NanoImpactNet - Stakeholders' knowledge needs for research on the health and environmental impact of nanomaterials

NanoImpactNet (NIN) is a multidisciplinary European Commission funded network on the environmental, health and safety (EHS) impact of nanomaterials. The 24 founding scientific institutes are leading European research groups active in the fields of nanosafety, nanorisk assessment and nanotoxicology. This 4−year project is the new focal point for information exchange within the research community. Contact with other stakeholders is vital and their needs are being surveyed. NIN is communicating with 100s of stakeholders: businesses; internet platforms; industry associations; regulators; policy makers; national ministries; international agencies; standard−setting bodies and NGOs concerned by labour rights, EHS or animal welfare. To improve this communication, internet research, a questionnaire distributed via partners and targeted phone calls were used to identify stakeholders' interests and needs. Knowledge gaps and the necessity for further data mentioned by representatives of all stakeholder groups in the targeted phone calls concerned: potential toxic and safety hazards of nanomaterials throughout their lifecycles; fate and persistence of nanoparticles in humans, animals and the environment; risks associated to nanoparticle exposure; participation in the preparation of nomenclature, standards, methodologies, protocols and benchmarks; development of best practice guidelines; voluntary schemes on responsibility; databases of materials, research topics and themes. Findings show that stakeholders and NIN researchers share very similar knowledge needs, and that open communication and free movement of knowledge will benefit both researchers and industry. Consequently NIN will encourage stakeholders to be active members. These survey findings will be used to improve NIN's communication tools to further build on interdisciplinary relationships towards a healthy future with nanotechnology.

Integration and development in schizotypy research : an introduction to the special supplement

In its fifth decade of existence, the construct of schizotypy is recapturing the early scientific interest it attracted when Paul E. Meehl (1920-2003), who coined the term, pioneered the field of schizotypy research. The International Lemanic Workshop on Schizotypy, hosted at the University of Geneva in December 2013, recently offered an opportunity to address some of the fundamental questions in contemporary schizotypy research and situate the construct in the greater scheme of future scientific projects on schizophrenia and psychological health research. What kind of knowledge has schizotypy research provided in furthering our understanding of schizophrenia? What types of questions can schizotypy research tackle, and which are the conceptual and methodological frameworks to address them? How will schizotypy research contribute to future scientific endeavors? The International Lemanic Workshop brought together leading experts in the field around the tasks of articulating the essential findings in schizotypy research, as well as providing some key insights and guidance to face scientific challenges of the future. The current supplement contains 8 position articles, 4 research articles, and 1 invited commentary that outline the state of the art in schizotypy research today

Comparative analysis of ten assesment grids of quality criteria in qualitative research

The authors present 10 grids which are widely used in Health Sciences for the assessment of quality in research. They proceed through a comparative thematic analysis of these grids and show which points of view are preferred. They insist on the issues that differentiate these grids from each other and suggest the analysis of their differences by distinguishing the theoretical perspectives that underpin each one of these grids. Whilst the authors of the assessment grids rarely refer to the implicit theoretical backgrounds that guide their work, findings show that these grids convey varied epistemologies and research models. This gap renders the comparison of quality assessment in qualitative research a very difficult task, unless we shift our focus on the relationship between the grids, their theoretical backgrounds and their specific research subjects.

From Naples 1963 to Rome 2013 - A brief review of how the International Research Group on Ostracoda (IRGO) developed as a social communication system

The 1st International Symposium on Ostracoda (ISO) was held in Naples (1963). The philosophy behind this symposium and the logical outcome of what is now known as the International Research Group on Ostracoda (IRGO) is here reviewed, namely ostracodology over the last 50 years is sociologically analysed. Three different and important historic moments for the scientific achievements of this domain are recognised. The first one, between about 1963-1983, is related to applied research for the oil industry as well as to the great interest in the better description of the marine environment by both zoologists and palaeontologists. Another important aspect during this period was the work by researchers dealing with Palaeozoic ostracods, who had their own discussion group, IRGPO. Gradually, the merger of this latter group with those dealing with post-Palaeozoic ostracods at various meetings improved communication between the two groups of specialists. A second period was approximately delineated between 1983 and 2003. During this time-slice, more emphasis was addressed to environmental research with topics such as the study of global events and long-term climate change. Ostracodologists profited also from the research "politics" within national and international programmes. Large international research teams emerged using new research methods. During the third period (2003-2013), communication and collaborative research reached a global dimension. Amongst the topics of research we cite the reconstruction of palaeoclimate using transfer functions, the building of large datasets of ostracod distributions for regional and intercontinental studies, and the implementation of actions that should lead to taxonomic harmonisation. Projects within which molecular biological techniques are routinely used, combined with sophisticated morphological information, expanded now in their importance. The documentation of the ostracod description improved through new techniques to visualise morphological details, which stimulated also communication between ostracodologists. Efforts of making available ostracod information through newsletters and electronic media are evoked.