The Global Andrology Forum (GAF): A World-Wide, Innovative, Online Initiative to Bridge the Gaps in Research and Clinical Practice of Male Infertility and Sexual Health.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Agarwal A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9482854 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The Global Andrology Forum (GAF): A World-Wide, Innovative, Online Initiative to Bridge the Gaps in Research and Clinical Practice of Male Infertility and Sexual Health.
Agarwal Ashok A Saleh Ramadan R Boitrelle Florence F Cannarella Rossella R Hamoda Taha Abo-Almagd Abdel-Meguid TAA Durairajanayagam Damayanthi D Harraz Ahmed M AM Shah Rupin R
The world journal of men's health 20220808 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThere are no published examples of a global online research collaborative in andrology. We describe the development, profile and member characteristics of the first consortium of this type, the Global Andrology Forum (GAF).Materials and methodsAn online survey sent to all GAF members collected demographic information (sex, age, experience, academic title, degrees, country, specialty, profession). It also tapped data on members' characteristics e.g., skills in research, software and statistics; preferred activities; time commitments; expected roles; and interest in participating in research, in GAF's scientific activities and collaborative online research. The findings were analyzed and tabulated. We outline members' demographic and professional characteristics and scientific achievements to date. A narrative approach outlined GAF's structure and functioning.ResultsA total of 418 out of 540 members completed the survey and were included in the analysis (77.4% response rate). The sample comprised mainly urologists (34.2%) and a third of the respondents had practiced for >15 years (33.3%). Up to 86.1% of the members expressed interest in being actively engaged in writing scientific articles. A third of the sample (37.1%) could dedicate 4 to 6 hours/week. Few respondents reported skills in statistics and artwork (2.6% and 1.9% respectively). Members were assigned to specific roles based on their expertise and experiences. Collaborative working ensured the timely completion of projects while maintaining quality. For outcomes, GAF published 29 original articles within one year of its creation, with authors from 48 countries spanning topics that included varicocele, sperm DNA damage, oxidative stress, semen analysis and male infertility, oocyte/embryo, and laboratory issues of assisted reproductive technique (ART) and male infertility evaluation.ConclusionsGAF is a successful global online andrology research model. A healthy number of scientific articles have been published. Given such effectiveness, adopting the GAF model could be useful for other disciplines that wish to create and coordinate successful international online research groups.
| S-EPMC10949020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis is the first study to design and assess a research capacity building (RCB) specifically tailored for clinical and non-clinical andrology practitioners worldwide. We appraised: 1) the barriers and enablers to research among these practitioners; 2) attendees' satisfaction with the webinar; and 3) research knowledge acquisition as a result of the webinar (before/after quiz).Materials and methodsA online RCB webinar was designed, comprising two presentations in research design and systematic review/meta-analysis (SR/MA). An online survey using validated published questionnaires assessed the three above-stated objectives. Paired t-test compared the means of the pre- and post-webinar scores. Subgroup analysis was performed on the participants' professional background, sex, and number of years in practice.ResultsA total of 237 participants attended the webinar, of which 184 completed the survey and are included in the current analysis. Male participants were about double the females and 60.9% were from Asian countries. The most common research enablers were to publish scientific papers (14.8%) and to develop research (14.7%) or new skills (12.7%). The most common barriers were the lack of training in research (12.4%), training in research software (11.8%), and time for research (11.8%). Satisfaction with the webinar was considerably high (86.3%-88.4%) for the different features of the webinar. Compared to the pre-webinar knowledge level, there were significant improvements in participants' research knowledge acquisition after the webinar in terms of the total score for the quiz (13.7±4.31 vs. 21.5±4.7), as well as the scores for the study design (7.12±2.37 vs. 11.5±2.69) and SR/MA sessions (6.63±2.63 vs. 9.93±2.49) (p<0.001 for each).ConclusionsClinical and non-clinical andrology webinar attendees recognized the importance of research and exhibited a range of research skills, knowledge and experience. There were significant improvements in the participants' knowledge and understanding of the components of scientific research. We propose an RCB model that can be implemented and further modeled by organizations with similar academic research goals.
| S-EPMC10949034 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Our objective is to investigate patient needs and understand information gaps in radiology reports using patient questions that were posted on online discussion forums. We leveraged online question and answer platforms to collect questions posted by patients to understand current gaps and patient needs. We retrieved six hundred fifty-nine (659) questions using the following sites: Yahoo Answers, Reddit.com, Quora, and Wiki Answers. The questions retrieved were analyzed and the major themes and topics were identified. The questions retrieved were classified into eight major themes. The themes were related to the following topics: radiology report, safety, price, preparation, procedure, meaning, medical staff, and patient portal. Among the 659 questions, 35.50% were concerned with the radiology report. The most common question topics in the radiology report focused on patient understanding of the radiology report (62 of 234 [26.49%]), image visualization (53 of 234 [22.64%]), and report representation (46 of 234 [19.65%]). We also found that most patients were concerned about understanding the MRI report (32%; n = 143) compared with the other imaging modalities (n = 434). Using online discussion forums, we discussed major unmet patient needs and information gaps in radiology reports. These issues could be improved to enhance radiology design in the future.
| S-EPMC8055745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPeer review is important to the scientific process. However, the present system has been criticised and accused of bias, lack of transparency, failure to detect significant breakthrough and error. At the British Journal of Surgery (BJS), after surveying authors' and reviewers' opinions on peer review, we piloted an open online forum with the aim of improving the peer review process.MethodsIn December 2014, a web-based survey assessing attitudes towards open online review was sent to reviewers with a BJS account in Scholar One. From April to June 2015, authors were invited to allow their manuscripts to undergo online peer review in addition to the standard peer review process. The quality of each review was evaluated by editors and editorial assistants using a validated instrument based on a Likert scale.ResultsThe survey was sent to 6635 reviewers. In all, 1454 (21.9%) responded. Support for online peer review was strong, with only 10% stating that they would not subject their manuscripts to online peer review. The most prevalent concern was about intellectual property, being highlighted in 118 of 284 comments (41.5%). Out of 265 eligible manuscripts, 110 were included in the online peer review trial. Around 7000 potential reviewers were invited to review each manuscript. In all, 44 of 110 manuscripts (40%) received 100 reviews from 59 reviewers, alongside 115 conventional reviews. The quality of the open forum reviews was lower than for conventional reviews (2.13 (± 0.75) versus 2.84 (± 0.71), P<0.001).ConclusionOpen online peer review is feasible in this setting, but it attracts few reviews, of lower quality than conventional peer reviews.
| S-EPMC5491000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a novel online orientation program (Nurses in REI Communication, Knowledge, and Skills [NRCKS]) among new and early-career reproductive endocrinology nurses to make recommendations for program quality improvement.DesignQuality improvement.SubjectsReproductive endocrinology nurses.ExposureOnline orientation program featuring 8 micromodules.Main outcome measuresKnowledge acquisition, confidence, user experience, skills, and abilities.ResultsNurses demonstrated a statistically significant increase in reproductive knowledge after completion of NRCKS. Most nurse users felt confident applying knowledge in the clinical settings after program completion. Nurse users had an overall positive experience with interactive components and quality of visuals. Most nurse users gained skills and abilities that they will implement into professional practice. Nurses suggested improving navigation, adding more visuals in content expert presentations, and teaching soft skills necessary for the role of reproductive endocrinology nurses.ConclusionsNurses in REI Communication, Knowledge, and Skills was well received by nurse participants and emphasized the receptivity and desire for reproductive health and fertility training among novice reproductive endocrinology nurses. Nurses in REI Communication, Knowledge, and Skills increased nursing knowledge, and nurses felt confident applying newly gained knowledge in the clinical setting on completion. Nurse participants provided invaluable feedback for quality improvement to inform the hard launch. The results emphasize the online orientation's strong potential to close the theory-practice gap.
