contract type, career stage, academic field, adherence to scientific norms and gender significantly predict QRP engagement. At the institution level, factors such as being outside of a collegial culture and experiencing harmful publication pressure, and the presence of safeguards against integrity breaches have small associations. Only a minimal amount of variance in QRP engagement is attributable to differences between institutions and countries.

CONCLUSIONS

We discuss the implications of these findings for developing effective interventions to reduce QRPs, highlighting the importance of addressing both individual and institutional factors in efforts to foster research integrity.

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Background

The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem.

Aims

The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ' What does the evidence say about the 'problem' with 'poor' research culture, what are the benefits of 'good' research culture, and what does 'good' look like?'

Methods

A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022.

Results

1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability.

Conclusions

There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals' well-being, career progression and performance.

"I never thought of it as payment": Qualitative evaluation of workshops with advanced practice registered nurses on pharmaceutical industry payment reporting

BACKGROUND

With the expansion of professional autonomy and prescriptive authority of advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), interactions with industry are under greater scrutiny. As of July 1, 2021, pharmaceutical and medical device companies must publicly report all payments to APRNs through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Open Payments website.

PURPOSE

To gauge APRNs' familiarity with, and perceptions of the Open Payments database and discuss whether and how APRNs should respond.

METHODOLOGY

Virtual workshops consisting of a didactic presentation and interactive exercises with APRNs recruited through professional networks, associations, and conferences. Transcripts were analyzed using a qualitative interpretive approach, grounded in an everyday ethics theoretical framework.

RESULTS

Thirty-six APRN clinicians, students, and faculty participated in nine workshops. Seeing sponsored meals reported in Open Payments as "payments" prompted participants to see familiar interactions in a new way. Participants valued the enhanced transparency as a way to identify risks of bias but were concerned that reporting might undermine public trust in APRNs. Emphasizing awareness as a precursor to action, participants desired greater preparation for ensuring independence in practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The importance of tackling the ethical issues associated with industry interactions is heightened within the context of an existing climate of distrust within health care. However, many participants were concerned about the effects of transparency on public trust rather than how APRNs individually or collectively can be more trustworthy.

IMPLICATIONS

Open Payments can serve as a useful tool to catalyze broader conversations about ethics, integrity in decision making, and health policy advocacy.

Effects of organizational climate on employee job satisfaction and psychological well-being: the role of technological influence in Chinese higher education

BACKGROUND

In the Chinese education sector, educators' job satisfaction (JoS) is considered critical to educational quality and student outcomes. One critical area of inquiry is the organizational climate (OC) and its impact on JoS, and psychological well-being (PW), with technological influence (TI) moderating effect.

PURPOSE

The current study has tried to look at the exact relationship among OC, PW, and JoS for educators working in the Chinese higher education setting. It also discusses the moderating role of TI on OC and JoS.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY

This study uses a quantitative cross-sectional survey design, grounded in post-positivism assumptions. Data collection involved sampling 690 respondents in the Chinese higher education setting via WeChat.

FINDINGS

The study methodology part included a pre-test, translation validation, demographic characteristics of participants, and results that showed a significant positive influence on JoS for PW and OC. The study also confirms the positive effect of PW on JoS. Moreover, the mediating role of PW within the OC-JoS link is also supported. Furthermore, TI positively moderates the OC-JoS relationship, thus it implies a supportive role of technology in enhancing the educators' satisfaction. The model indicated that OC, PW, and TI explain 72.4% of the variation in JoS.

CONCLUSION

In this respect, the findings offer some practical insights for educational institutions and policymakers to facilitate enhancement strategies for OC, thus recognizing its influence on JoS and the well-being of educators. Understanding how technology can play a moderating role presents the strategic occasion to utilize technological tools for a more satisfying work environment.

Modernizing authorship criteria and transparency practices to facilitate open and equitable team science

Background: The rapid acceleration of authorship inflation-increasing numbers of authors per publication in collaborative research-has rendered the traditional "substantial contributions" criterion for authorship and the lack of transparency in author contributions increasingly problematic.Methods and results: To address these challenges, a revamped approach to authorship is proposed, replacing the rigid requirement of "substantial contributions" with a more flexible, project-specific criterion of "sufficient contributions," as determined and justified by the authors for each project. This change more accurately reflects and accommodates the proliferation of scientific collaboration ("team science" or "group science"). It broadens the scope and granularity of roles deserving of authorship by integrating the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) and Method Reporting with Initials for Transparency (MeRIT) systems. It mandates in-text documentation of who did what (e.g., who collected what data) and moves beyond the typical binary (all-or-none) classification by assigning a gradated contribution level to each author for each role. Contributions can be denoted using an ordinal scale-either coarse (e.g., lead, equal, and supporting) or fine-grained (e.g., minimal, slight, moderate, substantial, extensive, and full). To support the implementation of the revamped approach, an authorship policy template is provided.Conclusions: Adopting proportional, role-specific credit allocation and explicit documentation of contributions fosters a more transparent, equitable, and trustworthy scientific environment.

Absence of Race/Ethnicity Reporting in Clinical Trials of True Minimally Invasive Surgical Therapies for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent of racial reporting and enrollment in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for the office-based treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for RCTs assessing 6 office-based MISTs: transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT), prostatic artery embolization, prostatic urethral lift, temporary implantable nitinol device, water vapor thermal therapy, and Optilume. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched up to November 3, 2023. Publications were excluded if they (1) did not address one of the aforementioned office-based MISTs for the treatment of BPH; (2) were not RCTs; (3) were an abstract or conference proceeding; or (4) were not published in English. In addition to study characteristics, data about racial reporting were collected. Two independent reviewers completed screening at title, abstract, and full-text levels, with conflicts resolved by consensus with a third reviewer.

RESULTS

A total of 61 publications representing 37 unique RCTs (n = 4027 unique patients) were reviewed, with publication years spanning from 1993 to 2023. TUMT was the most frequently studied MIST. Most publications (79%) were based solely in Europe or North America. Over 50% of the publications were multicenter trials. None of the included publications reported on race/ethnicity of study participants.

CONCLUSION

None of the 61 included publications of RCTs of office-based MISTs provided information on racial/ethnic composition of study participants. There is a staggering gap in the standardization of race/ethnicity reporting and enrollment within RCTs of MISTs. More granular data on race/ethnicity allow for better generalizability and equity.

Production of α-ketoisovalerate with whey powder by systemic metabolic engineering of Klebsiella oxytoca

BACKGROUND

Whey, which has high biochemical oxygen demand and chemical oxygen demand, is mass-produced as a major by-product of the dairying industry. Microbial fermentation using whey as the carbon source may convert this potential pollutant into value-added products. This study investigated the potential of using whey powder to produce α-ketoisovalerate, an important platform chemical.

RESULTS

Klebsiella oxytoca VKO-9, an efficient L-valine producing strain belonging to Risk Group 1 organism, was selected for the production of α-ketoisovalerate. The leucine dehydrogenase and branched-chain α-keto acid dehydrogenase, which catalyzed the reductive amination and oxidative decarboxylation of α-ketoisovalerate, respectively, were inactivated to enhance the accumulation of α-ketoisovalerate. The production of α-ketoisovalerate was also improved through overexpressing α-acetolactate synthase responsible for pyruvate polymerization and mutant acetohydroxyacid isomeroreductase related to α-acetolactate reduction. The obtained strain K. oxytoca KIV-7 produced 37.3 g/L of α-ketoisovalerate from lactose, the major utilizable carbohydrate in whey. In addition, K. oxytoca KIV-7 also produced α-ketoisovalerate from whey powder with a concentration of 40.7 g/L and a yield of 0.418 g/g.

CONCLUSION

The process introduced in this study enabled efficient α-ketoisovalerate production from low-cost substrate whey powder. Since the key genes for α-ketoisovalerate generation were integrated in genome of K. oxytoca KIV-7 and constitutively expressed, this strain is promising in stable α-ketoisovalerate fermentation and can be used as a chassis strain for α-ketoisovalerate derivatives production.

'The company is using the credibility of our profession': exploring experiences and perspectives of registered dietitians from Canada about their interactions with commercial actors using semi-structured interviews

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight into the experiences and perspectives of registered dietitians (RD) in Canada regarding their interactions with commercial actors and actions undertaken to manage these interactions.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews combined with a document analysis.

SETTING

Quebec, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

RD aged ≥ 18 years (n 18).

RESULTS

All participants reported interacting with commercial actors during their careers, such as receiving continuing education provided or sponsored by food companies. RD in Quebec perceive these interactions as either trivial or acceptable, depending on the commercial actor or interaction type. Participants discussed how certain interactions could represent a threat to the credibility and public trust in dietitians, among other risks. They also discussed the benefits of these interactions, such as the possibility for professionals to improve the food supply and public health by sharing their knowledge and expertise. Participants reported ten mechanisms used to manage interactions with commercial actors, such as following a code of ethics (individual level) and policies such as partnerships policy (institutional level). Finally, RD also stressed the need for training and more explicit and specific tools for managing interactions with commercial actors.

CONCLUSIONS

RD in Quebec, Canada, may engage with commercial actors in their profession and hold nuanced perspectives on this matter. While some measures are in place to regulate these interactions, they are neither standardised nor evaluated for their effectiveness. To maintain the public's trust in RD, promoting awareness and developing training on this issue is essential.

Cultural distance, gender and praise in peer review

Background: Understanding review comments holds significant importance within the realm of scientific discourse. This study aims to conduct an empirical analysis of factors associated with praise in peer review.Methods: The study involved manual labeling of "praise" in 952 review comments drawn from 301 articles published in the British Medical Journal, followed by regression analysis.Results: The study reveals that authors tend to receive longer praise when they share a cultural proximity with the reviewers. Additionally, it is observed that female reviewers are more inclined to provide praiseConclusions: In summary, these discoveries contribute valuable insights for the development of a constructive peer review process and the establishment of a more inclusive research culture.

Navigating the light and shadow of scientific publishing faced with machine learning and generative AI

BACKGROUND

The public release of ChatGPT in November 2022 sparked a boom and public interest in generative artificial intelligence (AI) that has led to journals and journal families hastily releasing generative AI policies, ranging from asking authors for acknowledgement or declaration to the outright banning of use.

RESULTS

Here, we briefly discuss the basics of machine learning, generative AI, and how it will affect scientific publishing. We focus especially on potential risks and benefits to the scientific community as a whole and journals specifically.

