PG Dip International Research Ethics UCT
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: EGAO00000001061 | EGA |
REPOSITORIES: EGA
Similar Datasets
Project description:Organisation EGAO00000001013
| EGAO00000001013 | EGA
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4838154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis paper describes an international nursing and health research immersion program. Minority students from the USA work with an international faculty mentor in teams conducting collaborative research. The Minority Health International Research Training (MHIRT) program students become catalysts in the conduct of cross-cultural research.AimTo narrow the healthcare gap for disadvantaged families in the USA and partner countries.MethodsFaculty from the USA, Germany, Italy, Colombia, England, Austria and Thailand formed an international research and education team to explore and compare family health issues, disparities in chronic illness care, social inequities and healthcare solutions. USA students in the MHIRT program complete two introductory courses followed by a 3-month research practicum in a partner country guided by faculty mentors abroad. The overall program development, student study abroad preparation, research project activities, cultural learning, and student and faculty team outcomes are explored.ResultsCross-fertilization of research, cultural awareness and ideas about improving family health occur through education, international exchange and research immersion. Faculty research and international team collaboration provide opportunities for learning about research, health disparities, cultural influences and healthcare systems. The students are catalysts in the research effort, the dissemination of research findings and other educational endeavours. Five steps of the collaborative activities lead to programmatic success.ConclusionsMHIRT scholars bring creativity, enthusiasm, and gain a genuine desire to conduct health research about families with chronic illness. Their cultural learning stimulates career plans that include international research and attention to vulnerable populations.
| S-EPMC3494487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Organisation EGAO00000000060
| EGAO00000000060 | EGA
Project description:Being the most aggressive type of brain tumor, glioblastoma is estimated to be diagnosed in about 12,400 new cases in 2017. The diagnosis is dramatic to patients and relatives and leaves open many unanswered questions for them. One is the big question why there is no cure as in other tumors. This review illustrates the US and global research efforts that have been made over the past century. It demonstrates the great magnitude of energy invested by US clinicians and scientists but undoubtedly, more research is needed and funding by NIH and other sources should be continued on the same level.
| S-EPMC5777808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With an ageing global population and an increasing focus on aging in place, the number of people in need of geriatric rehabilitation (GR) is rapidly increasing. As current GR practice is very heterogenous, cross-country comparisons could allow us to learn from each other and optimise the effectiveness of GR. However, international GR research comes with many challenges. This article summarises the facilitators and barriers relating to the recruitment of rehabilitation centres, the inclusion of patients, and data collection, as experienced by experts in the field of international GR research. The three most important methodological recommendations for conducting cross-national collaborative research in the field of GR are (1) make use of existing (inter)national networks and social media to aid recruitment of GR centres; (2) clearly define the GR treatment, setting, and patient characteristics in the inclusion criteria; and (3) use a hierarchical study structure to communicate transparently and regularly with both national and local coordinators. International GR research would greatly benefit from the implementation of a core dataset in regular GR care. Therefore, future studies should focus on developing an international consensus regarding the outcomes and corresponding cross-culturally validated measurement instruments to be used during GR.
| S-EPMC9917925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesResearch priority setting aims to collate stakeholder opinion to determine the most pressing research questions. Priority setting exercises influence decisions around research funding, development and policy. We compared published dementia research priority setting exercises from international healthcare systems.MethodsFour multidisciplinary, international, electronic databases were searched for relevant studies (2010 until 2021). Priorities were extracted, coded and assigned to categories using thematic analysis. The Nine Common Themes of Good Practice (9CTGP) and the Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE) checklists were used to assess methodological and reporting quality respectively.ResultsFrom 265 titles, 10 priority setting exercises (1179 participants, 147 priorities) were included. Studies spanned four continents and the majority included people living with dementia and their care-givers in the priority setting process (68%). Only one paper met all the best practice indicators. Issues around inclusiveness, implementation and evaluation of the priorities were apparent in nine papers. We categorised priorities under eight themes: caregivers (25%, n = 37), support (24%, n = 35), awareness and education (16%, n = 24), drugs and interventions (14%, n = 21), diagnosis (8%, n = 12), pathology (6%, n = 9), research design (5%, n = 7), and prevention (1%, n = 2). Priorities varied by geographical region, with awareness and education of higher priority in low-middle income countries, compared to caregivers and support in high income countries.ConclusionsKey priorities were identified with some commonality around themes considered of greatest importance. There is scope to improve the process and reporting of priority setting. Priorities differed according to contextual factors and so, priorities specific to one healthcare setting may not be applicable to others.
| S-EPMC9828247 | biostudies-literature