Research to Publication
Download as PPTX, PDF5 likes1,073 views
The document discusses a new e-learning program, Research to Publication (RToP), aimed at supporting early career researchers in healthcare. It highlights common issues leading to research paper rejections, including poor research design and selective reporting, and stresses the importance of improving research integrity. The program offers self-paced modules developed by experts to enhance research skills and increase the likelihood of publication.
![• nations need research evidence that’s reliable and relevant
enough to help them build UHC (SDG 3, target 8)
• Africa’s share of annual research publications on health rose
from 0.7% in 2000 to 1.3% in 2014, but only three countries –
South Africa, Nigeria, and Kenya – contributed over half [1]
• publications retracted for plagiarism are significantly more
likely to have 1st author from a low income country [2]
Relevance to global health
1. Uthman et al. BMJ Open 2015;5:3 e006340
2. Stretton S et al. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012;28(10):1575-83.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/rtop-160614142814/85/Research-to-Publication-5-320.jpg)
Research to Publication
- 1. Research to Publication eLearning from BMJ for early career researchers In partnership with UCSF Dr Trish Groves Head of research, BMJ; Editor-in-chief BMJ Open Editorial lead for Research to Publication
- 2. What are the main reasons for journal editors to reject a research paper, even if well written and presented? • the research question isn’t sufficiently new, interesting, or important • the question is answered with suboptimal design • investigators often lack training on developing good research questions, choosing study designs, and reporting research effectively What’s the problem?
- 3. What should we think about researchers who use the wrong techniques (either wilfully or in ignorance), use the right techniques wrongly, misinterpret their results, report their results selectively, cite the literature selectively, and draw unjustified conclusions? We should be appalled. Yet numerous studies of the medical literature, in both general and specialist journals, have shown that all of the above phenomena are common... This is surely a scandal.” The scandal of poor medical research Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ 1994; 308 :283
- 4. Stages of waste in the production and reporting of research evidence relevant to clinicians and patients; from Chalmers and Glasziou, The Lancet 2009 REWARD Alliance http://researchwaste.net/about/
- 5. • nations need research evidence that’s reliable and relevant enough to help them build UHC (SDG 3, target 8) • Africa’s share of annual research publications on health rose from 0.7% in 2000 to 1.3% in 2014, but only three countries – South Africa, Nigeria, and Kenya – contributed over half [1] • publications retracted for plagiarism are significantly more likely to have 1st author from a low income country [2] Relevance to global health 1. Uthman et al. BMJ Open 2015;5:3 e006340 2. Stretton S et al. Curr Med Res Opin. 2012;28(10):1575-83.
- 6. Research to Publication (RtoP) is an eLearning programme for early career academics in healthcare research to guide them right through from designing a study to seeing it published in an international journal RtoP offers a comprehensive and flexible set of stand-alone, self-study modules that let learners choose what to study, and at their own pace RtoP draws on expertise of The BMJ's senior research editors and senior academics at the UCSF Clinical and Translational Science Institute Research to Publication eLearning programme http://rtop.bmj.com
- 7. • courses on medical writing lack scientific depth • Publish or perish = universal problem • research output is an essential measurement of institutional success but output is inadequate • governments want/need to build research capability • author/institutional demand (doctors, nurses and other allied health researchers, postgraduates, undergraduates, research integrity departments) • extends The BMJ’s role in research integrity • inside track from decision-making editors Why Research to Publication?
