Knowledge-Production Processes in Practice Research - Outcomes and Critical Elements

The welfare sector has seen considerable changes in its operational context. Welfare services respond to an increasing number of challenges as citizens are confronted with life’s uncertainties and a variety of complex situations. At the same time the service-delivery system is facing problems of co-operation and the development of staff competence, as well as demands to improve service effectiveness and outcomes. In order to ensure optimal user outcomes in this complex, evolving environment it is necessary to enhance professional knowledge and skills, and to increase efforts to develop the services. Changes are also evident in the new emergent knowledge-production models. There has been a shift from knowledge acquisition and transmission to its construction and production. New actors have stepped in and the roles of researchers are subject to critical discussion. Research outcomes, in other words the usefulness of research with respect to practice development, is a topical agenda item. Research is needed, but if it is to be useful it needs to be not only credible but also useful in action. What do we know about different research processes in practice? What conceptions, approaches, methods and actor roles are embedded? What is the effect on practice? How does ‘here and now’ practice challenge research methods? This article is based on the research processes conducted in the institutes of practice research in social work in Finland. It analyses the different approaches applied by elucidating the theoretical standpoints and the critical elements embedded in them, and reflects on the outcomes in and for practice. It highlights the level of change and progression in practice research, arguing for diverse practice research models with a solid theoretical grounding, rigorous research processes, and a supportive infrastructure.

A Research Roadmap for Complementary and Alternative Medicine – What We Need to Know by 2020