CONCLUSION

While the concerns of editors, for example about manufactured studies, are valid, some recently implemented or suggested policies will not be sustainable in the long run. The quality of generated text and code is quickly becoming so high that it will not only be impossible to detect the use of generative AI but would also mean taking a powerful tool away from researchers that can make their life easier every day.

SIGNIFICANCE

We discuss the history and current state of AI and highlight its relevance for medical publishing and pain research. We provide guidance on how to act now to increase good scientific practice in the world of ChatGPT and call for a task force focusing on improving publishing pain research with use of generative AI.

Equity in Clinical Care and Research Involving Persons with Disorders of Consciousness

People with disorders of consciousness (DoC) are characteristically unable to synchronously participate in decision-making about clinical care or research. The inability to self-advocate exacerbates preexisting socioeconomic and geographic disparities, which include the wide variability observed across individuals, hospitals, and countries in access to acute care, expertise, and sophisticated diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic interventions. Concerns about equity for people with DoC are particularly notable when they lack a surrogate decision-maker (legally referred to as "unrepresented" or "unbefriended"). Decisions about both short-term and long-term life-sustaining treatment typically rely on neuroprognostication and individual patient preferences that carry additional ethical considerations for people with DoC, as even individuals with well thought out advance directives cannot anticipate every possible situation to guide such decisions. Further challenges exist with the inclusion of people with DoC in research because consent must be completed (in most circumstances) through a surrogate, which excludes those who are unrepresented and may discourage investigators from exploring questions related to this population. In this article, the Curing Coma Campaign Ethics Working Group reviews equity considerations in clinical care and research involving persons with DoC in the following domains: (1) access to acute care and expertise, (2) access to diagnostics and therapeutics, (3) neuroprognostication, (4) medical decision-making for unrepresented people, (5) end-of-life decision-making, (6) access to postacute rehabilitative care, (7) access to research, (8) inclusion of unrepresented people in research, and (9) remuneration and reciprocity for research participation. The goal of this discussion is to advance equitable, harmonized, guideline-directed, and goal-concordant care for people with DoC of all backgrounds worldwide, prioritizing the ethical standards of respect for autonomy, beneficence, and justice. Although the focus of this evaluation is on people with DoC, much of the discussion can be extrapolated to other critically ill persons worldwide.

Perceptions on the role of research integrity officers in French medical schools

Researchers, organizations, and governments are trying to foster research integrity. In France, the law recently permitted the appointment of research integrity officers (RIOs) in each university, to promote research integrity and handle misconducts. Since we assumed that having adequate bodies to deal with research integrity could foster research integrity, we wanted to understand how this might work more concretely. We interviewed 11 newly appointed RIOs in medical schools about how they perceive their role and cope with their responsibilities. We analyzed data following the Paillé and Muchielli's thematic analysis approach. The RIOs report a strong and interesting appropriation of concepts of research integrity, which allows them to warrant their role. Although they report that they did not seek their appointment, they show a real desire to cope with their responsibilities. They are willing to build a role which is currently poorly defined. They assert their legitimacy through their position and experience. They identify themselves with a preventive and corrective role, in an altruistic way. They emphasize their independent and collective role, congruent with other actors. The RIOs intend to be enablers of a responsible conduct of research. These results are encouraging about the potential impact of RIOs to foster research integrity.

The trend and ripple effects of retractions in primary health care: A bibliometric analysis

BACKGROUND

In primary health care, the dissemination of retracted publications through literature reviews, guidelines, and recommendations can have a significant and lasting impact. Despite this potential threat, the retraction consequences and patterns in this domain have not been extensively explored. Therefore, this study investigates the characteristics and ripple effects of retracted papers in primary health care literature.

METHODS

Retracted publications indexed in PubMed from 1984 to 2022 in primary health care journals underwent bibliometric analysis. The dataset included detailed publication information, from which we derived annual retraction rates and examined trends by journal, authorship, and geographic origin. We further evaluated the extent of influence exerted by retracted papers through postretraction citation analysis.

RESULTS

In 44 primary health care journals, 13 articles were retracted over the study period, representing a retraction rate of 0.01%-notably lower than the aggregate rate for all PubMed journals. Despite this, we observed a recent surge in retraction frequency, especially in the last decade. The median interval to retraction was 15 months, with scientific misconduct, specifically fabrication, and plagiarism, as the predominant reasons. After retraction, the articles continued to exert considerable influence, averaging 25 citations per article with a 78.1% postretraction citation prevalence.

CONCLUSION

Retractions resulting from scientific misconduct in primary health care are increasing, with a substantial portion of such work continuing to be cited. This trend underscores the urgent need to improve research ethics and develop mechanisms that help primary care physicians discern reliable information, thereby reducing the reliance on compromised literature.

Words Matter: Reflective Science Communication and Tradeoffs in Environmental Health Research

BACKGROUND

Scientists who communicate societally relevant information face challenging contexts in which misinformation, disinformation, hype, and spin are prevalent. As a result, they often face difficult decisions about how to frame their work in a socially responsible manner.

OBJECTIVES

Drawing from the literature on science communication and framing, we identify tradeoffs that environmental health scientists face when deciding how to communicate their work, and we propose strategies for handling these tradeoffs. We use research on the human health effects of environmental endocrine disruptors as a case study to illustrate these challenges and strategies.

