COVID-19 related interdisciplinary methods: Preventing errors and detecting research opportunities.

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.

Research Priorities in Lymphatic Interventions: Recommendations from a Multidisciplinary Research Consensus Panel.

Recognizing the increasing importance of lymphatic interventions, the Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation brought together a multidisciplinary group of key opinion leaders in lymphatic medicine to define the priorities in lymphatic research. On February 21, 2020, SIRF convened a multidisciplinary Research Consensus Panel (RCP) of experts in the lymphatic field. During the meeting, the panel and audience discussed potential future research priorities. The panelists ranked the discussed research priorities based on clinical relevance, overall impact, and technical feasibility. The following research topics were prioritized by RCP: lymphatic decompression in patients with congestive heart failure, detoxification of thoracic duct lymph in acute illness, development of newer agents for lymphatic imaging, characterization of organ-based lymph composition, and development of lymphatic interventions to treat ascites in liver cirrhosis. The RCP priorities underscored that the lymphatic system plays an important role not only in the intrinsic lymphatic diseases but in conditions that traditionally are not considered to be lymphatic such as congestive heart failure, liver cirrhosis, and critical illness. The advancement of the research in these areas will lead the field of lymphatic interventions to the next level.

ARADyAL: The Spanish Multidisciplinary Research Network for Allergic Diseases.

Thematic cooperative health research networks (RETICS) are organizational structures promoted by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III of the Spanish Ministry of Science with the objective of carrying out cooperative research projects addressing challenges of general interest for society as a whole in the field of health care. The RETICS of Asthma, Adverse Drug Reactions, and Allergy (ARADyAL) received funding in 2016 for a 5-year program (2017-2021). ARADyAL integrates basic and clinical research in the areas of allergy, immunology, genetics, nanomedicine, pharmacology, and chemistry, with special interest in research on new biomarkers and the design and evaluation of new interventions for allergic patients with severe phenotypes. The consortium comprises 28 groups across Spain, including 171 clinical and basic researchers, 17 clinical groups that cover more than 10 000 000 patients of all ages from urban and rural areas and 11 basic groups active mostly at universities and research institutes. ARADyAL has proposed a research program organized into 3 different areas focusing on precision medicine, as follows: Program 1, Mechanisms and prediction of adverse drug reactions and allergic diseases; Program 2, Toward a precise diagnosis of allergic diseases; and Program 3, Predicting interventions in allergic diseases. There is also 1 common program dedicated to training. The network has a Steering Committee and an External Advisory Scientific Committee, which advise the global network coordinator, who has recognized expertise in the field. ARADyAL is a unique meeting point for clinicians and basic scientists who are already working in allergy.

ARADyAL: The Spanish Multidisciplinary Research Network for Allergic Diseases

Thematic cooperative health research networks (RETICS) are organizational structures promoted by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III of the Spanish Ministry of Science with the objective of carrying out cooperative research projects addressing challenges of general interest for society as a whole in the field of health care. The RETICS of Asthma, Adverse Drug Reactions, and Allergy (ARADyAL) received funding in 2016 for a 5-year program (2017-2021). ARADyAL integrates basic and clinical research in the areas of allergy, immunology, genetics, nanomedicine, pharmacology, and chemistry, with special interest in research on new biomarkers and the design and evaluation of new interventions for allergic patients with severe phenotypes. The consortium comprises 28 groups across Spain, including 171 clinical and basic researchers, 17 clinical groups that cover more than 10 000 000 patients of all ages from urban and rural areas and 11 basic groups active mostly at universities and research institutes. ARADyAL has proposed a research program organized into 3 different areas focusing on precision medicine, as follows: Program 1, Mechanisms and prediction of adverse drug reactions and allergic diseases; Program 2, Toward a precise diagnosis of allergic diseases; and Program 3, Predicting interventions in allergic diseases. There is also 1 common program dedicated to training. The network has a Steering Committee and an External Advisory Scientific Committee, which advise the global network coordinator, who has recognized expertise in the field. ARADyAL is a unique meeting point for clinicians and basic scientists who are already working in allergy. (AU)

