Scientific research output evaluation of professors of Sao Paulo State University, Marilia/SP

In this work, an analysis of scientific bibliographic productivity was made using the Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciencias, Universidade Estadual Paulista (FFC-UNESP) as example. It is composed by nine departments which offer altogether nine undergraduate courses: 1) Archival, 2) Library, 3) Speech Therapy, 4) Pedagogy, 5) International Relations, 6) Physiotherapy, 7) Occupational Therapy, 8) Philosophy, 9) Social Sciences and six graduate programs leading to M. S. and Ph.D. degrees. Moreover, when analyzing the different courses of FFC-UNESP, they represent typical academic organization in Brazil and Latin America and could be taken as a model for analyzing other Brazilian research institutions. Using data retrieved from the Lattes Plataform database (Curriculum Lattes) we have quantitatively the scientific productivity percentage of professors at UNESP. We observed that bibliometric evaluations using the Curriculum Lattes (CL) showed that the professors published papers in journal are not indexed by ISI and SCOPUS. This analysis was made using: 1) the total number of papers (indexed in Curriculum Lattes database), 2) the number of papers indexed by Thomson ISI Web of Science database and SCOPUS database, and 3) the Hirsch (h-index) by ISI and SCOPUS. Bibliometric evaluations of departments showed a better performance of Political Science and Economics Department when compared to others departments, in relation total number of papers (indexed in Curriculum Lattes database). We also analyzed the academic advisory (Master's Thesis and Ph. D. Thesis) by nine departments of FFC/UNESP. The Administration and School Supervision Department presented a higher academic advisory (concluded and current) when compared to the others departments.

Post-trial access to study medication: a Brazilian e-survey with major stakeholders in clinical research

Objectives To analyse the perspective of clinical research stakeholders concerning post-trial access to study medication. Methods Questionnaires and informed consents were sent through e-mail to 599 ethics committee (EC) members, 290 clinical investigators (HIV/AIDS and Diabetes) and 53 sponsors in Brazil. Investigators were also asked to submit the questionnaire to their research patients. Two reminders were sent to participants. Results The response rate was 21%, 20% and 45% in EC, investigators and sponsors' groups, respectively. 54 patients answered the questionnaire through their doctors. The least informative item in the consent form was how to obtain the study medication after trial. If a benefit were demonstrated in the study, 60% of research participants and 35% of EC answered that all patients should continue receiving study medication after trial; 43% of investigators believed the medication should be given to participants, and 40% to subjects who participated and benefited from treatment. For 50% of the sponsors, study medication should be assured to participants who had benefited from treatment. The majority of responders answered that medication should be provided free by sponsors; investigators and sponsors believed the medication should be kept until available in the public health sector; EC members said that the patient should keep the benefit; patients answered that benefits should be assured for life. Conclusions Due to the study limitations, the results cannot be generalised; however, the data can contribute to discussion of this complex topic through analysing the views of stakeholders in clinical research in Brazil.