Ingelfinger imperative: when speed of release risks quality of research

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (12) ◽  
pp. 1595-1596
Author(s):  
Jonathon P. Fanning ◽  
Jeremy Cohen ◽  
Balasubramanian Venkatesh
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Research

Analysis of Reading, Reference and Information Management on the Quality of Scientific Writing

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-69
Author(s):  
Muhammad Zarlis ◽  
Sherly Astuti ◽  
Muhammad Salamuddin
Keyword(s):  
Information Management ◽  
Scientific Writing ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Reference List ◽  
Management Skill ◽  
Library Search ◽  
Important Thing ◽  
Reading Material ◽  
Quality Of Research

In education, for educational instruments scientific writing is a very important thing. It requires an information management skill, information management is a library search, which can be done through a computer and guided by the internet. It can also be through the quality of reading used as a reference for scientific writing. In addition, in producing a paper also must know the management of writing, not only required to pay attention to the rules of standard language, but also must be able to convey ideas and ideas well and meet scientific criteria, such as making a quote or reference list used. This paper was written with the aim of improving the quality of research through reading material, making notes and avoiding plagiarism, references using the Harvard system for journals, books, and articles. Management of citing articles either CD or internet, writing, editing, storing references electronically, writing bibliography, and quotations.

An experience of performing spirometry by trained general practitioners

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-36
Author(s):  
M. A. Pokhaznikova ◽  
E. A. Andreeva ◽  
O. Yu. Kuznetsova
Keyword(s):  
General Practitioners ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Poor Quality ◽  
Male Gender ◽  
Study Research ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Quality Of Research ◽  
Forced Expiratory Maneuver ◽  
Maximal Effort

The article discusses the experience of teaching and conducting spirometry of general practitioners as part of the RESPECT study (RESearch on the PrEvalence and the diagnosis of COPD and its Tobacco-related aetiology). A total of 33 trained in spirometry general practitioners performed a study of 3119 patients. Quality criteria met 84.1% of spirometric studies. The analysis of the most common mistakes made by doctors during the forced expiratory maneuver is included. The most frequent errors were expiration exhalation of less than 6s (54%), non-maximal effort throughout the test and lack of reproducibility (11.3%). Independent predictors of poor spirogram quality were male gender, obstruction (FEV1 /FVC<0.7), and the center where the study was performed. The number of good-quality spirograms ranged from 96.1% (95% CI 83.2–110.4) to 59.8% (95% CI 49.6–71.4) depending on the center. Subsequently, an analysis of the reasons behind the poor quality of research in individual centers was conducted and the identified shortcomings were eliminated. The poor quality of the spirograms was associated either with the errors of the doctors who undertook the study or with the technical malfunctions of the spirometer.

Evaluating quality of science in CGIAR research programs: Use of bibliometrics

2021 ◽  
pp. 003072702110242
Author(s):  
Max Rünzel ◽  
Paolo Sarfatti ◽  
Svetlana Negroustoueva
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Bibliometric Indicators ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Practical Utilization ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
First Time ◽  
Quality Of Research

When evaluating Quality of Science (QoS) in the context of development initiatives, it is essential to define adequate criteria. The objective of this perspective paper is to show how altmetric and bibliometric indicators have been used to support the evaluation of QoS in the 2020 Review of the Phase 2-CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs, 2017–2022), where, for the first time, the Quality of Research for Development (QoR4D) frame of reference has been utilized across the entire CGIAR CRP portfolio. Overall, the CRP review showed a significant output of scientific publications during the period 2017–2020, with 4,872 articles, 220,101 references, and 7.1 citations per article. Additionally, wider interest in scientific publications is demonstrated by good to high altmetrics, with average attention scores ranging from 70.8 to 806.9 with an average of 425.1. The use of selected bibliometrics was shown to be an adequate tool, for use together with other qualitative indicators to evaluate the QoS in the 12 CRPs. The CRP review process clearly demonstrated that standardized, harmonized and consistent data on research output is paramount to provide high-quality quantitative instruments and should be a priority throughout the transition toward One CGIAR. Therefore, we conclude that the QoR4D framework should be augmented by standardized bibliometric indicators embedded in measurement frameworks within the new One CGIAR. Finally, its practical utilization in monitoring and evaluation should be supported with clear guidelines.

A Systematic Review of Replicative Self-Determination Intervention Studies

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-39
Author(s):  
John L. Luckner ◽  
Rashida Banerjee ◽  
Sara Movahedazarhouligh ◽  
Kaitlyn Millen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intervention Studies ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Research Designs ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
Quality Of Research

Current federal legislation emphasizes the use of programs, interventions, strategies, and activities that have been demonstrated through research to be effective. One way to increase the quantity and quality of research that guides practice is to conduct replication research. The purpose of this study was to undertake a systematic review of the replication research focused on self-determination conducted between 2007 and 2017. Using methods used by Cook and colleagues, we identified 80 intervention studies on topics related to self-determination, of which 31 were coded as replications. Intervention study trends, rate of replication studies, percentage of agreements between findings of original and replication studies, amount of author overlap, and types of research designs used are reported along with recommendations for future research.

The quality of research exploring in-session measures of CBT competence: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Kathryn Rayson ◽  
Louise Waddington ◽  
Dougal Julian Hare
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Research Training ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Fidelity Assessment ◽  
Quality Of Research

Abstract Background: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is in high demand due to its strong evidence base and cost effectiveness. To ensure CBT is delivered as intended in research, training and practice, fidelity assessment is needed. Fidelity is commonly measured by assessors rating treatment sessions, using CBT competence scales (CCSs). Aims: The current review assessed the quality of the literature examining the measurement properties of CCSs and makes recommendations for future research, training and practice. Method: Medline, PsychINFO, Scopus and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to identify relevant peer-reviewed, English language studies from 1980 onwards. Relevant studies were those that were primarily examining the measurement properties of CCSs used to assess adult 1:1 CBT treatment sessions. The quality of studies was assessed using a novel tool created for this study, following which a narrative synthesis is presented. Results: Ten studies met inclusion criteria, most of which were assessed as being ‘fair’ methodological quality, primarily due to small sample sizes. Construct validity and responsiveness definitions were applied inconsistently in the studies, leading to confusion over what was being measured. Conclusions: Although CCSs are widely used, we need to pay careful attention to the quality of research exploring their measurement properties. Consistent definitions of measurement properties, consensus about adequate sample sizes and improved reporting of individual properties are required to ensure the quality of future research.

scholarly journals Ten Basic Rules of Antibody Validation

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 117739011875746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G Weller
Keyword(s):  
Practical Application ◽  
Validation Criteria ◽  
Antibody Validation ◽  
Quality Of Research

The quality of research antibodies is an issue for decades. Although several papers have been published to improve the situation, their impact seems to be limited. This publication makes the effort to simplify the description of validation criteria in a way that the occasional antibody user is able to assess the validation level of an immunochemical reagent. A simple, 1-page checklist is supplied for the practical application of these criteria.

Qualitative generalising in accounting research: concepts and strategies

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 1100-1131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee D. Parker ◽  
Deryl Northcott
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
General Applicability ◽  
Information Systems Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Accounting Research ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Quality Of Research

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify and articulate concepts and approaches to qualitative generalisation that will offer qualitative accounting researchers avenues for enhancing and justifying the general applicability of their research findings and conclusions. Design/methodology/approach – The study and arguments draw from multidisciplinary approaches to this issue. The analysis and theorising is based on published qualitative research literatures from the fields of education, health sciences, sociology, information systems, management and marketing, as well as accounting. Findings – The paper develops two overarching generalisation concepts for application by qualitative accounting researchers. These are built upon a number of qualitative generalisation concepts that have emerged in the multidisciplinary literatures. It also articulates strategies for enhancing the generalisability of qualitative accounting research findings. Research limitations/implications – The paper provides qualitative accounting researchers with understandings, arguments and justifications for the generalisability of their research and the related potential for wider accounting and societal contributions. It also articulates the key factors that impact on the quality of research generalisation that qualitative researchers can offer. Originality/value – This paper presents the most comprehensively sourced and developed approach to the concepts, strategies and unique deliverables of qualitative generalising hitherto available in the accounting research literature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document