Las Redes Temáticas de Investigación Cooperativa en Salud (RETICS) son unas estructuras organizativas promovidas por el Instituto de Salud Carlos III del Ministerio de e Sanidad, Consumo y Bienestar Social con el objetivo de llevar a cabo proyectos de investigación colaborativos que aborden desafíos de interés general para la sociedad en el campo de la salud. La RETICS de Asma, Reacciones Adversas a Fármacos y Alérgicas (ARADyAL) comenzó en 2016 y fue financiada por un periodo de 5 años (2017-2021). ARADyAL integra la investigación básica y clínica en diferentes áreas de conocimiento, alergia, inmunología, genética, nanomedicina, farmacología y química, con especial interés en la investigación de nuevos biomarcadores, y el diseño y evaluación de nuevas estrategias de intervención para pacientes alérgicos con fenotipos graves. El consorcio está compuesto por 28 grupos de toda España, que incluyen 171 investigadores clínicos y básicos: 17 grupos clínicos que cubren a más de 10.000.000 de pacientes de todas las edades y de áreas tanto urbanas como rurales; 11 grupos básicos que desarrollan sus actividades principalmente en universidades e institutos de investigación. ARADyAL propone un programa de investigación organizado en tres áreas diferentes centradas en la medicina de precisión: Programa 1. Mecanismos y predicción de reacciones adversas a medicamentos y enfermedades alérgicas; Programa 2. Hacia un diagnóstico preciso de enfermedades alérgicas; y Programa 3. Predicción de intervenciones en enfermedades alérgicas. Además, hay un programa transversal dedicado a la formación. La red cuenta con un Comité de Dirección y un Comité Científico Asesor Externo, que asesoran a la coordinadora de la red la cual tiene experiencia reconocida en el campo. ARADyAL es un punto de encuentro único para médicos y científicos básicos que ya están trabajando en alergias.

Contributors to Independent Research Funding Success from the Perspective of K12 BIRCWH Program Directors.

INTRODUCTION: Faculty training awards are an important means of advancing early career faculty in research. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women's Health (BIRCWH) is a long-running K12 career development program and has been integral in promoting the research success of faculty nationally. We surveyed BIRCWH program directors to understand factors likely to influence long-term research careers and funding success. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed an online survey containing open-ended questions about individual and programmatic attributes and activities that promote success in achieving independent research funding. Domains of interest included: 1) strategies for funding success; 2) traits for predicting success; 3) groups considered vulnerable to attrition; and 4) existing resources and means of support. RESULTS: Fifteen institutions (75%) were included in the final analysis. Passion for research, persistence, resilience, and strong mentorship relationships were identified by all directors as factors important to scholar success. Responses also revealed an important pattern: program directors attributed attrition either to individual or organizational characteristics. This distinction has meaningful consequences for framing efforts to diminish attrition. Faculty who were clinicians, women, parents and underrepresented minorities were identified as vulnerable to attrition from the research careers. Common perceived challenges in these groups included isolation/feeling alienated, juggling numerous priorities, inadequate research time, lack of role models, and work-life balance issues. CONCLUSION: K12 BIRCWH directors identified persistence and resilience and developing community, networks, and other support opportunities as elements of scholar success. Programs and mentors can help early career faculty by teaching skills and providing tools they can use to maximize the value of these opportunities and expand their mentees' research relationships. Our study also highlights the importance of social factors, particularly isolation, on clinicians, women, and minoritized scholars on career success.

Interactive rhythms in the wild, in the brain, and in silico.

There are some historical divisions in methods, rationales, and purposes between studies on comparative cognition and behavioural ecology. In turn, the interaction between these two branches and studies from mathematics, computation, and neuroscience is not usual. In this short piece, we attempt to build bridges among these disciplines. We present a series of interconnected vignettes meant to illustrate what a more interdisciplinary approach looks like when successful, and its advantages. Concretely, we focus on a recent topic, namely animal rhythms in interaction, studied under different approaches. We showcase 5 research efforts, which we believe successfully link 5 particular scientific areas of rhythm research conceptualised as the following: social neuroscience, detailed rhythmic quantification, ontogeny, computational approaches, and spontaneous interactions. Our suggestions will hopefully spur a "comparative rhythms in interaction" field, which can integrate and capitalize on knowledge from zoology, comparative psychology, neuroscience, and computation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Pandemics and psychiatry: Repositioning research in context of COVID-19.

The current Covid-19 pandemic is posing an unprecedented threat to global well-being and its mental health consequences are just becoming understood. While the crisis has led to a temporary halt in a lot of ongoing or planned psychiatric research, this pandemic is a natural experiment that can help the field to repurpose research to better understand the causes, presentations and outcome trajectories as well as treatments in psychiatry. Inter-disciplinary collaborations between researchers are needed to rapidly develop and share the emerging new knowledge of the mental health implications of Covid-19, This will help mount an effective response to the current as well as future pandemics.

A low-cost, in silico nutritional genomics course-based undergraduate research experience applicable to multiple disciplines.

This article describes the development and assessment of a Nutritional Genomics course, designed to be held in a regular classroom during normal class periods, with few extra costs to the students or the department. The course was run as an upper-level undergraduate and lower-level graduate student course. Student taking the course spent 11 weeks learning and then 4 weeks using various in silico methods to independently characterize genes of interest in the field. During the last 4 weeks of the course, students combined their methods to test a hypothesis they generated about a gene they have not yet studied and completed a final report in the form of a journal article. Two students have published or are in the process of publishing work from their final project. Validated surveys of genetic knowledge given at least 6 months following the course indicated a very high level of genetic knowledge retainment, and favorable attitudes toward genetics testing and medical use of genetics. Finally, self-perceived critical thinking skills were high, and students indicated that they perceived these skills to be gained by their participation in the course. Materials and syllabus provided in the manuscript makes this CURE easily transferrable to other disciplines.

How Interdisciplinary? Taking Stock of Decision-Making Research at the Intersection of Psychology and Law.

Contemporary inquiries in psychology and law increasingly cross disciplinary boundaries for inspiration. Our focus is on whether such research is substantive in both directions and whether interdisciplinary psychology-and-law author teams produce more meaningful interdisciplinary work, specifically in decision-making research conducted between 2004 and 2017. We found that interdisciplinary psychology-and-law author teams (a) produce publications that show more cross-disciplinary integration in methods than single-discipline teams, (b) produce publications with more conceptual integration in the introduction and discussion than only law author teams, and (c) elicit more citations than only law or only psychology author teams. When considering a collaborative team approach, we suggest that the disciplinary background of the collaborators is a meaningful indicator of the type of interdisciplinary research to be conducted. We also suggest that it would be beneficial for both psychology and law journals to be more open to publishing scholarship from mixed disciplinary teams.

The Kaleidoscope of Citizen ScienceCommentary.

The narratives in this issue suggest six themes that merit further exploration: (1) the complexity of citizen science as a concept; (2) the potential to incorporate insights from the literature on team science; (3) the role of power and privilege in citizen science; (4) tensions over standardization, regulation, and quality control; (5) the nature and importance of local knowledge; and (6) the role of funding sources in citizen science initiatives. Taken together, these narratives and themes provide an image of citizen science that is like a kaleidoscope. They portray citizen science as a jumble of different kinds of activities that are in a constant state of flux. One of the most important tasks for the citizen science community going forward is to find ways to harness this energy and innovation while providing appropriate guidelines and standards.

Evaluation of multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation education delivered by either DVD or spoken talk.

INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a multidisciplinary program of care for patients with chronic respiratory disease. The educational component is an integral component and represents a large proportion of a program. However, it can be difficult to secure regular multidisciplinary input to PR programs. OBJECTIVES: This service evaluation assessed whether DVD presentations are acceptable to patients and effective as an education medium. METHOD: Two PR groups were compared; one group received education by DVD and the other by spoken talk. Both groups evaluated the content and delivery of each session and their knowledge was measured using the Bristol COPD Knowledge Questionnaire (BCKQ). RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-three patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) took part; 58 evaluated the DVD, 75 the talk sessions. There were no differences between the two groups at baseline with respect to age, gender distribution, or FEV1 . Both groups were satisfied with the content (99.46% DVD, 100% talk group) and delivery (100% both DVD and talk groups) of their education sessions. At baseline, there were no between group differences in the mean BCKQ. After PR, significant changes in BCKQ scores were seen within the groups (6.52 points (1.48-11.37) DVD group and 8.96 points (6.50-11.19) talk group), again with no differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: A DVD-based education package is both acceptable to PR patients and effective at improving patients' knowledge of COPD. Using filmed educational talks with PR would have a number of benefits to both the patients and the service and may be a way of increasing the capacity of PR services.

Be an NIH Reviewer: Contribute to Multidisciplinary Research.

One of the best ways to contribute to multidisciplinary research and to improve your own knowledge of the review process at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is to serve as a peer reviewer for research, traineeship, and small business innovation research proposals. Proactive targeted outreach to Scientific Review Officers (SROs) at NIH will increase your chances to become a reviewer. Reviewers with nursing expertise are especially welcome as multidisciplinary research is becoming more prevalent. Steps to identify a likely study section, contact the correct SRO, and review responsibly are described in this article, written by an experienced NIH review officer.

Sacral Neuromodulation: Standardized Electrode Placement Technique.

INTRODUCTION: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) (sacral nerve stimulation SNS) has become an established therapy for functional disorders of the pelvic organs. Despite its overall success, the therapy fails in a proportion of patients. This may be partially due to inadequate electrode placement with suboptimal coupling of the electrode and nerve. Based on these assumptions the technique of sacral spinal neuromodulation has been redefined. All descriptions relate to the only currently available system licensed for all pelvic indications (Medtronic Interstim® ). METHOD: An international multidisciplinary working party of ten individuals highly experienced in performing SNM convened two meetings (including live operating) to standardize the implant procedure. This report addresses the main steps to optimal electrode lead placement in temporal sequence. RESULTS: Key elements of the electrode placement are radiological marking, the use of a curved stylet, the entry of the electrode into the sacral foramen and its progression through the foramen, its placement guided by a combination of a typical appearance in fluoroscopy and achieving specific motor/sensory responses with stimulation. The report describes quadripolar electrode placement and then either insertion of a connecting percutaneous extension lead or permanent implantation of the programmable device. CONCLUSION: Standardization of electrode placement may ensure close electrode proximity to the target nerve providing a higher likelihood for optimal effect with less energy consumption (better battery longevity), more programming options with more electrode contacts close to the nerve and reduced likelihood of side-effects. The potentially better clinical outcome needs to be demonstrated.

Defining Advance Care Planning for Adults: A Consensus Definition From a Multidisciplinary Delphi Panel.

CONTEXT: Despite increasing interest in advance care planning (ACP) and previous ACP descriptions, a consensus definition does not yet exist to guide clinical, research, and policy initiatives. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a consensus definition of ACP for adults. METHODS: We convened a Delphi panel of multidisciplinary, international ACP experts consisting of 52 clinicians, researchers, and policy leaders from four countries and a patient/surrogate advisory committee. We conducted 10 rounds using a modified Delphi method and qualitatively analyzed panelists' input. Panelists identified several themes lacking consensus and iteratively discussed and developed a final consensus definition. RESULTS: Panelists identified several tensions concerning ACP concepts such as whether the definition should focus on conversations vs. written advance directives; patients' values vs. treatment preferences; current shared decision making vs. future medical decisions; and who should be included in the process. The panel achieved a final consensus one-sentence definition and accompanying goals statement: "Advance care planning is a process that supports adults at any age or stage of health in understanding and sharing their personal values, life goals, and preferences regarding future medical care. The goal of advance care planning is to help ensure that people receive medical care that is consistent with their values, goals and preferences during serious and chronic illness." The panel also described strategies to best support adults in ACP. CONCLUSIONS: A multidisciplinary Delphi panel developed a consensus definition for ACP for adults that can be used to inform implementation and measurement of ACP clinical, research, and policy initiatives.