| S-EPMC10774875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeSystematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) are used to generate evidence-based guidelines. Although the number of SRMAs published in the literature has increased dramatically in the last decade, the training and the experience of the researchers performing the SRMAs are usually not explained in the SRMAs' methodology, and this may be a source of bias. Although some studies pointed out the need for quality control of SRMAs and training in proper statistical methods, to the best of our knowledge, no study has reported the importance of training the researchers that conduct the SRMAs. The aim of this study is to describe a training program designed to impart the essential knowledge and skills required for the conduct of an SRMA and to assess the need for, and outcome of, such a training.Materials and methodsResearchers were trained for use of Scopus, study eligibility, assessment of the quality of evidence (QoE) through the Cambridge Quality Checklist for observational studies, as well as the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines, and the Jadad score for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) questions and data extraction. A total of 35 of them were approved to join a planned SRMA. At the end of the SRMA, they were administered 43 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) on demographics, motivation for participation in the SRMA, self-perceived change in knowledge before and after conducting the SRMA, and self-assessment of performance. The senior researchers then revised the spreadsheet of the SRMA and, based on the mistakes found, organized a training focused on the correct assessment of the study design, where 43 researchers (9 joined midway) and 11 trainees with no experience in conducting SRMA attended. They all were tested through a 5 MCQ assessment that was administered before and after the training. Those scoring poorly were re-trained and re-tested, and only those scoring satisfactorily were admitted to further SRMAs.ResultsApproximately 54.3% of the participants were medical doctors (MD), 31.4% were urologists and 48.6% had previous experience with SRMAs. Joining an international collaborative study was the main motivation, chosen by 19.7% of researchers. The results of the self-perceived change in knowledge showed a significant improvement in the use of Scopus, checklists for QoE, PICO questions, data required to perform a meta-analysis, and critical reading of scientific articles. Also, the majority of the researchers ranked the quality of their work as high. The pre-test results of the 5 MCQ showed a low score, which was not different from that achieved by a group of fresh trainees (median, 2; IQR 1-3 vs. median, 1; IQR, 1-2; p=0.3). Post-training there was significant improvement in both groups (researchers: median, 4; IQR, 3-5 vs. median, 2; IQR, 1-3; p<0.001; trainees: median, 4; IQR, 3-4 vs. median, 1; IQR, 1-2; p=0.02). Out of the 44 researchers, 12 (27.3%) scored poorly (≤3). After re-training, all of them scored satisfactorily (>3) and were admitted to subsequent SRMAs.ConclusionsAt the end of our model, 100% of researchers participating in this study were validated to be included in a meta-analysis. This validation required the involvement of the MT, two meetings, a self-evaluation survey, and one or two sets of objective tests with explanations and corrections. Our results indicate that even well-trained clinicians are naïve when it comes to the methodology of SRMA. All the researchers performing an SRMA need comprehensive training that must cover each aspect of the SRMA methodology. This paper provides a replicable training program that could be used by other investigators to train the researchers to perform high-quality SRMAs.
| S-EPMC10042656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of the study was to explore the menopausal symptom experience of White midlife women.BackgroundRecent cross-cultural investigations have indicated important ethnic differences in menopausal symptoms and have challenged the universality of these symptoms. Currently available cultural knowledge on menopausal experience, however, is inadequate to guide appropriate and adequate care even for White women in the menopausal transition.MethodA cross-sectional qualitative online forum study was conducted in 2007 with 23 midlife women who self-identified as non-Hispanic Whites using convenience sampling. Seven topics related to menopausal symptom experience were used to guide the online forum for 6 months. The data were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsThe experiences of menopause caused women to redefine themselves within their busy daily life schedules. They were optimistic about their symptoms, and tried to laugh at the experience to boost their inner strength and motivate themselves to persevere. Many thought that both generational and life-style differences were much more important than ethnic differences in menopausal symptom experiences. In seeking assistance with the symptoms of menopause, women were not satisfied with the guidance of their physicians.ConclusionNurses need to listen carefully to what women themselves say about their own experiences with menopausal symptoms and avoid imposing predetermined symptom management strategies. Further studies of women's perceptions of life-style influences are needed to guide symptom management. In addition, studies of generational changes in menopausal symptom experience are needed.
| S-EPMC2430027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with substance use disorders are overrepresented among general hospital inpatients, and their admissions are associated with longer lengths of stay and increased readmission rates. Amid the national opioid crisis, increased attention has been given to the integration of addiction with routine medical care in order to better engage such patients and minimize fragmentation of care. General hospital addiction consultation services and transitional, hospital-based "bridge" clinics have emerged as potential solutions. We designed the Bridging Recovery Initiative Despite Gaps in Entry (BRIDGE) trial to determine if these clinics are superior to usual care for these patients.MethodsThis single-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial is enrolling hospitalized patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) who are initiating medication for OUD (MOUD) in consultation with the addiction consult service. Patients are randomized for referral to a co-located, transitional, multidisciplinary bridge clinic or to usual care, with the assignment probability being determined by clinic capacity. The primary endpoint is hospital length of stay. Secondary endpoints include quality of life, linkage to care, self-reported buprenorphine or naltrexone fills, rate of known recurrent opioid use, readmission rates, and costs. Implementation endpoints include willingness to be referred to the bridge clinic, attendance rates among those referred, and reasons why patients were not eligible for referral. The main analysis will use an intent-to-treat approach with full covariate adjustment.DiscussionThis ongoing pragmatic trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of proactive linkage to a bridge clinic intervention for hospitalized patients with OUD initiating evidence-based pharmacotherapy in consultation with the addiction consult service.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04084392 . Registered on 10 September 2019. The study has been approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The current approved protocol is dated version May 12, 2021.
| S-EPMC8556830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Conspiracy theories play a troubling role in political discourse. Online forums provide a valuable window into everyday conspiracy theorizing, and can give a clue to the motivations and interests of those who post in such forums. Yet this online activity can be difficult to quantify and study. We describe a unique approach to studying online conspiracy theorists which used non-negative matrix factorization to create a topic model of authors' contributions to the main conspiracy forum on Reddit.com. This subreddit provides a large corpus of comments which spans many years and numerous authors. We show that within the forum, there are multiple sub-populations distinguishable by their loadings on different topics in the model. Further, we argue, these differences are interpretable as differences in background beliefs and motivations. The diversity of the distinct subgroups places constraints on theories of what generates conspiracy theorizing. We argue that traditional "monological" believers are only the tip of an iceberg of commenters. Neither simple irrationality nor common preoccupations can account for the observed diversity. Instead, we suggest, those who endorse conspiracies seem to be primarily brought together by epistemological concerns, and that these central concerns link an otherwise heterogenous group of individuals.
| S-EPMC5826393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Innovative Medicines Initiative is a public-private partnership between the European Union and the pharmaceuticals industry that was established in 2008, with an overall budget of €5.3 billion from 2008 until 2024. The objective of the initiative is to boost pharmaceutical innovation in Europe and speed up the development of innovative medicines, vaccines and medical technologies, in particular in areas with high unmet needs. This article discusses the objectives of the initiative, its governance and main results and impact. The initiative has proved to be a unique platform for multi-stakeholder collaborations across Europe. It has contributed to the acceleration of the development process for medicines, from drug discovery to clinical development. The initiative has made important steps towards accessing and using real-world evidence for pharmaceutical research and development, and for healthcare decision-making. Several projects have contributed to a better understanding of the causes of diseases, and some are already delivering results, such as a vaccine against Ebola virus. The initiative has also significantly contributed to building capacity and resources for open use by the broader research and innovation community.
| S-EPMC6105180 | biostudies-literature