Background: The CAMbrella coordination action was funded within the Framework Programme 7. Its aim is to provide a research roadmap for clinical and epidemiological research for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) that is appropriate for the health needs of European citizens and acceptable to their national research institutes and healthcare providers in both public and private sectors. One major issue in the European research agenda is the demographic change and its impact on health care. Our vision for 2020 is that there is an evidence base that enables European citizens to make informed decisions about CAM, both positive and negative. This roadmap proposes a strategic research agenda for the field of CAM designed to address future European health care challenges. This roadmap is based on the results of CAMbrella’s several work packages, literature reviews and expert discussions including a consensus meeting. Methods: We first conducted a systematic literature review on key issues in clinical and epidemiological research in CAM to identify the general concepts, methods and the strengths and weaknesses of current CAM research. These findings were discussed in a workshop (Castellaro, Italy, September 7–9th 2011) with international CAM experts and strategic and methodological recommendations were defined in order to improve the rigor and relevance of CAM research. These recommendations provide the basis for the research roadmap, which was subsequently discussed in a consensus conference (Järna, Sweden, May 9–11th 2012) with all CAMbrella members and the CAMbrella advisory board. The roadmap was revised after this discussion in CAMbrella Work Package (WP) 7 and finally approved by CAMbrella’s scientific steering committee on September 26th 2012. Results: Our main findings show that CAM is very heterogenous in terms of definitions and legal regulations between the European countries. In addition, citizens’ needs and attitudes towards CAM as well as the use and provision of CAM differ significantly between countries. In terms of research methodology, there was consensus that CAM researchers should make use of all the commonly accepted scientific research methods and employ those with utmost diligence combined in a mixed methods framework. Conclusions: We propose 6 core areas of research that should be investigated to achieve a robust knowledge base and to allow stakeholders to make informed decisions. These are: Research into the prevalence of CAM in Europe: Reviews show that we do not know enough about the circumstances in which CAM is used by Europeans. To enable a common European strategic approach, a clear picture of current use is of the utmost importance. Research into differences regarding citizens’ attitudes and needs towards CAM: Citizens are the driver for CAM utilization. Their needs and views on CAM are a key priority, and their interests must be investigated and addressed in future CAM research. Research into safety of CAM: Safety is a key issue for European citizens. CAM is considered safe, but reliable data is scarce although urgently needed in order to assess the risk and cost-benefit ratio of CAM. Research into the comparative effectiveness of CAM: Everybody needs to know in what situation CAM is a reasonable choice. Therefore, we recommend a clear emphasis on concurrent evaluation of the overall effectiveness of CAM as an additional or alternative treatment strategy in real-world settings. Research into effects of context and meaning: The impact of effects of context and meaning on the outcome of CAM treatments must be investigated; it is likely that they are significant. Research into different models of CAM health care integration: There are different models of CAM being integrated into conventional medicine throughout Europe, each with their respective strengths and limitations. These models should be described and concurrently evaluated; innovative models of CAM provision in health care systems should be one focus for CAM research. We also propose a methodological framework for CAM research. We consider that a framework of mixed methodological approaches is likely to yield the most useful information. In this model, all available research strategies including comparative effectiveness research utilising quantitative and qualitative methods should be considered to enable us to secure the greatest density of knowledge possible. Stakeholders, such as citizens, patients and providers, should be involved in every stage of developing the specific and relevant research questions, study design and the assurance of real-world relevance for the research. Furthermore, structural and sufficient financial support for research into CAM is needed to strengthen CAM research capacity if we wish to understand why it remains so popular within the EU. In order to consider employing CAM as part of the solution to the health care, health creation and self-care challenges we face by 2020, it is vital to obtain a robust picture of CAM use and reliable information about its cost, safety and effectiveness in real-world settings. We need to consider the availability, accessibility and affordability of CAM. We need to engage in research excellence and utilise comparative effectiveness approaches and mixed methods to obtain this data. Our recommendations are both strategic and methodological. They are presented for the consideration of researchers and funders while being designed to answer the important and implicit questions posed by EU citizens currently using CAM in apparently increasing numbers. We propose that the EU actively supports an EUwide strategic approach that facilitates the development of CAM research. This could be achieved in the first instance through funding a European CAM coordinating research office dedicated to foster systematic communication between EU governments, public, charitable and industry funders as well as researchers, citizens and other stakeholders. The aim of this office would be to coordinate research strategy developments and research funding opportunities, as well as to document and disseminate international research activities in this field. With the aim to develop sustainability as second step, a European Centre for CAM should be established that takes over the monitoring and further development of a coordinated research strategy for CAM, as well as it should have funds that can be awarded to foster high quality and robust independent research with a focus on citizens health needs and pan-European collaboration. We wish to establish a solid funding for CAM research to adequately inform health care and health creation decision-making throughout the EU. This centre would ensure that our vision of a common, strategic and scientifically rigorous approach to CAM research becomes our legacy and Europe’s reality. We are confident that our recommendations will serve these essential goals for EU citizens.

The Hundred Most-Cited Publications in Orthopaedic Knee Research

BACKGROUND: Despite its limitations, citation analysis remains one of the best currently available tools for quantifying the impact of articles. Bibliometric studies list the "best-sellers" in a single location, and they have been published frequently in many fields during recent years. The purpose of the present study was to report the qualities and characteristics of citation classics in orthopaedic knee research. METHODS: The database of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) was utilized for identification of articles published from 1945 to March 2014. All knee articles that had been published in sixty-five orthopaedic and twenty-nine rheumatology journals and that had been cited at least 200 times were identified. The top 100 were selected for further analysis of authorship, source journal, number of citations, citation rate (both since publication and in 2013), geographic origin, article type, and level of evidence. RESULTS: The publication dates of the 100 most-cited articles ranged from 1948 to 2007, with the greatest number of articles published in the 1980s. Citations per article ranged from 2640 to 287. All articles were published in eleven of the ninety-four journals. The leading countries of origin were the U.S. followed by the U.K. and Sweden. The two main focus areas were sports traumatology and degenerative disease. The number of citations per article was also greatest for articles published in the 1980s. Basic research articles were cited more quickly, but not more often, than clinical articles. Most articles represented Level-IV evidence, followed by Levels II, III, and I. CONCLUSIONS: This bibliometric study is likely to include a list of intellectual milestones in orthopaedic knee research. It is apparent that a high level of evidence is not mandatory for an article to gain a large number of citations. Bibliometric reports provide a reflection of the quality of cited research published in a specific field and should therefore provoke thinking within the scientific community.

Barriers to cross-border research projects: A prelude to improving professional collaborations between the United States and Mexico

Study objective. This was a secondary data analysis of a study designed and executed in two phases in order to investigate several questions: Why aren't more investigators conducting successful cross-border research on human health issues? What are the barriers to conducting this research? What interventions might facilitate cross-border research? ^ Methods. Key informant interviews and focus groups were used in Phase One, and structured questionnaires in Phase Two. A multi-question survey was created based on the findings of focus groups and distributed to a wider circle of researchers and academics for completion. The data was entered and analyzed using SPSS software. ^ Setting. El Paso, TX located on the U.S-Mexico Border. ^ Participants. Individuals from local academic institutions and the State Department of Health. ^ Results. From the transcribed data of the focus groups, eight major themes emerged: Political Barriers, Language/Cultural Barriers, Differing Goals, Geographic Issues, Legal Barriers, Technology/Material Issues, Financial Barriers, and Trust Issues. Using these themes, the questionnaire was created. ^ The response rate for the questionnaires was 47%. The largest obstacles revealed by this study were identifying a funding source for the project (47% agreeing or strongly agreeing), difficulties paying a foreign counterpart (33% agreeing or strongly agreeing) and administrative changes in Mexico (31% agreeing or strongly agreeing). ^ Conclusions. Many U.S. investigators interested in cross-border research have been discouraged in their efforts by varying barriers. The majority of respondents in the survey felt financial issues and changes in Mexican governments were the most significant obstacles. While some of these barriers can be overcome simply by collaboration among motivated groups, other barriers may be more difficult to remove. Although more evaluation of this research question is warranted, the information obtained through this study is sufficient to support creation of a Cross-Border Research Resource Manual to be used by individuals interested in conducting research with Mexico. ^

The Zebrafish Information Network (ZFIN): a resource for genetic, genomic and developmental research

The Zebrafish Information Network, ZFIN, is a WWW community resource of zebrafish genetic, genomic and developmental research information (http://zfin.org). ZFIN provides an anatomical atlas and dictionary, developmental staging criteria, research methods, pathology information and a link to the ZFIN relational database (http://zfin.org/ZFIN/). The database, built on a relational, object-oriented model, provides integrated information about mutants, genes, genetic markers, mapping panels, publications and contact information for the zebrafish research community. The database is populated with curated published data, user submitted data and large dataset uploads. A broad range of data types including text, images, graphical representations and genetic maps supports the data. ZFIN incorporates links to other genomic resources that provide sequence and ortholog data. Zebrafish nomenclature guidelines and an automated registration mechanism for new names are provided. Extensive usability testing has resulted in an easy to learn and use forms interface with complex searching capabilities.

BEHIND THE COMPUTER SCREEN: WHAT IRB PROFESSIONALS REALLY THINK ABOUT SOCIAL MEDIA RESEARCH

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Comparisons of physical separation methods of Kunjin virus-induced membranes

The two sets of connected membranes induced in Kunjin virus-infected cells are characterized by the presence of NS3 helicase/protease in both, and by RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) activity plus the associated double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) template in vesicle packets (VP), or by the absence of both the VP-specific markers in the convoluted membranes/paracrystalline arrays (CM/PC). Attempts were made to separate flavivirus-induced membranes by sedimentation or flotation analyses in density gradients of sucrose or iodixanol, respectively, after treatment of cell lysates by sonication, osmotic shock, or tryptic digestion. Only osmotic shock treatment provided suggestive evidence of separation. This was explored by flow cytometry analysis (FCA) of RdRp active membrane fractions from a sucrose gradient, using dual fluorescent labelling via antibodies to NS3 and dsRNA. FCA revealed the presence of a dual labelled membrane population indicative of VP, and in a faster sedimenting fraction a membrane population able to be labelled only in NS3, representative of CM/PC and associated (R)ER. It was postulated that osmotic shock ruptured the bounding membrane of the VP, releasing the enclosed small vesicles associated with the Kunjin virus replication complex characterized previously. Notably, the presence of the full spectrum of nonstructural proteins in some membrane fractions was not a reliable marker for RdRp activity. These experiments may provide the opportunity for isolation of relatively pure flavivirus replication complexes in their native membrane-associated state by fluorescence-activated cell sorting. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Investigating the dilemmas of ethical social research

The author’s work with a university ethics committee and field research in Pacific New Caledonia is used as a basis to problematise the biomedical research models used by universities in Australia for assessing social research as ethical. The article explores how culturally specific Western emotional bases for ethical decisions are often unexamined. It expresses concerns about gaps in biomedical models by linking the author’s description of field interactions with research participants to debates about the creation of knowledge.

Shoot first, ask questions later: Ethnographic research in an online computer gaming community

For researchers investigating online communities, the existence of the internet has made the activities and opinions of community members visible in a public domain. FPS gaming culture is a highly literate culture - members communicate and represent themselves in textual forms online, and the culture makes use of a wide variety of communication and publishing technologies. While a significant amount of insider knowledge is required to understand and interpret such online content, a large body of material is available to researchers online, and sometimes provides more reliable and enlightening information than that generated by more traditional research methods. While the abundance of data available online in some ways makes research far easier, it also creates new dilemmas and challenges for researchers. What extra knowledge is required of the researcher? How can one ensure that one's interpretations of member statements are made with an understanding of meaning within that culture? What responsibilities does the researcher have in their representation of the culture under examination? What ethical issues must be considered?

Living on the ground research: Steps towards white women researching in collaboration with indigenous people

De Ishtar discusses ways in which Whites could develop research epistemologies and methodologies which responded to and reflected those being developed by Indigenous researchers across Australia and around the world. She details her own explorations in developing a methodology which enabled her to work in collaboration with a group of Indigenous women elders from Western Australia's Great Sandy Desert. She stresses that if collaborative research with Indigenous women is to be possible, White feminists must learn how to do research which is culturally unobtrusive, and that means taking responsibility for their own cultural practices, attitudes and values.

Postcolonialism and the politics of qualitative research in international business

This paper offers a re-configuration of international business research by subjecting it to a postcolonial critique. This critique sees international business research as exhibiting continuities with the colonial project in the way it appropriates the Other. Qualitative research in international business often reproduces a neopositivist separation of theory and method, which can marginalize discussion of the important ontological, epistemological and political issues inherent in any research process

Ethical issues in social research

There are numerous ethical issues that one must consider when developing a research project; however, much discussion about ethics in health research has focused on experimental studies such as clinical trials. As a result, there remains some ambiguity as to the ethical issues that need to be considered in health-related social research. This paper outlines a number of important ethical issues that CAM researchers should be aware of when developing, running and writing up social research. Maintaining high ethical standards is extremely important in social research as it protects participants and researchers, improves the quality of the data retrieved and ensures that future researchers will have access to participants within the community. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Finding common ground in team-based qualitative research using the convergent interviewing method

Research councils, agencies, and researchers recognize the benefits of team-based health research. However, researchers involved in large-scale team-based research projects face multiple challenges as they seek to identify epistemological and ontological common ground. Typically, these challenges occur between quantitative and qualitative researchers but can occur between qualitative researchers, particularly when the project involves multiple disciplinary perspectives. The authors use the convergent interviewing technique in their multidisciplinary research project to overcome these challenges. This technique assists them in developing common epistemological and ontological ground while enabling swift and detailed data collection and analysis. Although convergent interviewing is a relatively new method described primarily in marketing research, it compares and contrasts well with grounded theory and other techniques. The authors argue that this process provides a rigorous method to structure and refine research projects and requires researchers to identify and be accountable for developing a common epistemological and ontological position.