scholarly journals Open science precision medicine in Canada: Points to consider

FACETS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Palmira Granados Moreno ◽  
Sarah E. Ali-Khan ◽  
Benjamin Capps ◽  
Timothy Caulfield ◽  
Damien Chalaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Precision Medicine ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Market Size ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Mcgill University ◽  
Blockbuster Drug ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Translational Process

Open science can significantly influence the development and translational process of precision medicine in Canada. Precision medicine presents a unique opportunity to improve disease prevention and healthcare, as well as to reduce health-related expenditures. However, the development of precision medicine also brings about economic challenges, such as costly development, high failure rates, and reduced market size in comparison with the traditional blockbuster drug development model. Open science, characterized by principles of open data sharing, fast dissemination of knowledge, cumulative research, and cooperation, presents a unique opportunity to address these economic challenges while also promoting the public good. The Centre of Genomics and Policy at McGill University organized a stakeholders’ workshop in Montreal in March 2018. The workshop entitled “Could Open be the Yellow Brick Road to Precision Medicine?” provided a forum for stakeholders to share experiences and identify common objectives, challenges, and needs to be addressed to promote open science initiatives in precision medicine. The rich presentations and exchanges that took place during the meeting resulted in this consensus paper containing key considerations for open science precision medicine in Canada. Stakeholders would benefit from addressing these considerations as to promote a more coherent and dynamic open science ecosystem for precision medicine.

scholarly journals Zheln.com: A protocol for a universal living overview of health-related systematic reviews

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel Zhelnov
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Business Policy ◽  
Medical Specialties ◽  
The Public ◽  
Overview Of Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Science Framework

BACKGROUNDObjectives. 1. Identify and monitor most of published systematic reviews. 2. Tag the identified systematic records with medical specialties. 3. Select or crowdfund reviews for further appraisal. 4. Critically appraise and replicate the selected systematic reviews. 5. Disseminate practice implications of positively appraised reviews to both the public and evidence-based practitioners in health care and other fields associated with intervention into a human life, such as education, business, policy, or ecology.METHODSEligibility criteria. Record eligibility is assessed by checking the record title and, if the title failed, abstract against the ‘true positive criteria’ for systematic reviews taken from the publication by Shojania & Bero, 2001 (PMID 11525102). The record/study flow is as follows: All eligible records are amenable for tagging, selection, and crowdfunding process; Only those eligible records that have been selected or crowdfunded are subject to critical appraisal; For all records that have been selected, all relevant reports are collected; Reports are grouped into studies; Only for the studies appraised positively, practical implications are summarized and disseminated. COVID-19 publications are not selected. Crowdfunding an appraisal of any eligible record is possible for any individual or organization.Information sources. MEDLINE via PubMed. Adding other search sources, such as Scopus, OSF, and medRxiv, is planned in the future when more appraisers become available. The Replicated Version of the PubMed Systematic Review Subset Query Zheln Edition (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/Z3JU7) will be used. The searches are run daily.Risk of bias. Critical appraisal will feature: Duplication assessment; Replication; Assessment against the MECIR conduct standards; ROB-ME assessment; GRADE assessment.Synthesis of results. No across-studies synthesis is planned. Within-studies, I will formulate explicit practice-relevant statements based on the extracted health outcomes and quality-of-conduct assessment. Also, the process of each critical appraisal is video-recorded and published on YouTube daily.OTHERFunding. The review is crowdfunded; the details are available from the Zheln website (https://zheln.com). Crowd funders had no role in the design of the protocol. They will be able to request critical appraisal and additional critical appraisal (with new data provided) of any eligible record but will not influence the review process otherwise.Registration. The project is hosted on GitHub. Also, there is an umbrella Open Science Framework project that links repositories and preprints (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/EJKFC). The protocol for this overview of systematic reviews has been submitted for registration in PROSPERO.

scholarly journals Dynamics of Cumulative Advantage and Threats to Equity in Open Science - A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Ross-Hellauer ◽  
Stefan Reichmann ◽  
Nicki Lisa Cole ◽  
Angela Fessl ◽  
Thomas Klebel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Cumulative Advantage ◽  
The Public ◽  
Technological Readiness ◽  
Data Practices ◽  
Qualitative Methodologies ◽  
Research And Policy

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible, and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide re-use or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science’s agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of “cumulative advantage”. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: “What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?” Aiming to synthesise findings, identify gaps in the literature, and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open/FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as “reproducibility” becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.

