Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0255704, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365423

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Governments commonly fund research with specific applications in mind. Such mechanisms may facilitate 'research translation' but funders may employ strategies that can also undermine the integrity of both science and government. We estimated the prevalence and investigated correlates of funder efforts to suppress health behaviour intervention trial findings. METHODS: Our sampling frame was lead or corresponding authors of papers (published 2007-2017) included in a Cochrane review, reporting findings from trials of interventions to improve nutrition, physical activity, sexual health, smoking, and substance use. Suppression events were based on a previous survey of public health academics. Participants answered questions concerning seven suppression events in their efforts to report the trial, e.g., [I was…] "asked to suppress certain findings as they were viewed as being unfavourable." We also examined the association between information on study funder, geographical location, targeted health behaviour, country democracy rating and age of publication with reported suppression. FINDINGS: We received responses from 104 authors (50%) of 208 eligible trials, from North America (34%), Europe (33%), Oceania (17%), and other countries (16%). Eighteen percent reported at least one of the seven suppression events relating to the trial in question. The most commonly reported suppression event was funder(s) expressing reluctance to publish because they considered the results 'unfavourable' (9% reported). We found no strong associations with the subject of research, funding source, democracy, region, or year of publication. CONCLUSIONS: One in five researchers in this global sample reported being pressured to delay, alter, or not publish the findings of health behaviour intervention trials. Regulation of funder and university practices, establishing study registries, and compulsory disclosure of funding conditions in scientific journals, are needed to protect the integrity of public-good research.


Subject(s)
Financial Management/trends , Health Behavior , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Research Personnel/economics , Translational Research, Biomedical/economics , Alcoholism/prevention & control , Diet, Healthy , Europe , Exercise , Government Programs/economics , Humans , North America , Preventive Medicine/methods , Sexual Health , Surveys and Questionnaires , Tobacco Use/prevention & control
4.
Health Res Policy Syst ; 19(1): 5, 2021 Jan 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1033470

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has created urgent demand around the world for knowledge generation about a novel coronavirus, its transmission, and control, putting academic institutions at the frontline of politics. While many academic institutions are well poised to conduct research, there are well-documented barriers for these institutions, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to further conduct strategic synthesis and dissemination to promote knowledge utilization among policy-makers. These systemic barriers to knowledge translation (KT) pose significant challenges for academic institutions seeking to take advantage of unprecedented policy windows to inform evidence-based decision-making. Global health funding organizations should prioritize the support of academic institutions' activities along the KT pathway, including both knowledge generation and strategic dissemination, to improve knowledge uptake for decision-making to improve health. Institutional capacity-building initiatives for KT have the potential to profoundly impact responses to this and future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Capacity Building , Developing Countries , Global Health , Health Policy , Pandemics , Translational Research, Biomedical , Disaster Planning , Evidence-Based Practice , Financing, Organized , Humans , Knowledge , Policy Making , Research Support as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Translational Research, Biomedical/economics
5.
Nature ; 586(7831): 683-692, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1028698

ABSTRACT

Starting with the launch of the Human Genome Project three decades ago, and continuing after its completion in 2003, genomics has progressively come to have a central and catalytic role in basic and translational research. In addition, studies increasingly demonstrate how genomic information can be effectively used in clinical care. In the future, the anticipated advances in technology development, biological insights, and clinical applications (among others) will lead to more widespread integration of genomics into almost all areas of biomedical research, the adoption of genomics into mainstream medical and public-health practices, and an increasing relevance of genomics for everyday life. On behalf of the research community, the National Human Genome Research Institute recently completed a multi-year process of strategic engagement to identify future research priorities and opportunities in human genomics, with an emphasis on health applications. Here we describe the highest-priority elements envisioned for the cutting-edge of human genomics going forward-that is, at 'The Forefront of Genomics'.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/trends , Genome, Human/genetics , Genomics/trends , Public Health/standards , Translational Research, Biomedical/trends , Biomedical Research/economics , COVID-19/genetics , Genomics/economics , Humans , National Human Genome Research Institute (U.S.)/economics , Social Change , Translational Research, Biomedical/economics , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL