Development of a research agenda for medical grade footwear in the Netherlands: A multidisciplinary multiphase project to determine the key research questions to advance scientific knowledge in the field.

BACKGROUND: The field of medical grade footwear is dynamic. Originally, a field where individual knowledge, expertise and skills determined the footwear and its outcomes, now becoming a more evidence-based and data-driven field with protocols and systems in place to create appropriate footwear. However, scientific evidence concerning medical grade footwear is still limited. Evidently, all stakeholders, from patients to pedorthists to rehabilitation physicians, will profit from a larger evidence-base in this field. A widely supported research agenda is an essential first step to advance and facilitate new knowledge. METHODS: We formed a multidisciplinary team and followed the methodology from Dutch medical societies for the development of a research agenda on medical grade footwear. This consisted of seven steps: (1) inventory of relevant questions with users and professionals; (2) analyses of responses; (3) analyses of existing knowledge and evidence; (4) formulating research questions; (5) prioritising research questions by users and professionals; (6) finalising the research agenda and (7) implementing the research agenda. RESULTS: In phase 1, 109 participants completed a survey, including 50% pedorthists, 6% rehabilitation physicians and 3% users. Participants provided 228 potential research questions. In phases 2-4, these were condensed to 65 research questions. In phase 5, 152 participants prioritised these 65 research questions, including 50% pedorthists, 13% rehabilitation physicians and 9% users. In phase 6, the final research agenda was created, with 26 research questions, categorised based on the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health 'process description assistive devices'. In phase 7, an implementation meeting was held with over 50 stakeholders (including users and professionals), resulting in seven applications for research projects based on one or more research questions from the research agenda. CONCLUSIONS: This research agenda structures and guides knowledge development within the field of medical grade footwear in the Netherlands and elsewhere. We expect that this will help to stimulate the field to tackle the research questions prioritised and with that to advance scientific knowledge in this field.

Training Outcomes and Satisfaction in Canadian MD/PhD and MD/MSc Programs: Findings from a National Survey.

PURPOSE: Despite the impact of physician-scientists on scientific discovery and translational medicine, several reports have signalled their declining workforce, reduced funding, and insufficient protected research time. Given the paucity of outcome data on Canadian MD/PhD programs, this study presents a national portrait of the sociodemographic characteristics, training trajectories, productivity, and satisfaction in trainees and alumni from Canadian MD/PhD and MD/MSc programs. METHODS: Quantitative data were collected in a national survey launched in 2021. Respondents included 74 MD/PhD alumni and 121 trainees across 12 Canadian MD/PhD and MD/MSc programs. RESULTS: Among MD/PhD alumni, 51% were independent practitioners/researchers while others underwent residency training. Most trainees (88%) were in MD/PhD programs. Significantly more alumni identified as men than did trainees. Significantly more alumni conducted clinical and health services research, while more trainees conducted basic science research. Average time to MD/PhD completion was 8 years, with no correlation to subsequent research outcomes. Self-reported research productivity was highest during MD/PhD training. Concerning training trajectories, most alumni completed residency, pursued additional training, and practised in Canada. Finally, regression models showed that trainees and alumni were satisfied with programs, with significant moderators in trainee models. CONCLUSION: Survey findings showed Canadian MD/PhD and MD/MSc programs recruit more diverse cohorts of trainees than before, provide productive research years, and graduate alumni who pursue training and academic employment in Canada. Both alumni and trainees are largely satisfied with these training programs. The need to collect in-depth longitudinal data on Canadian MD/PhD graduates to monitor diversity and success metrics is discussed.

Global Trends and Frontier in Research on Pancreatic Alpha Cells: A Bibliometric Analysis from 2013 to 2023.

PURPOSE: Over the past 20 years, much of the research on diabetes has focused on pancreatic beta cells. In the last 10 years, interest in the important role of pancreatic alpha cells in the pathogenesis of diabetes, which had previously received little attention, has grown. We aimed to summarize and visualize the hotspot and development trends of pancreatic alpha cells through bibliometric analysis and to provide research direction and future ideas for the treatment of diabetes and other islet-related diseases. METHODS: We used two scientometric software packages (CiteSpace 6.1.R6 and VOSviewer1.6.18) to visualize the information and connection of countries, institutions, authors, and keywords in this field. RESULTS: A total of 532 publications, published in 752 institutions in 46 countries and regions, were included in this analysis. The United States showed the highest output, accounting for 39.3% of the total number of published papers. The most active institution was Vanderbilt University, and the authors with highest productivity came from Ulster University. In recent years, research hotspots have concentrated on transdifferentiation, gene expression, and GLP-1 regulatory function. Visualization analysis shows that research hotspots mainly focus on clinical diseases as well as physiological and pathological mechanisms and related biochemical indicators. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a review and summary of the literature on pancreatic alpha cells through bibliometric and visual methods and shows research hotspot and development trends, which can guide future directions for research.

[Practice and exploration of "scientific research back-feeding teaching" in Medical Immunology teaching].

Medical immunology is an important link between basic experiments and clinical applications, and it is also the intersection of many cutting-edge disciplines. At present, there are still limitations in immunology teaching such as single teaching methods and insufficient scientific research training for students. Department of Immunology has implemented practice and exploration of "scientific research back-feeding teaching" in medical immunology course. By incorporating scientific research into teaching activities, the team has carried out teaching practice through scientific research platforms, enriched teaching content with scientific research progress, conducted scientific research activities to stimulate students' interest, which not only increase students' inner drive, improves teaching efficiency, and leads to a "win-win" situation of teaching and scientific research, but also contributes to training medical innovative talents who can shoulder the heavy responsibility of the country.

The Peer Review Process: Past, Present, and Future.

The peer review process is a fundamental aspect of modern scientific paper publishing, underpinning essential quality control. First conceptualised in the 1700s, it is an iterative process that aims to elevate scientific literature to the highest standards whilst preventing publication of scientifically unsound, potentially misleading, and even plagiarised information. It is widely accepted that the peer review of scientific papers is an irreplaceable and fundamental aspect of the research process. However, the rapid growth of research and technology has led to a huge increase in the number of publications. This has led to increased pressure on the peer review system. There are several established peer review methodologies, ranging from single and double blind to open and transparent review, but their implementation across journals and research fields varies greatly. Some journals are testing entirely novel approaches (such as collaborative reviews), whilst others are piloting changes to established methods. Given the unprecedented growth in publication numbers, and the ensuing burden on journals, editors, and reviewers, it is imperative to improve the quality and efficiency of the peer review process. Herein we evaluate the peer review process, from its historical origins to current practice and future directions.

Improving laboratory animal genetic reporting: LAG-R guidelines.

The biomedical research community addresses reproducibility challenges in animal studies through standardized nomenclature, improved experimental design, transparent reporting, data sharing, and centralized repositories. The ARRIVE guidelines outline documentation standards for laboratory animals in experiments, but genetic information is often incomplete. To remedy this, we propose the Laboratory Animal Genetic Reporting (LAG-R) framework. LAG-R aims to document animals' genetic makeup in scientific publications, providing essential details for replication and appropriate model use. While verifying complete genetic compositions may be impractical, better reporting and validation efforts enhance reliability of research. LAG-R standardization will bolster reproducibility, peer review, and overall scientific rigor.

Priorities for Clinical Research in Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Anticoagulation From the Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Anticoagulation CollaborativE Consensus Conference.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and prioritize research questions for anticoagulation and hemostasis management of neonates and children supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) from the Pediatric ECMO Anticoagulation CollaborativE (PEACE) consensus. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) databases from January 1988 to May 2021, followed by serial consensus conferences of international, interprofessional experts in the management of ECMO for critically ill neonates and children. STUDY SELECTION: The management of ECMO anticoagulation for critically ill neonates and children. DATA EXTRACTION: Within each of the eight subgroups, two authors reviewed all citations independently, with a third independent reviewer resolving any conflicts. DATA SYNTHESIS: Following the systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1988 to May 2021, and the consensus process for clinical recommendations and consensus statements, PEACE panel experts constructed research priorities using the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology. Twenty research topics were prioritized, falling within five domains (definitions and outcomes, therapeutics, anticoagulant monitoring, protocolized management, and impact of the ECMO circuit and its components on hemostasis). CONCLUSIONS: We present the research priorities identified by the PEACE expert panel after a systematic review of existing evidence informing clinical care of neonates and children managed with ECMO. More research is required within the five identified domains to ultimately inform and improve the care of this vulnerable population.

The Development of Principles for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Preclinical Spinal Cord Research: A Modified Delphi Study.