Open Science in Education Sciences

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
Chris Schatschneider ◽  
Sara Ann Hart
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Critical Elements ◽  
Rigorous Research ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Science Movement

The Open Science movement has gained considerable traction in the last decade. The Open Science movement tries to increase trust in research results and open the access to all elements of a research project to the public. Central to these goals, Open Science has promoted four critical elements: Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access. All Open Science elements can be thought of as extensions to the traditional way of achieving openness in science, which has been scientific publication of research outcomes in journals or books. Open Science in Education Sciences, however, has the potential to be much more than a safeguard against questionable research. Open Science in Education Science provides opportunities to (a) increase the transparency and therefore replicability of research, and (b) develop and answer research questions about individuals with learning disabilities and learning difficulties that were previously impossible to answer due to complexities in data analysis methods. We will provide overviews of the main tenets of Open Science (i.e., Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access), show how they are in line with grant funding agencies’ expectations for rigorous research processes, and present resources on best practices for each of the tenets.

scholarly journals Representing COVID-19 information in collaborative knowledge graphs: The case of Wikidata

Semantic Web ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Houcemeddine Turki ◽  
Mohamed Ali Hadj Taieb ◽  
Thomas Shafee ◽  
Tiago Lubiana ◽  
Dariusz Jemielniak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Query Language ◽  
Open Data ◽  
General Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Description Framework ◽  
Automated Tools ◽  
Collaborative Knowledge

Information related to the COVID-19 pandemic ranges from biological to bibliographic, from geographical to genetic and beyond. The structure of the raw data is highly complex, so converting it to meaningful insight requires data curation, integration, extraction and visualization, the global crowdsourcing of which provides both additional challenges and opportunities. Wikidata is an interdisciplinary, multilingual, open collaborative knowledge base of more than 90 million entities connected by well over a billion relationships. It acts as a web-scale platform for broader computer-supported cooperative work and linked open data, since it can be written to and queried in multiple ways in near real time by specialists, automated tools and the public. The main query language, SPARQL, is a semantic language used to retrieve and process information from databases saved in Resource Description Framework (RDF) format. Here, we introduce four aspects of Wikidata that enable it to serve as a knowledge base for general information on the COVID-19 pandemic: its flexible data model, its multilingual features, its alignment to multiple external databases, and its multidisciplinary organization. The rich knowledge graph created for COVID-19 in Wikidata can be visualized, explored, and analyzed for purposes like decision support as well as educational and scholarly research.

scholarly journals Open Science training and education: challenges and difficulties on the researchers' side and in public engagement

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. C01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Pitrelli ◽  
Stefania Arabito
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Change ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Training And Education ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
New Vision ◽  
Science Training

Open Science may become the next scientific revolution, but still lingers in a pre-paradigmatic phase, characterised by the lack of established definitions and domains. Certainly, Open Science requires a new vision of the way to produce and share scientific knowledge, as well as new skills. Therefore, education plays a crucial role in supporting this cultural change along the path of science. This is the basic principle inspiring the collection of essays published in this issue of JCOM, which deals with many subjects ranging from open access to the public engagement in scientific research, from open data to the social function of preprint servers for the physicians' community. These are issues that go along with the targets of the FOSTER project (Facilitate Open Science Training for European Research) funded by the European Union, which has provided interesting food for thought in order to write this commentary.