DISCUSSION

We examine four major frames (i.e., ways of packaging information that draw attention to facets of an issue or topic) in discussions of the effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals on sexual and neural development and obesity. We show how these frames can be beneficial (e.g., focusing public attention on environmental health threats and promoting actions to address environmental pollution) while simultaneously having harmful effects (e.g., contributing to stigmatization of particular groups or the promotion of harmful political ideologies).

CONCLUSIONS

Researchers who seek to responsibly communicate societally relevant work can employ several strategies to mitigate difficult tradeoffs, including a) striving for sensitivity to the social context and its relationship to their framing choices, b) choosing to avoid some frames, c) employing frames that alleviate ethical tensions, d) fostering education to alleviate harms, e) developing interdisciplinary and community collaborations, and f) working with institutions like scientific societies and journals to develop guidance on responsible communication practices. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP14527.

Perception of organizational climate by university staff and students in medicine and humanities: A qualitative study

Organizational climate and culture are important for research organizations because they foster research integrity and responsible conduct of research, reduce questionable research practices, and improve job satisfaction. The aim of our study was to explore how employees and students perceive organizational climate and its consequences in the university setting. We conducted semi-structured interviews with senior students and employees (teaching and non-teaching staff) from two different university schools: School of Medicine and Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. Participants were asked questions regarding perceived climate, working environment, and the role of the institution. The data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis approach. Three themes were identified. The first theme addressed the difference in the perception and understanding of organizational climate. The second theme dealt with institutional issues emanating from organizational climate. The third theme described the behavior of stakeholders in the formation of organizational climate. Organizational climate is important concept in academic organizations as it influences both employees, particularly early career researchers, and students. Institutional leadership can strongly influence organizational climate, which can in turn affect job and job satisfaction. Due to the importance of personal morality on everyday decision-making, virtue-based research integrity training could be useful in improving academic institutions' organizational climate.

How to embed ethics into laboratory research

Health-related innovation in biotechnology requires anticipating potential bioethical implications. In this article, we present a strategy to embed ethics in a group of early-stage researchers performing research in gene therapy and regenerative medicine in the laboratory phase. We conducted a series of focus group meetings with early-stage researchers who work in biotechnology laboratories. The objective was to reflect on the bioethical challenges of their own work and to promote the integration of research ethics with laboratory practice. The activity was assessed with questionnaires completed by the researchers before and after the meetings, and the analyses of the focus groups' content. As a result of the focus group series, all participants changed their perspectives about ethical issues regarding their planned research, developed the ability to reflect and debate on research ethics and had increased awareness of ethical issues in their own research activities. Half of them made changes in their research work. The study provides a concrete strategy to embed ethics and to strengthen responsibility in laboratory research. It is a strategy that allows to perform ethics reflection "on site" and in "real time" and complements the classic strategy of ethics assessment of the research protocol before starting the research procedure.

Letter to editor: NLP systems such as ChatGPT cannot be listed as an author because these cannot fulfill widely adopted authorship criteria

This letter to the editor suggests adding a technical point to the new editorial policy expounded by Hosseini et al. on the mandatory disclosure of any use of natural language processing (NLP) systems, or generative AI, in writing scholarly publications. Such AI systems should naturally also be forbidden from being named as authors, because they would not have fulfilled prevailing authorship guidelines (such as the widely adopted ICMJE authorship criteria).

Challenges for enforcing editorial policies on AI-generated papers

ChatGPT, a chatbot released by OpenAI in November 2022, has rocked academia with its capacity to generate papers "good enough" for academic journals. Major journals such as Nature and professional societies such as the World Association of Medical Editors have moved fast to issue policies to ban or curb AI-written papers. Amid the flurry of policy initiatives, one important challenge seems to be overlooked: AI-generated papers are not easily discernible to the human eye, and we lack the right tools to implement the policies. Without such tools, the well-intentioned policies are likely to remain on paper.

Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii immunoglobulins and its association with systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The exact cause of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is still unknown. However, hormonal, genetic, and environmental factors may play significant roles in its development. Infection has been recognized as a crucial trigger for SLE development. Several studies have reported a higher prevalence of Toxoplasma gondii infections in patients with SLE than in healthy individuals. However, these results were inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to provide a definitive conclusion regarding the relationship between T. gondii infection and SLE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search across diverse databases using an array of search tools to uncover pertinent literature. Following the stringent application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we carefully selected the appropriate reports for our meta-analysis. Using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software v4, we analyzed the data and determined the prevalence of antibodies against T. gondii in patients affected with SLE. To investigate the correlation between T. gondii seropositivity and SLE, we computed the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Eleven studies were considered eligible for inclusion in the present study. The prevalence of anti-IgG and IgM antibodies against T. gondii was 33.9% and 7.7%, respectively. A significant association between T. gondii IgG seropositivity and SLE was observed when compared to the controls (risk ratio = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.42 to 3.22, p = .000). However, IgM seropositivity against T. gondii was comparable between patients with SLE and healthy controls.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, this study suggests that T. gondii IgG is more prevalent in patients with SLE than in healthy individuals in areas where T. gondii infections are more frequent. However, an exact cause-and-effect relationship still needs to be established. Therefore, additional research is necessary to validate these findings and to investigate the underlying mechanisms.

