Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
3.
Curr Protoc ; 1(5): e149, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1242712

ABSTRACT

The goals of PhenX (consensus measures for Phenotypes and eXposures) are to promote the use of standard measurement protocols and to help investigators identify opportunities for collaborative research and cross-study analysis, thus increasing the impact of individual studies. The PhenX Toolkit (https://www.phenxtoolkit.org/) offers high-quality, well-established measurement protocols to assess phenotypes and exposures in studies with human participants. The Toolkit contains protocols representing 29 research domains and 6 specialty collections of protocols that add depth to the Toolkit in specific research areas (e.g., COVID-19, Social Determinants of Health [SDoH], Blood Sciences Research [BSR], Mental Health Research [MHR], Tobacco Regulatory Research [TRR], and Substance Abuse and Addiction [SAA]). Protocols are recommended for inclusion in the PhenX Toolkit by Working Groups of domain experts using a consensus process that includes input from the scientific community. For each PhenX protocol, the Toolkit provides a detailed description, the rationale for inclusion, and supporting documentation. Users can browse protocols in the Toolkit, search the Toolkit using keywords, or use Browse Protocols Tree to identify protocols of interest. The PhenX Toolkit provides data dictionaries compatible with the database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data submission compatibility, and data collection worksheets to help investigators incorporate PhenX protocols into their study design. The PhenX Toolkit provides resources to help users identify published studies that used PhenX protocols. © 2021 The Authors. Current Protocols published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Using the PhenX Toolkit to support or extend study design.


Subject(s)
Databases as Topic , Genome-Wide Association Study/methods , Human Genetics/methods , Interdisciplinary Research/methods , Software/standards , Environmental Exposure , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Phenotype
4.
Methods ; 195: 3-14, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240650

ABSTRACT

More than 130,000 peer-reviewed studies have been published within one year after COVID-19 emerged in many countries. This large and rapidly growing field may overwhelm the synthesizing abilities of both researchers and policy-makers. To provide a sinopsis, prevent errors, and detect cognitive gaps that may require interdisciplinary research methods, the literature on COVID-19 is summarized, twice. The overall purpose of this study is to generate a dialogue meant to explain the genesis of and/or find remedies for omissions and contradictions. The first review starts in Biology and ends in Policy. Policy is chosen as a destination because it is the setting where cognitive integration must occur. The second review follows the opposite path: it begins with stated policies on COVID-19 and then their assumptions and disciplinary relationships are identified. The purpose of this interdisciplinary method on methods is to yield a relational and explanatory view of the field -one strategy likely to be incomplete but usable when large bodies of literature need to be rapidly summarized. These reviews identify nine inter-related problems, research needs, or omissions, namely: (1) nation-wide, geo-referenced, epidemiological data collection systems (open to and monitored by the public); (2) metrics meant to detect non-symptomatic cases -e.g., test positivity-; (3) cost-benefit oriented methods, which should demonstrate they detect silent viral spreaders even with limited testing; (4) new personalized tests that inform on biological functions and disease correlates, such as cell-mediated immunity, co-morbidities, and immuno-suppression; (5) factors that influence vaccine effectiveness; (6) economic predictions that consider the long-term consequences likely to follow epidemics that growth exponentially; (7) the errors induced by self-limiting and/or implausible paradigms, such as binary and reductionist approaches; (8) new governance models that emphasize problem-solving skills, social participation, and the use of scientific knowledge; and (9) new educational programs that utilize visual aids and audience-specific communication strategies. The analysis indicates that, to optimally address these problems, disciplinary and social integration is needed. By asking what is/are the potential cause(s) and consequence(s) of each issue, this methodology generates visualizations that reveal possible relationships as well as omissions and contradictions. While inherently limited in scope and likely to become obsolete, these shortcomings are avoided when this 'method on methods' is frequently practiced. Open-ended, inter-/trans-disciplinary perspectives and broad social participation may help researchers and citizens to construct, de-construct, and re-construct COVID-19 related research.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Policy , Interdisciplinary Research/methods , Animals , Biomedical Research/standards , Biomedical Research/trends , COVID-19/immunology , Health Policy/trends , Humans , Immunity, Herd/physiology , Interdisciplinary Research/standards , Interdisciplinary Research/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL