Search results

Using a pre‐test‐post‐test control group experimental research design, this paper seeks to examine the effects of the 20‐week structure of intellect (SOI) training programme on the critical thinking skills of a group of participants in a manufacturing facility in Ireland as measured by both Watson‐Glaser critical thinking skills assessment (CTSA) and Raven’s standard progressive matrices (SPM). The results demonstrate no statistically significant difference in the experimental group pre‐ and post‐test scores on the Watson‐Glaser CTSA, but the results derived from the administration of Raven’s SPM were significant (p = 0.003). As expected, no statistically significant difference was found between the pre‐ and post‐test performance of the control group on either test. A number of possible reasons for the results are advanced.

The purpose of the Ethics Support Office, funded by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) and administered by the Institute for Translational Sciences (ITS) at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), is to provide research ethics support to faculty, fellows, and students. This chapter reports on an ongoing qualitative study to understand scientists' views on ethical issues in team science and their suggestions for advancing ethical policy and activities in order to improve ethics training. We originally conducted face-to-face, semistructured, qualitative interviews with a convenience sample of 20 key ITS researchers, representing the majority of researchers. The scientists' most general approach to ethics – in perceiving them, understanding them, and applying them – is to appreciate ethics in terms of their relevance to particular research situations and problems. They prefer to deal with ethics as a common feature and value incorporated into their work. Respondents suggested that those teaching ethics in multidisciplinary translational research must develop strategies that help scientists see and understand the relevance of ethics education to their work. Strategies include improving communication skills, providing shared opportunities for learning, sensitizing researchers to the demands on others on the team who are expected to contribute data and knowledge to the success of the project, and imbedding ethicists on research teams. In tune with the key finding of the study, ethics instructors and coaches need to become well acquainted with the nuances of their scientists' work. This approach will respond to the scientists' desire to conduct ethical research, but in practical terms of the specialized nature of their work.

The impetus was to assess pluses and minuses of a national mandate with specific paratransit guidelines per “the” 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) model. Two European countries were chosen to explore other ways to serve persons with disabilities, not driven by ADA.

This research compared mandates in each area (via a tri-lingual survey) both as related to ADA’s most common practices and the European model of “Persons with Reduced Mobility” (PMRs). After data collection, analysis compared and contrasted ADA and PMR schemes.

Even in California, differences were found among survey sites; for instance, the organization type and mix of services varied greatly, despite a national framework. In Europe, there were more similar approaches among regions where, without a national framework, there was flexible, regional decision-making. In Europe, the national focus is on more regular transit accessibility, maximizing transit use rather than special services.

Five recommendations resulted and apply most directly to California and equally for agencies with or without ADA. The strengths of the PMR approach are transferable to California and the trend among a few California partners to go beyond ADA, while only a local option, reinforces the strength of the PMR solution.

How to improve service and financial performance and enlarge the private sector role are put forward. Existing methods, whether Federal or California-driven, need revisiting to achieve true benefits of coordination.

The purpose of this chapter is to examine an evolving role in the translational science team: that of the consultant. The role of the consultant has long been a key feature of complex organizations in business and government. The consultant provides flexibility to an organization's employee base while providing specific expert knowledge and skills in a timely manner. The role of the consultant in Translational Science is innovative largely because they are attached or assigned to particular research teams, for varying lengths of tenure, to provide both basic and applied/evaluative skills to the increasingly central and defining team concept.

What sets health sciences librarians apart from other academic librarians when it comes to partnering with health-focused innovators? Do health-related innovators have different information needs or space requirements? This chapter illustrates some of the major issues and topics health sciences librarians consider as they offer information services to entrepreneurs and innovators. Health sciences innovators must be aware of relevant policies and laws such as HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. They also need to meet federal safety regulations required by the Food and Drug Administration; moreover, device materials must be biocompatible. Those developing therapeutic games and apps in this arena need to ensure their products are supported by current literature and scientific evidence. In many cases, these new technologies require clinical trials and testing to ensure their safety and efficacy. Health sciences librarians guide innovators to relevant resources, knowledge, and experts on these and other topics. This navigator role is extremely valuable to students, who may not understand the healthcare landscape and its processes. Additionally, librarians assist innovators with identifying dissemination venues for their scholarly output. They provide instruction and guidance on how to write and tailor conference proposals to meet specific professional association criteria. A retired health sciences library director shares her experiences. Tips and lessons learned are highlighted so others may gain an understanding of the unique information needs of health innovators.

The establishment of Science Cafés has become a popular strategy to enhance informal yet instruction-oriented interaction between medical and scientific experts and members of the relevant local communities. The purpose of this chapter is to report on two significant findings of a mixed-methods evaluation of the SCI (Science and Communities Interact) Café. Method: The Clinical and Translational Science Award in the Institute for Translational Sciences at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) in Galveston established an SCI Café program in 2013 to enable local residents to engage in dialogs with clinicians and researchers regarding their scientific interests and health concerns. A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the program. Results: The essential experience of SCI Café (SC) is updating one's knowledge of a topic. The primary comparative and analytical feature of SC participation is expertise. Expertise varies in terms of the social position of the participants: graduate student, university staff, engaged participant, topical participant, and curious participant.

Using a mixed-methods approach, this study evaluated a Master of Science program in Clinical and Translational Research (MSCTR) geared toward training physicians in research methodology. The purpose of this study is to allow trainees to articulate their expectations, needs and experiences in the MSCTR and to develop novel training methods and/or curriculum modifications to improve physician-scholar training.

The mixed-method study design with qualitative emphasis included interviews, participant journal entries and a survey. Interview and journal entry data were analyzed using a modified seven-stage hermeneutic analysis and survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Findings suggest three major areas for improvement, namely, curriculum, mentorship/relationships and instructional methods. Concluding recommendations to address these three areas include: make ongoing curriculum updates to provide a sequential pathway but also allow for flexibility, improve statistical training, invest in online courses and create a more structured mentorship program.

Extant research, though minimal, has evaluated clinical research training programs in terms of alumni productivity. However, this is the first study of its kind to examine a clinical research training program primarily qualitatively and from the perspective of its students and alumni.

This study aims to examine the scholarly impact of funded and non-funded research published in ten core library and information science (LIS) journals published in 2016.

In total, ten high-impact LIS journals were selected using Google Scholar metrics. The source title of each selected journal was searched in the Scopus database to retrieve the articles published in 2016. The detailed information of all the retrieved articles for every journal was exported in a CSV Excel file, and after collecting all the journal articles’ information, all CSV Excel files were merged into a single MS Excel file for data analysis.

The study analyzed 1,064 publications and found that 14% of them were funded research articles. Funded articles received higher average citation counts (24.56) compared to non-funded articles (20.49). Funded open-access articles had a higher scholarly impact than funded closed-access articles. The research area with the most funded articles was “Bibliometrics,” which also received the highest number of citations (1,676) with an average citation count of 24.64. The National Natural Science Foundation of China funded the most papers (30), while the USA funded the highest number of research publications (36) in the field of LIS.

This study highlights the importance of securing funding, open access publishing, discipline-specific differences, diverse funding sources and aiming for higher citations. Researchers, practitioners and policymakers can use these findings to enhance research impact in LIS.

This study explores the impact of funding on research LIS and provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between funding and research impact.