A survey of experimental stimulus presentation code sharing in major areas of psychology

Computer code plays a vital role in modern science, from the conception and design of experiments through to final data analyses. Open sharing of code has been widely discussed as being advantageous to the scientific process, allowing experiments to be more easily replicated, helping with error detection, and reducing wasted effort and resources. In the case of psychology, the code used to present stimuli is a fundamental component of many experiments. It is not known, however, the degree to which researchers are sharing this type of code. To estimate this, we conducted a survey of 400 psychology papers published between 2016 and 2021, identifying those working with the open-source tools Psychtoolbox and PsychoPy that openly share stimulus presentation code. For those that did, we established if it would run following download and also appraised the code's usability in terms of style and documentation. It was found that only 8.4% of papers shared stimulus code, compared to 17.9% sharing analysis code and 31.7% sharing data. Of shared code, 70% ran directly or after minor corrections. For code that did not run, the main error was missing dependencies (66.7%). The usability of the code was moderate, with low levels of code annotation and minimal documentation provided. These results suggest that stimulus presentation code sharing lags behind other forms of code and data sharing, potentially due to less emphasis on such code in open-science discussions and in journal policies. The results also highlight a need for improved documentation to maximize code utility.

The argument for adopting a jurisprudence platform for scientific misconduct

In this paper we will describe the arguments to adopt a jurisprudence platform for scientific misconduct, we argue that this will increase the principle of legal certainty, improve procedures, and will promote scientific integrity in other, indirect ways. With the platform that we are currently setting up in the Netherlands as a motivating example, we finally also describe the prerequisites for such a platform, its contents as well as its value in the international context.

Timing and monitoring of financial disclosures in publications: A cross-institutional assessment of financial conflict of interest reports

A consistent mitigation strategy used in sponsored research to manage a financial conflict of interest (FCOI) is disclosure in publications. While federal funding regulations require mitigation strategies to be monitored through the end of the project's term, manuscripts are often published after the project term has ended. We examined whether it would be valuable to extend monitoring of publications for compliance with requirements for disclosure beyond the end date of a project's term and, if so, for how long after the term has ended. Using publicly available databases, we identified FCOI reports from public universities and analyzed disclosure completion in the years before and after the end of the project's term. We found that 80.2% of FCOI reports in our sample had a publication in which a conflicted Investigator served as an author, yet less than half (43.6%) of these publications contained disclosure statements acknowledging the known FCOI. We also found that publication most commonly occurred one year after the end of the project's term. These findings indicate that an effective way to support accountability and accuracy of the scientific record would be to extend monitoring of disclosure in publications through one year following the end of the project's term.

Is requiring Research Integrity Advisors a useful policy for improving research integrity? A census of advisors in Australia

Research Integrity Advisors are used in Australia to provide impartial guidance to researchers who have questions about any aspect of responsible research practice. Every Australian institution conducting research must provide access to trained advisors. This national policy could be an important part of creating a safe environment for discussing research integrity issues and thus resolving issues. We conducted the first formal study of advisors, using a census of every Australian advisor to discover their workload and attitudes to their role. We estimated there are 739 advisors nationally. We received responses to our questions from 192. Most advisors had a very light workload, with an median of just 0.5 days per month. Thirteen percent of advisors had not received any training, and some advisors only discovered they were an advisor after our approach. Most advisors were positive about their ability to help colleagues deal with integrity issues. The main desired changes were for greater advertising of their role and a desire to promote good practice rather than just supporting potential issues. Advisors might be a useful policy for supporting research integrity, but some advisors need better institutional support in terms of training and raising awareness.

Moral Engagement and Disengagement in Health Care AI Development

BACKGROUND

Machine learning (ML) is utilized increasingly in health care, and can pose harms to patients, clinicians, health systems, and the public. In response, regulators have proposed an approach that would shift more responsibility to ML developers for mitigating potential harms. To be effective, this approach requires ML developers to recognize, accept, and act on responsibility for mitigating harms. However, little is known regarding the perspectives of developers themselves regarding their obligations to mitigate harms.

METHODS

We conducted 40 semi-structured interviews with developers of ML predictive analytics applications for health care in the United States.

RESULTS

Participants varied widely in their perspectives on personal responsibility and included examples of both moral engagement and disengagement, albeit in a variety of forms. While most (70%) of participants made a statement indicative of moral engagement, most of these statements reflected an awareness of moral issues, while only a subset of these included additional elements of engagement such as recognizing responsibility, alignment with personal values, addressing conflicts of interests, and opportunities for action. Further, we identified eight distinct categories of moral disengagement reflecting efforts to minimize potential harms or deflect personal responsibility for preventing or mitigating harms.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest possible facilitators and barriers to the development of ethical ML that could act by encouraging moral engagement or discouraging moral disengagement. Regulatory approaches that depend on the ability of ML developers to recognize, accept, and act on responsibility for mitigating harms might have limited success without education and guidance for ML developers about the extent of their responsibilities and how to implement them.

In defense of the ICMJE authorship guideline, a rejoinder to Curzer

Curzer (Curzer 2021. Authorship and justice: Credit and responsibility, Accountability in Research 28:1-22) has constructed cogent and important arguments against the ICMJE authorship criteria from various philosophical perspectives. Here, we provide differing opinions to Curzer's points, primarily from the perspective of biomedical sciences (for which the ICMJE authorship criteria are originally meant for). We could neither identify nor concur with Curzer's opinion of a "disconnect" between writer and researcher in contemporary biomedical science publications, or see definitive value in the notion that intellectual and non-intellectual contributors should be equally credited. Furthermore, we note that consequentialist argument for utility, Rawlsian justice, as well as Kantian deontology are all not in disagreement with the ICMJE criteria. In brief, while we find Curzer's arguments to be participant or people-centric, these are not particularly in line with either the philosophy or the practice of science. We posit that the key concept underlying the ICMJE authorship criteria, in which authorship entails a coupling of intellectual credit to accountability, should remain a cornerstone in the practice of scientific research.

A structural equation model for cyber academic dishonesty in higher education: Evidence from Taiwan

With the continued spread of the rise of online teaching, and the massive use of 3C products (computer, communication, and consumer electronics), the cases of academic plagiarism or using others' works as own works caused by inappropriate use of the Internet are occurring all the time. However, very little research has been conducted on the cyber ethical climate in relation to cyber academic dishonesty. This study investigates the structural relationship between cyber ethical climate, cyber self-efficacy, cyber ethical attitude and cyber academic dishonesty, among university and graduate students, and develops a multiple mediation model. A total of 812 university and graduate students from 32 universities in Taiwan completed the online questionnaire. The results of the study show that the multiple mediation model is valid and find that the cyber ethical climate creates a favorable context for organizing members to demonstrate cyber ethical behavior, demonstrating the importance of mutual influence on cyber academic dishonesty between the cyber ethical climate created by teachers and the cyber ethical climate of class peers. Based on these results, we deeply examine the practical implications and make specific recommendations to improve the cyber ethical behavior of university and graduate students.

Quantitative Comparison of Chatbots on Common Rhinology Pathologies

OBJECTIVES

Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of chatbots as a source of patient information is critical for providers in the rising artificial intelligence landscape. This study is the first to quantitatively analyze and compare four of the most used chatbots available regarding treatments of common pathologies in rhinology.

METHODS

The treatment of epistaxis, chronic sinusitis, sinus infection, allergic rhinitis, allergies, and nasal polyps was asked to chatbots ChatGPT, ChatGPT Plus, Google Bard, and Microsoft Bing in May 2023. Individual responses were analyzed by reviewers for readability, quality, understandability, and actionability using validated scoring metrics. Accuracy and comprehensiveness were evaluated for each response by two experts in rhinology.

RESULTS

ChatGPT, Plus, Bard, and Bing had FRE readability scores of 33.17, 35.93, 46.50, and 46.32, respectively, indicating higher readability for Bard and Bing compared to ChatGPT (p = 0.003, p = 0.008) and Plus (p = 0.025, p = 0.048). ChatGPT, Plus, and Bard had mean DISCERN quality scores of 20.42, 20.89, and 20.61, respectively, which was higher than the score for Bing of 16.97 (p < 0.001). For understandability, ChatGPT and Bing had PEMAT scores of 76.67 and 66.61, respectively, which were lower than both Plus at 92.00 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) and Bard at 92.67 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). ChatGPT Plus had an accuracy score of 4.39 which was higher than ChatGPT (3.97, p = 0.118), Bard (3.72, p = 0.002), and Bing (3.19, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

On aggregate of the tested domains, our results suggest ChatGPT Plus and Google Bard are currently the most patient-friendly chatbots for the treatment of common pathologies in rhinology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A Laryngoscope, 134:4225-4231, 2024.

Why and how to incorporate issues of race/ethnicity and gender in research integrity education

With the increasing focus on issues of race/ethnicity and sex/gender1 across the spectrum of human activity, it is past time to consider how instruction in research integrity should incorporate these topics. Until very recently, issues of race/ethnicity and sex/gender have not typically appeared on any conventional lists of research integrity or responsible conduct of research (RCR) topics in the United States or, likely, other countries as well.2 However, I argue that not only can we incorporate these issues, we should do so to help accomplish some of the central goals of instruction in research integrity. I also offer some initial suggestions about where and how to incorporate them within familiar topics of instruction.

How to combine rules and commitment in fostering research integrity?

Research integrity (RI) is crucial for trustworthy research. Rules are important in setting RI standards and improving research practice, but they can lead to increased bureaucracy; without commensurate commitment amongst researchers toward RI, they are unlikely to improve research practices. In this paper, we explore how to combine rules and commitment in fostering RI. Research institutions can govern RI using markets (using incentives), bureaucracies (using rules), and network processes (through commitment and agreements). Based on Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action, we argue that network processes, as part of the lifeworld, can legitimize systems - that is, market or bureaucratic governance modes. This can regulate and support RI practices in an efficient way. Systems can also become dominant and repress consensus processes. Fostering RI requires a balance between network, market and bureaucratic governance modes. We analyze the institutional response to a serious RI case to illustrate how network processes can be combined with bureaucratic rules. Specifically, we analyze how the Science Committee established at Tilburg University in 2012 has navigated different governance modes, resulting in a normatively grounded and efficient approach to fostering RI. Based on this case, we formulate recommendations to research institutions on how to combine rules and commitment.

[International Multi-stakeholder Consensus Statement on Clinical Trial Integrity]

BACKGROUND

Science integrity initiatives require specific recommendations for randomised clinical trials (RCT).

OBJECTIVE

To prepare a set of statements for RCT integrity through an international multi-stakeholder consensus.

METHODS

The consensus was developed via multi-country multidisciplinary stakeholder group composition and engagement; evidence synthesis of 55 systematic reviews concerning RCT integrity; anonymised two-round modified Delphi survey with consensus threshold based on the average percent of majority opinions; and, a final consensus development meeting.

RESULTS

There were 30 stakeholders representing 15 countries from 5 continents including trialists, ethicists, methodologists, statisticians, consumer representative, industry representative, systematic reviewers, funding body panel members, regulatory experts, authors, journal editors, peer-reviewers and advisors for resolving integrity concerns. Delphi survey response rate was 86.7% (26/30 stakeholders). There were 111 statements (73 stakeholder-provided, 46 systematic review-generated, 8 supported by both) in the initial long list, with 8 additional statements provided during the consensus rounds. Through consensus the final set consolidated 81 statements (49 stakeholder-provided, 41 systematic review-generated, 9 supported by both). The entire RCT life cycle was covered by the set of statements including general aspects (n=6), design and approval (n=11), conduct and monitoring (n=19), reporting of protocols and findings (n=20), post-publication concerns (n=12), and future research and development (n=13).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of this multi-stakeholder consensus statement is expected to enhance RCT integrity.

'Managing values' in health economics modelling: Philosophical and practical considerations

Stakeholder involvement has been proposed as a key strategy for appropriately managing value-laden decisions or 'value judgments' in health economics modelling. Philosophers of science, however, conceive of stakeholder involvement in research in conflicting ways, and also propose alternative strategies for 'managing values' in science. Furthermore, all proposed strategies for managing values in science raise philosophical questions and practical challenges that are difficult to resolve. As a result, health economists who seek to appropriately inform value judgments in modelling must currently go without straightforward guidance. There is a need to further explore how health economists should manage value judgments in modelling, taking into account philosophical debates and contextual constraints. This paper discusses core proposals for managing values in science and identifies philosophical questions and practical challenges these proposals leave unresolved. It further considers how this could potentially inform processes to manage value judgments in health economics modelling, using examples from an ongoing modelling project called LEAP (Lifetime Exposures and Asthma Outcomes Projection). We conclude that all strategies to 'manage values' in health economics modelling have strengths and weaknesses, but are generally compatible with one another, suggesting that health economists may use a combination of strategies. Further research is needed to explore the effects of strategies to 'manage values' in health economics modelling.

Retraction (mal)practices of elite marketing and social psychology journals in the Dirk Smeesters' research misconduct case

The Dirk Smeesters case is one of the most well-documented and widely publicized cases of research misconduct to date. We investigate, using a case study approach, which of Smeesters' articles were found to be unreliable and recommended for retraction, which were retracted, and which were not. We also investigate by whom, when, and how these fraudulent articles were retracted. We found that only six retraction notices exist for the seven Smeesters' fraudulent articles that were recommended for retraction. For four of the six retraction notices, there were no explicit markers that clearly indicated who wrote them (e.g., the editor and/or the publisher). Smeesters' flawed articles were retracted in 97.6 days on average by the retracting journals. Retraction practices in these elite marketing and social psychology journals ranged from a seeming failure to retract (i.e., no record of a retraction notice) to a fair (i.e., informative and transparent) retraction. We also emphasize the ramifications of failing to retract an article whose findings are based on fabricated data. We conclude by listing the lessons learned from the Smeesters case.

Larger and more instructable language models become less reliable

The prevailing methods to make large language models more powerful and amenable have been based on continuous scaling up (that is, increasing their size, data volume and computational resources1) and bespoke shaping up (including post-filtering2,3, fine tuning or use of human feedback4,5). However, larger and more instructable large language models may have become less reliable. By studying the relationship between difficulty concordance, task avoidance and prompting stability of several language model families, here we show that easy instances for human participants are also easy for the models, but scaled-up, shaped-up models do not secure areas of low difficulty in which either the model does not err or human supervision can spot the errors. We also find that early models often avoid user questions but scaled-up, shaped-up models tend to give an apparently sensible yet wrong answer much more often, including errors on difficult questions that human supervisors frequently overlook. Moreover, we observe that stability to different natural phrasings of the same question is improved by scaling-up and shaping-up interventions, but pockets of variability persist across difficulty levels. These findings highlight the need for a fundamental shift in the design and development of general-purpose artificial intelligence, particularly in high-stakes areas for which a predictable distribution of errors is paramount.

Stepwise Imperatives for Improving the Protection of Animals in Research and Education in Canada

In this paper, we review the standard-setting tools of different levels of government in Canada for overseeing the care of animals used in science against a landscape of other international efforts. We find regulatory inconsistencies, argue that the related shortcomings are detrimental to the level of care afforded to animals, and offer suggestions for a centralized and proactive approach that could close the existing gaps. Given the resources, cost, and time it would take to transform the current system into a single cohesive one, the proposed approach is a stepwise one, and begins with the addition of two new Rs-Reflection and Responsiveness-to the existing 3Rs framework: Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction. Reflection emphasizes more continuous and specific attention to progress in the research pathway as it applies to animals than is currently required by institutional review and reporting; Responsiveness speaks to the immediate action that researchers can take responsively to that ongoing evaluation.