INTRODUCTION: There is currently limited guidance for researchers on Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) for preclinical spinal cord research, leading to uncertainty about design and implementation. This study aimed to develop evidence-informed principles to support preclinical spinal cord researchers to incorporate PPI into their research. METHODS: This study used a modified Delphi method with the aim of establishing consensus on a set of principles for PPI in spinal cord research. Thirty-eight stakeholders including researchers, clinicians and people living with spinal cord injury took part in the expert panel. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with a series of statements relating to PPI in preclinical spinal cord research over two rounds. As part of Round 2, they were also asked to rate statements as essential or desirable. RESULTS: Thirty-eight statements were included in Round 1, after which five statements were amended and two additional statements were added. After Round 2, consensus (> 75% agreement) was reached for a total of 27 principles, with 13 rated as essential and 14 rated as desirable. The principles with highest agreement related to diversity in representation among PPI contributors, clarity of the purpose of PPI and effective communication. CONCLUSION: This research developed a previously unavailable set of evidence-informed principles to inform PPI in preclinical spinal cord research. These principles provide guidance for researchers seeking to conduct PPI in preclinical spinal cord research and may also inform PPI in other preclinical disciplines. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT STATEMENT: This study was conducted as part of a project aiming to develop PPI in preclinical spinal cord injury research associated with an ongoing research collaboration funded by the Irish Rugby Football Union Charitable Trust (IRFU CT) and the Science Foundation Ireland Centre for Advanced Materials and BioEngineering Research (SFI AMBER), with research conducted by the Tissue Engineering Research Group (TERG) at the RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences. The project aims to develop an advanced biomaterials platform for spinal cord repair and includes a PPI Advisory Panel comprising researchers, clinicians and seriously injured rugby players to oversee the work of the project. PPI is included in this study through the involvement of members of the PPI Advisory Panel in the conceptualisation of this research, review of findings, identification of key points for discussion and preparation of the study manuscript as co-authors.

Hasty generalizations and generics in medical research: A systematic review.

It is unknown to what extent medical researchers generalize study findings beyond their samples when their sample size, sample diversity, or knowledge of conditions that support external validity do not warrant it. It is also unknown to what extent medical researchers describe their results with precise quantifications or unquantified generalizations, i.e., generics, that can obscure variations between individuals. We therefore systematically reviewed all prospective studies (n = 533) published in the top four highest ranking medical journals, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), and the British Medical Journal (BMJ), from January 2022 to May 2023. We additionally reviewed all NEJM Journal Watch clinical research summaries (n = 143) published during the same time. Of all research articles reporting prospective studies, 52.5% included generalizations beyond specific national study populations, with the numbers of articles with generics varying significantly between journals (JAMA = 12%; Lancet = 77%) (p < 0.001, V = 0.48). There was no evidence that articles containing broader generalizations or generics were correlated with larger or more nationally diverse samples. Moreover, only 10.2% of articles with generalizations beyond specific national populations reported external validity strengthening factors that could potentially support such extrapolations. There was no evidence that original research articles and NEJM Journal Watch summaries intended for practitioners differed in their use of broad generalizations, including generics. Finally, from the journal with the highest citation impact, articles containing broader conclusions were correlated with more citations. Since there was no evidence that studies with generalizations beyond specific national study populations or with generics were associated with larger, more nationally diverse samples, or with reports of population similarity that may permit extensions of conclusions, our findings suggest that the generalizations in many articles were insufficiently supported. Caution against overly broad generalizations in medical research is warranted.

A bibliometric analysis from 2013 to 2023 reveals research hotspots and trends in the connection between sport and regenerative medicine.

The field of regenerative medicine for sports injuries has grown significantly in the 21st century. This study attempted to provide an overview of the current state of research and key findings regarding the relationship between sport and regenerative medicine in general, identifying trends and hotspots in research topics. We gathered the literature from the Web of Science (WOS) database covering the last 10 years (2013-2023) pertaining to regenerative medicine for sporter and applied Citespace to assess the knowledge mapping. The findings demonstrated that there were 572, with a faster increase after 2018. The country, institution, and author with the most publications are the USA, Harvard University, and Maffulli Nicola. In addition, the most co-cited reference is J Acad Nutr Diet (2016) (199). Adipose tissue, high tibial osteotomy, and bone marrow are the hot spots in this field in the next few years.

Global trends and frontiers of research on Kümmell's disease: A bibliometric analysis.

The prevalence of Kümmell's disease (KD) has been increasing due to the aging population and the rise of osteoporotic vertebral compressibility fractures. As a result, there has been a growing concern about this condition. Despite the rapid advancements in its related research fields, the current research status and hotspot analysis of KD remain unclear. Therefore, our goal was to identify and analyze the global research trends on KD using bibliometric tools. All KD data were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection. The information of research field was collected, including title, author, institutions, journals, countries, references, total citations, and years of publication for further analysis. From 1900 to 2022, a total of 195 articles and 1973 references have been published in this field, originating from 27 countries/regions and 90 journals, with China leading the contributions. The most significant institutional and author contributions come from Soochow University and Kim, HS, respectively. The journal with the highest number of published research and total citation frequency is Spine. The latest research focuses in this field include "risk factor," "osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture," "pedicle screw fixation," "percutaneous vertebroplasty," and "bone cement," and should be closely monitored. Additionally, we have conducted a comprehensive analysis of the 50 most-cited articles in KD, providing a valuable list of articles to guide clinical decision-making and future research for clinicians and researchers. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in scientific research on KD. Future research in KD is likely to focus on surgical treatment, risk factors, and complications.