Bibliometric Analysis on the Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices through Building Effective Systems

Implementing evidence-based practices in early intervention has generated new research interest in the need for effective early childhood systems. This study used a bibliometric analysis to discern the importance and relevance of the field. The analysis highlights that the main goals of the future direction of the research field need to be better defined. First, articles published in the Web of Science database between 2012 and 2022 were reviewed, and then word and author combinations were analyzed. Finally, articles were collected in different groups for bibliographic linking. Five key points were identified as the most important practices recommended by the Department of Early Childhood or Professional Development. It should be noted that the main difficulty encountered in this field arises from the novelty of our research topic, i.e., there is no research on constructing systems for early intervention. However, it is worth highlighting the articles that are relevant to the field of study and our success with integrating them in order to demonstrate the importance of serving children with disabilities and their families. In conclusion, the establishment of a system built on evidence-based practices is underdeveloped but shows promise for the future of early intervention systems.

Family-centred early intervention: Comparing practitioners' actual and desired practices

BACKGROUND

In Spain, as in other countries, there has been a deep and intense process of change towards the adoption and use of family-centred practices (FCPs) on early intervention (EI). Despite that several international organizations have recommended FCPs be embedded in EI services, researchers on this field have highlighted a recommendation-implementation gap, as well as the need to point investigation on practitioners and intervention variables involved. Consequently, our goals were to describe and compare the practitioners' appraisals on actual and desired practices in Spain and to explore the relationships between practitioners and intervention characteristics and the use of recommended practices.

METHODS

A survey including practitioner and intervention characteristics measures was used to obtain data needed. The actual and desired practices were explored through the Family Orientation of Community and Agency Services Scale. The participants were 119 EI Spanish practitioners whose programmes were in the first stages of different FCP implementation projects.

RESULTS

Practitioners reported actual practices to be less family centred than they would like, moderately in line with FCP. They reported desired practices as quite close to recommended practices. Intervention characteristics were related to actual practices, whereas practitioner characteristics were not.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the recommendation-implementation gap still exists in our context, as well as in other countries. Intervention characteristics seem to be one of the key elements significantly influencing actual practices, though additional research is needed. A comprehensive framework for implementation is needed to bridge the gap between recommendation practices and the use of these practices.

Use of globally unique identifiers (GUIDs) to link herbarium specimen records to physical specimens

With the advent of the U.S. National Science Foundation's Advancing Digitization of Biodiversity Collections program and related worldwide digitization initiatives, the rate of herbarium specimen digitization in the United States has expanded exponentially. As the number of electronic herbarium records proliferates, the importance of linking these records to the physical specimens they represent as well as to related records from other sources will intensify. Although a rich and diverse literature has developed over the past decade that addresses the use of specimen identifiers for facilitating linking across the internet, few implementable guidelines or recommended practices for herbaria have been advanced. Here we review this literature with the express purpose of distilling a specific set of recommendations especially tailored to herbarium specimen digitization, curation, and management. We argue that associating globally unique identifiers (GUIDs) with physical herbarium specimens and including these identifiers in all electronic records about those specimens is essential to effective digital data curation. We also address practical applications for ensuring these associations.

STP position paper: Recommended practices for sampling and processing the nervous system (brain, spinal cord, nerve, and eye) during nonclinical general toxicity studies

The Society of Toxicologic Pathology charged a Nervous System Sampling Working Group with devising recommended practices to routinely screen the central nervous system (CNS) and peripheral nervous system (PNS) in Good Laboratory Practice-type nonclinical general toxicity studies. Brains should be weighed and trimmed similarly for all animals in a study. Certain structures should be sampled regularly: caudate/putamen, cerebellum, cerebral cortex, choroid plexus, eye (with optic nerve), hippocampus, hypothalamus, medulla oblongata, midbrain, nerve, olfactory bulb (rodents only), pons, spinal cord, and thalamus. Brain regions may be sampled bilaterally in rodents using 6 to 7 coronal sections, and unilaterally in nonrodents with 6 to 7 coronal hemisections. Spinal cord and nerves should be examined in transverse and longitudinal (or oblique) orientations. Most Working Group members considered immersion fixation in formalin (for CNS or PNS) or a solution containing acetic acid (for eye), paraffin embedding, and initial evaluation limited to hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained sections to be acceptable for routine microscopic evaluation during general toxicity studies; other neurohistological methods may be undertaken if needed to better characterize H&E findings. Initial microscopic analyses should be qualitative and done with foreknowledge of treatments and doses (i.e., "unblinded"). The pathology report should clearly communicate structures that were assessed and methodological details. Since neuropathologic assessment is only one aspect of general toxicity studies, institutions should retain flexibility in customizing their sampling, processing, analytical, and reporting procedures as long as major neural targets are evaluated systematically.