Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 18(12): 791-799, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36215686

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate implicit bias (IB) in the peer review process across ASCO and Conquer Cancer Foundation and to propose potential mitigation strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We, ASCO Working Group on Implicit Bias, selected four data sources: (1) literature search [(a) defining IB in peer review, (b) evidence of IB in peer review, and (c) strategies to mitigate IB]; (2) created and analyzed an ASCO database for sex, race, and institutional affiliation regarding peer review success; (3) constructed and conducted qualitative interviews of key stakeholders within the ASCO board, publications, and grants committee, on experience with IB within ASCO; and (4) constructed, delivered, and analyzed results of member survey on perception of IB within ASCO. RESULTS: Historically uncommon, PubMed articles on IB in peer review subsequently increased exponentially in the past 2 decades. Qualitative interviews of ASCO key stakeholders reveal that system changes and IB training were priorities. The committee member survey reported that their peer review decisions could be affected by IB and that mitigating IB should be a priority. Most reported having never been trained on IB. Available data from ASCO database support stakeholder findings, suggesting that there exists a disproportionate representation of males and better-known institutions among both reviewer positions and awardees. Ethnicity/race data were insufficiently reported. Limited data on interventions/strategies to mitigate IB in the peer-reviewed literature suggest that there are feasible processes for grants, program committees, and journals. CONCLUSION: Limited data reveal that the peer review process at ASCO is not exempt from IB and suggest association with sex and institutional affiliation. Working Group on Implicit Bias recommends three actions to mitigate IB within peer review: (1) create awareness and a culture of inclusivity, (2) create systems to reduce IB, and (3) collect data for ongoing analysis.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Peer Review , Male , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires
2.
Oxf Med Case Reports ; 2021(5): omab019, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34055356

ABSTRACT

Aphantasia, the loss of mental imagery, is a rare disorder and even more infrequent when acquired. No previous cases have been identified that were caused by transplant-related treatment. We describe a case of acquired aphantasia in a 62-year-old male with refractory IgG kappa multiple myeloma after receiving an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) following high-dose melphalan with a complicated hospital admission. The etiology of aphantasia remains unidentified, but we provide viable explanations to include direct effects from ASCT treatment and indirect effects from transplant-related complications.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...