1,720,999 research outputs found
Valutazione dell'impatto della ricerca biomedica e sanitaria: revisione sistematica della letteratura
No full textSeppur limitato dalla crisi economica, l’interesse per programmi di Ricerca
amp; Sviluppo da parte di strutture del Servizio Sanitario Nazionale, Regioni e Università è crescente. Va anche in questa direzione parte della riforma universitaria che vuole promuovere la ricerca, puntando sulla valutazione delle performance di ricerca degli atenei. In questo contesto abbiamo sviluppato una revisione sistematica con l’obiettivo di descrivere i modelli teorici, la metodologia e gli approcci empirici alla valutazione delle ricadute della ricerca biomedica e sanitaria e di identificare le principali dimensioni e indicatori d’impatto. Sono state analizzate le iniziative condotte a livello internazionale e italiano riportate in 4 revisioni sistematiche e 14 studi primari. I modelli teorici sono numerosi e la metodologia di ricerca
utilizzata comprende analisi bibliometrica e citazionale, economica e case studies disegnati ad hoc. Il modello “payback” emerge come quello
maggiormente completo e convincente e comprende cinque dimensioni d’impatto: a) avanzamento delle conoscenze, b) sviluppo delle conoscenze e delle infrastrutture, c) influenza a livello decisionale, d) miglioramento della salute pubblica, e) benefici economico-sociali. Per ogni dimensione sono stati analizzati i set di possibili indicatori mettendone in luce i pro e
contro. Lo studio dell’impatto della ricerca bio-medica è un ambito piuttosto
“giovane” e disomogeneo. È possibile però rilevare dei modelli più maturi di
altri. Questi modelli possono essere utili nel supportare scelte strategiche
e politiche per individuare gli approcci di ricerca consolidati e strutturati, garantendo una loro valorizzazione, e affiancando a questi approcci tematiche emergenti che possano garantire un ritorno nel medio-lungo periodo
Online evidence-based practice point of care information sommaries : a content evaluation cross-sectional study
No full textBackground: Busy clinicians should have easy access to evidence-based information during their clinical practice. Publishing groups and institutions designed specific tools to meet doctor’s need, the so called ‘point of care’ products. Clinicians may strongly rely on these information resources and it is therefore important to assess their relevance and validity. Objectives: To describe online evidence-based practice point of care summaries and evaluate their broadness, content development, and editorial policy against their claims as ‘evidence-based’. Data Sources: To identify evidence based practice summaries we searched MEDLINE, Google, librarian association websites and scientific information conferences’ proceedings from January to December 2008. Summary Selection: We included English web-based summaries specifically designed to deliver pre-digested, rapidly accessible, comprehensive, periodically up-dated, and evidence-based information to clinicians. Data Extraction: Two investigators independently extracted data on general characteristics and content presentation of summaries. We assessed and ranked point of care products according to: coverage of medical conditions, editorial quality, and evidence-based methodology. The correlation among quality and quantity factors was explored. Data Synthesis: We retrieved 30 eligible evidence-based practice summaries. Eighteen products met our inclusion criteria and were qualitatively described and 16 provided sufficient data for the quantitative evaluation. The median coverage volume was 80.6% (interquartile range: 68.9 to 84.2%). The median editorial and evidence-based methodology scores were 8.0 (interquartile range: 5.8 to 10.3) and 10.0 (interquartile range: 1.0 to 12.8) according to a 15-point scale. None of the correlations analysed
– editorial quality, evidence-based methodology and volume – turned out to be significantly associated. Conclusions: Doctors can now have access to many different points of care summaries to support their clinical practice at the point of care. Some are at the top rank in one or two desirable aspects but none completely satisfied our criteria
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Constraint-induced movement therapy: trial sequential analysis applied to Cochrane collaboration systematic review results
Full text linkBackground: Trial sequential analysis (TSA) may establish when firm evidence about the efficacy of interventions is reached in a cumulative meta-analysis, combining a required information size with adjusted thresholds for conservative statistical significance. Our aim was to demonstrate TSA results on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in a Cochrane systematic review on the effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) for stroke patients. Methods: We extracted data on the functional independence measure (FIM) and the action research arm test (ARAT) from RCTs that compared CIMT versus other rehabilitative techniques. Mean differences (MD) were analyzed using a random-effects model. We calculated the information size and the cumulative Z-statistic, applying the O'Brien-Fleming monitoring boundaries. Results: We included data from 14 RCTs. In the conventional meta-analysis (seven trials, 233 patients), the effect of CIMT on FIM was reported as significant (MD 2.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.68; P = 0.04). The diversity-adjusted required information size was 142 patients, and the cumulative Z-score did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit (adjusted 95% CI -0.02 to 5.78). The effect of CIMT on ARAT (nine trials, 199 patients) was reported as significant (MD 7.78, 95% CI 1.19 to 14.37; P = 0.02). However, the diversity-adjusted required information size was 252 patients, and the Z-score did not cross the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit (adjusted 95% CI -0.06 to 15.62). Conclusions: Although conventional meta-analyses of CIMT reached statistical significance, their overall results remain inconclusive and might be spurious. Researchers should not be overconfident on CIMT efficacy based on the results of meta-analyses and derived recommendations
- …