scholarly journals The Epistemic Value of Open Science

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Siraprapa Chavanayarn
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Epistemic Value ◽  
Scientific Culture ◽  
Impact Measurement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Open Discussion ◽  
Access To Knowledge

Open science refers to all scientific culture that is described by its openness. It may often include features of open access, open data, and open source. Fecher and Friesike (2014) identify five open science schools of thought: the public school, which is about the accessibility of knowledge creation; the democratic school, which is about equality of access to knowledge; the pragmatic school, which is about collaborative research; the infrastructure school, which is about the technological architecture; and the measurement school, which is about alternative impact measurement. This article argues that there are only two open science schools, the public and democratic iterations, that can defend themselves against the serious epistemic objections to open science. In addition, if society supports an “open discussion” policy, societies will gain much more benefit from open science. These two schools, therefore, have more epistemic value than the other schools.

scholarly journals Open Science in Education Sciences

2020 ◽  
pp. 002221942094526
Author(s):  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
Christopher Schatschneider ◽  
Sara A. Hart
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Data ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Open Science ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rigorous Research ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Education Science ◽  
Science Movement ◽  
Open Materials

The Open Science movement has gained considerable traction in the last decade. The Open Science movement tries to increase trust in research results and open the access to all elements of a research project to the public. Central to these goals, Open Science has promoted five critical tenets: Open Data, Open Analysis, Open Materials, Preregistration, and Open Access. All Open Science elements can be thought of as extensions to the traditional way of achieving openness in science, which has been scientific publication of research outcomes in journals or books. Open Science in education sciences, however, has the potential to be much more than a safeguard against questionable research. Open Science in education science provides opportunities to (a) increase the transparency and therefore replicability of research and (b) develop and answer research questions about individuals with learning disabilities and learning difficulties that were previously impossible to answer due to complexities in data analysis methods. We will provide overviews of the main tenets of Open Science (i.e., Open Data, Open Analysis, Open Materials, Preregistration, and Open Access), show how they are in line with grant funding agencies’ expectations for rigorous research processes, and present resources on best practices for each of the tenets.

Biblical Literacy and the English King James Liberal Bible

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-211
Author(s):  
James Crossley
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Biblical Literacy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Arena ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Liberal Capitalism ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Popular Nationalism ◽  
King James Bible

Using the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible as a test case, this article illustrates some of the important ways in which the Bible is understood and consumed and how it has continued to survive in an age of neoliberalism and postmodernity. It is clear that instant recognition of the Bible-as-artefact, multiple repackaging and pithy biblical phrases, combined with a popular nationalism, provide distinctive strands of this understanding and survival. It is also clear that the KJV is seen as a key part of a proud English cultural heritage and tied in with traditions of democracy and tolerance, despite having next to nothing to do with either. Anything potentially problematic for Western liberal discourse (e.g. calling outsiders “dogs,” smashing babies heads against rocks, Hades-fire for the rich, killing heretics, using the Bible to convert and colonize, etc.) is effectively removed, or even encouraged to be removed, from such discussions of the KJV and the Bible in the public arena. In other words, this is a decaffeinated Bible that has been colonized by, and has adapted to, Western liberal capitalism.

Trend of Parental Refusal or Delay of Childhood Vaccinations

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meagan Marie Daoust
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Educational Context ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Parental Refusal

The healthcare trend of parental refusal or delay of childhood vaccinations will be investigated through a complex Cynefin Framework component in an economic and educational context, allowing patterns to emerge that suggest recommendations of change for the RN role and healthcare system. As a major contributing factor adding complexity to this trend, social media is heavily used for health related knowledge, making it is difficult to determine which information is most trustworthy. Missed opportunities for immunization can result, leading to economic and health consequences for the healthcare system and population. Through analysis of the powerful impact social media has on this evolving trend and public health, an upstream recommendation for RNs to respond with is to utilize reliable social media to the parents’ advantage within practice. The healthcare system should focus on incorporating vaccine-related education into existing programs and classes offered to parents, and implementing new vaccine classes for the public.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document