- 8. • uniquely, combines expertise of international medical publisher and world-leading university • focused on clinical and public health research • supports research integrity and drives high ethical standards • builds research skills • increases relevance and quality, of research; reduces waste • improves chances of publication • provides practical advice in a user-friendly multimedia format Value for learners and their institutions • helps institutions build research capabilities, improve reputation, attract funding • offers the option for integration into a Masters programme • Certificate of Completion from BMJ and UCSF for every module • 75% discount on APCs for protocols published in BMJ Open and other BMJJs
- 9. • takes the lecture out of the classroom and brings homework in • puts students in charge of their own learning • students needing more time to master a concept aren’t left behind Ideal for blended learning with “flipped classroom”
- 10. Before the flip After the flip Before class • students assigned reading • instructor/teacher/tutor prepares lecture • students guided through learning module that asks and collects questions • instructor prepares learning opportunities Beginning of class • students have limited information about what to expect • instructor makes general assumption about what is helpful • students have specific questions in mind to guide their learning • instructor can anticipate where students need the most help During class • students try to follow along • instructor tries to get through all the material • students practise skills • instructor guides the process with feedback and mini-lectures After class • students attempt homework, usually with delayed feedback • instructor grades past work • students continue applying their knowledge skills after clarification and feedback • instructor posts any additional explanations and resources as necessary, and grades higher quality work
- 13. A closer look
- 14. The faculty Professor Deborah Grady Associate Dean of Clinical and Translational Research, UCSF School of Medicine Professor Bernard Lo Professor of Medicine Emeritus, UCSF CTSI Dr Trish Groves Head of research, BMJ; Editor-in-chief BMJ Open & Editorial lead for Research to Publication
- 17. Use best study design to answer research Q Descriptive studies answer “what’s happening?” Analytic observational studies answer “why or how is it happening?” Analytic experimental studies answer “can it work?” Adapted from: Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, Oxford, UK www.cebm.net
- 18. Imagine you want to design and conduct a study to answer this research question about risk: “In my country, where 1 in 200 births is a stillbirth, what proportion of the women who have a stillbirth will go on to have another stillbirth in their next pregnancy?” What would be the best study design to answer this question? a) a randomised controlled trial where 100 women who have had one stillbirth are randomly allocated to one of two groups: i) a group having regular follow up by a midwife over the next three years or ii) a group having no active follow up. b) a cross sectional study where 100 women who have had one stillbirth in the past year are sent an online survey asking about their current health and lifestyle. c) a retrospective cohort study where a database of routinely collected health data is used to compare the incidence of stillbirth in two groups of women: all women who had a stillbirth in their previous pregnancy, compared with all women whose previous pregnancy led to a live birth. d) a qualitative study where 25 women who have had stillbirths are interviewed in depth about their fears about becoming pregnant and their needs for support and care. e) a case series where all consecutive stillbirths in one area are documented and described, along with information about the mothers’ health and lifestyles. Sample MCQ
- 19. Video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/A8EINvlnktw More on Research to Publication
- 21. Twitter @BMJRtoP
- 22. Thank You Dr Trish Groves, BMJ twitter @trished @BMJRtoP tgroves@bmj.com
- 23. Appendix: more details of modules
- 24. • the research question • study design • subjects and variables • enhancing causal inference • sample size and power • data and safety monitoring • questionnaires and qualitative research • ethical considerations in research Course: designing clinical research
- 25. • trial designs • randomisation • selection of participants • blinding • choosing interventions and controls • recruitment • adherence and follow up • outcome measures • adverse events • regulatory issues • ethical issues in clinical trials Course: introduction to clinical trials
- 26. • overview of clinical research regulations • informed consent and related issues • conflicts of interest • authorship and research misconduct • ethics in big data and “precision medicine” • research in resource-poor environments Course: responsible conduct of research
- 27. • the introduction: presenting the research question • the methods: matching study designs to research questions • ethics aspects of study methods • reporting statistical methods and analyses • the results: reporting all findings succinctly • the discussion: using structure and balance • choosing and citing references • optimising the abstract and title Course: how to write a paper
- 28. • compliance with journal and ICMJE requirements • navigating journal and peer review processes • surviving peer review • what to do with rejections and appeals • pre-submission inquiries and cover letters • good medical writing Course: what editors and peer reviewers look for
- 29. • patients’ consent to publication • journal rules on authorship • reporting conflicts of interest • how to write up industry-sponsored trials • scientific transparency: the pitfalls of selective reporting • how and why to avoid plagiarism • how journals uncover scientific fraud • how journals act on scientific misconduct Course: publication ethics
Editor's Notes
- #9: At BMJ Open we are offering a £250 APC (75% discount) for authors who have successfully completed the R2P protocols module in the past 6 months Other Gold OA titles that publish protocol articles and might offer this discount: Open Heart, BMJ Open Gastroenterology, BMJ Open Respiratory Research, RMD Open
- #10: Image from https://teachmspost.wordpress.com/2014/07/23/instructional-design-and-the-micro-mooc/ Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License
- #19: Correct answer = c) a cohort study is the best study design for estimating the population risk of an outcome that is infrequent. The study scenario above is about the risk of recurrent stillbirth in a developed country where the baseline rate of stillbirth is 1 in 200 births and it is, therefore, a relatively uncommon event. If you are unsure about why this is the correct answer, and/or you would like to know more about the uses, advantages, and disadvantages of different clinical and epidemiological study designs, these are explained well at the website of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, Oxford, UK: http://www.cebm.net/study-designs/ Here is the information from CEBM about cohort studies: In a cohort study: Data are obtained from groups who have been exposed, or not exposed, to the new technology or factor of interest (eg from databases). No allocation of exposure is made by the researcher. Best for study the effect of predictive risk factors on an outcome. Advantages: ethically safe; subjects can be matched; can establish timing and directionality of events; eligibility criteria and outcome assessments can be standardised; administratively easier and cheaper than RCT. Disadvantages: controls may be difficult to identify; exposure may be linked to a hidden confounder; blinding is difficult; randomisation not present; for rare disease, large sample sizes or long follow-up necessary.