Views of a non-probability sample of corresponding authors with retracted publications in biomedical fields about the impact of different types of retractions on researchers' careers

Echoing Arturo Casadevall and Ferric Fang in their Reforming Science: Methodological and Cultural Reforms, "great human enterprises must undergo periodic cycles of self-examination and renewal to maintain their vigor". Especially in the last decade, the research culture has undergone such cycles, partially driven by countercultural transformations that have been reshaping assumptions towards reward-deserving achievements. Addressing retractions is among the challenges in this culture. This work builds upon research carried out at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), which explored the views of 224 reviewers serving on panels for the US National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, among others. We show results of a survey that add to our previous data. It was sent to a population of 1,089 corresponding authors affiliated with institutions from the 20 most productive countries in biomedical fields. We explored how corresponding authors of at least one retracted publication issued between 2013 and 2015 in biomedical journals envisioned the impact of different types of retractions on the careers of the first and corresponding authors. As such impact (if any) is not always immediate, we selected this time frame to ensure that potential respondents would have tangible post-retraction experience.

Ethics of research engagement with Deaf people. A qualitative evidence synthesis

In this article, we explore ethical issues of Deaf people's engagement in research. To focus on the perspectives of Deaf people, we investigated existing qualitative and mixed methods research within a qualitative evidence synthesis. Our synthesis is based on a systematic database search (Scopus, PubMed) and reference check of included papers which resulted in 27 eligible papers. We analyzed the data using thematic synthesis and developed 5 analytical themes. The results present research as a struggle for Deaf people and emphasize the need for changes regarding recognition of Deaf research in a cross-cultural context, maintaining equal and partner relations, and provision of accessible communication. Our research contributes to understanding what the ethical inclusion of Deaf people in research implies. It may also support the development of evidence-based normative recommendations and scientific cooperation between Deaf and hearing people.

The Ethics of Human Embryo Editing via CRISPR-Cas9 Technology: A Systematic Review of Ethical Arguments, Reasons, and Concerns

The possibility of editing the genomes of human embryos has generated significant discussion and interest as a matter of science and ethics. While it holds significant promise to prevent or treat disease, research on and potential clinical applications of human embryo editing also raise ethical, regulatory, and safety concerns. This systematic review included 223 publications to identify the ethical arguments, reasons, and concerns that have been offered for and against the editing of human embryos using CRISPR-Cas9 technology. We identified six major themes: risk/harm; potential benefit; oversight; informed consent; justice, equity, and other social considerations; and eugenics. We explore these themes and provide an overview and analysis of the critical points in the current literature.

ChatGPT isn't an author, but a contribution taxonomy is needed

PURPOSE

The increasing use of AI tools, particularly large language models like ChatGPT, in academic research has raised significant questions about authorship and transparency. This commentary emphasizes the need for a standardized AI contributions taxonomy to clarify AI's role in producing and publishing research outputs, ensuring ethical standards and maintaining academic integrity.

APPROACH

We propose adapting the NIST AI Use Taxonomy and incorporating categories that reflect AI's use in tasks such as hypothesis generation, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and ethical oversight. Findings: Establishing an AI contributions taxonomy for the production and publication of research output would address inconsistencies in AI disclosure, enhance transparency, and uphold accountability in research. It would help differentiate between AI-assisted and human-led tasks, providing more explicit attribution of contributions.

FINDINGS

Establishing an AI contributions taxonomy for the production and publication of research output would address inconsistencies in AI disclosure, enhance transparency, and uphold accountability in research. It would help differentiate between AI-assisted and human-led tasks, providing more explicit attribution of contributions.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The proposed taxonomy would offer researchers and journals a standardized method for disclosing AI's role in academic work, promoting responsible and transparent reporting aligned with ethical guidelines from COPE and ICMJE.

VALUE

A well-defined AI contributions taxonomy for the production and publication of research output would foster transparency and trust in using AI in research, ensuring that AI's role is appropriately acknowledged while preserving academic integrity.

Evolving intellectual property landscape for AI-driven innovations in the biomedical sector: opportunities in stable IP regime for shared success

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the biomedical sector in advanced diagnosis, treatment, and personalized medicine. While these AI-driven innovations promise vast benefits for patients and service providers, they also raise complex intellectual property (IP) challenges due to the inherent nature of AI technology. In this review, we discussed the multifaceted impact of AI on IP within the biomedical sector, exploring implications in areas like drug research and discovery, personalized medicine, and medical diagnostics. We dissect critical issues surrounding AI inventorship, patent and copyright protection for AI-generated works, data ownership, and licensing. To provide context, we analyzed the current IP legislative landscape in the United States, EU, China, and India, highlighting convergences, divergences, and precedent-setting cases relevant to the biomedical sector. Recognizing the need for harmonization, we reviewed current developments and discussed a way forward. We advocate for a collaborative approach, convening policymakers, clinicians, researchers, industry players, legal professionals, and patient advocates to navigate this dynamic landscape. It will create a stable IP regime and unlock the full potential of AI for enhanced healthcare delivery and improved patient outcomes.