Infants,Children, and Informed Consent

Obtaining informed consent for non-therapeutic experimentation on infants and children has ethical and legal implications that cause great controversy. There is some danger that worthy research will be inhibited if current ethical codes are interpreted too strictly, yet infants, children, and other vulnerable groups clearly must be protected from exploitation as research subjects. It is suggested that permission from parents coupled with integrity of the investigator will remain the child''s best protection, but several additional protective mechanisms are available and should be used. Some guidelines for non-therapeutic research are suggested which should not only provide adequate protection for infants and young children involved in research projects, but allow investigators reasonable freedom to prosecute worthy research vital to continued improvements in child care.     

Stem cell-based therapies: promises, obstacles, discordance, and the agora

Stem cell research has entered the public consciousness through the media. Proponents and opponents of all such research, or of human embryonic stem cell research specifically, engage in heated exchanges in the modern public forum where stakeholders negotiate, the agora. One common claim that emerges from the fray is that a particular type of stem cell research should be pursued as the most promising path toward the reduction of suffering and untimely death for all of humanity. Upon evaluation, experimental data regarding the potential role of stem cells in regenerative therapies for three conditions-spinal cord injury, type 1 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease-tell distinct, complex, and inconclusive stories. Further analyses in this article incorporate realistic considerations of a broad range of relevant factors: limited funding for biomedical research, media motives, the discordance hypothesis of evolutionary medicine, the relationship between religion and science, medical care in developing nations, and culture wars over abortion. Holistic investigation inspired by the current agora conversation supports the need to drastically change interactions regarding stem cell research so that its potential to benefit humanity may be more fully realized.     

社会经济代谢研究:内涵、发现和展望

社会经济代谢是指由于人类活动导致的物质和能量在社会经济系统内部和边界上的迁移和转换。社会经济代谢研究已经成为产业生态学的核心领域。本文结合典型案例介绍了社会经济代谢研究的内涵和基本步骤,总结了社会经济代谢研究的主要发现:提供了追踪物质在社会经济系统的来源、去向和流动路径的方法与模型;揭示了物质材料及其社会经济代谢过程对现代化生产和生活方式的支撑作用;阐明了人类活动驱动与物质代谢相关的生态环境问题的机制;提供了评估资源利用效率、资源供需趋势和城市矿产开发潜力的模型与基础数据。最后指出了社会经济代谢研究的发展方向:增加研究对象并深化对每种对象的研究精度;拓展或细化研究系统的时空边界;引入并融合新的数据来源和研究方法;将社会经济代谢中的物质流对接到与其相关的生态环境影响;建立可共享、可拓展、可累积的数据平台。     

Community Writing, Participatory Research, and an Anthropological Sensibility

Participatory research is a radical praxis through which marginalized people acquire research capabilities that they use to transform their own lives. In this article, I examine how parent writers incorporated facets of community writing into their research practice as they developed their practices and identities as researchers. I also consider how anthropology, as both research practice and sensibility, contributed to the ways I engaged as an outside collaborator with these parent researchers.  [community writing, participatory research, praxis, anthropological sensibility]     

Science, senators, and uncertainty.

Members of Congress consider value judgments and the likelihood of successful enactment as well as scientific facts in formulating policy. If scientists would provide a range of scientifically acceptable options at the same time as they recommend the scientifically optimal solutions, politicans could choose the best scientific option that is also politically acceptable. In the context of research funding Congress needs to be presented with more realistic expectations about the time it takes for different levels of research to result in practical applications, so as to provide better continuity in research funding.     

Trapping and marking terrestrial mammals for research: integrating ethics, performance criteria, techniques, and common sense

We propose that researchers integrate ethics, performance criteria, techniques, and common sense when developing research trapping programs and in which members of institutional animal care and use committees address these topics when evaluating research protocols. To ask questions about ethics is in the best tradition of science, and researchers must be familiar with codes of ethics and guidelines for research published by professional societies. Researchers should always work to improve research methods and to decrease the effects on research animals, if for no other reason than to minimize the chances that the methods influence the animals' behavior in ways that affect research results. Traps used in research should meet performance criteria that address state-of-the-art trapping technology and that optimize animal welfare conditions within the context of the research. The proposal includes the following criteria for traps used in research: As Criterion I, killing-traps should render >/= 70% of animals caught irreversibly unconscious in /= 70% of animals with 相似文献   

Gender,diversity, and the responsible assessment of researchers

In response to the Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers, this Formal Comment argues that it is time to take gender and diversity considerations seriously in the pursuit of fostering research integrity; this requires acknowledging and reshaping the influence of research assessment criteria on researcher representation.

The Hong Kong Principles (HKP) for assessing researchers [1], a product of the 2019 World Conference on Research Integrity, were published in PLOS Biology this past July. The principles concern research institutions’ assessment of researchers according to responsible research criteria. The HKP value issues ranging from complete reporting and open science to a diversity of other essential research tasks (e.g., peer reviewing).We applaud this initiative and believe it is an important step forward because it directly addresses a root cause of many issues that erode research integrity: the unfair reward structures and perverse incentives that researchers encounter [2]. Reforming research assessment practice to reward responsible research, rather than privileging publication volume, is crucial for incentivizing research integrity.We were surprised that HKP explicitly refrain from considering gender and other issues related to diversity and inclusiveness in researcher assessment. They rather state that, “[t]hese themes require an assessment of a group of researchers (e.g., research institution) when making decisions about funding allocations or human resources policies. Furthermore, these issues concern the social justice and societal relevance of research rather than research integrity.” (p. 9) [1]. We disagree on a number of counts.First, we challenge the assertion that gender and diversity issues concern social justice and societal relevance of research rather than research integrity. Such a strong distinction between societal relevance and research integrity is difficult to justify; although the field of research integrity was traditionally narrowly defined as pertaining to misconduct issues, it is increasingly acknowledged as addressing general issues of research quality, relevance, and reliability [3]. Furthermore, diversity in research teams is not only important for issues related to social justice and societal relevance, but also crucial for maintaining scientific objectivity and trust in science [4]. Researchers’ backgrounds influence the way that research is funded, conducted, and applied; to prevent science from becoming biased toward certain assumptions and avoid gaps in knowledge, diverse research teams are needed [4]. A lack of diversity in the research community can be detrimental because, through shutting out important perspectives from the research process, it can create undesirable scientific and social effects. For instance, current health research methods commonly entail gender bias, possibly due to the underrepresentation of women in leading research and publishing positions, which not only distorts the public health knowledge base but can also lead to health disparities [4]. Similarly, a lack of early attention and research on the differential impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on people of different ethnic groups has posed a challenge in curbing mortality and poor health outcomes among Black, Asian, and other ethnic minority groups in several countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States of America [5]. When the research knowledge base is biased in terms of gender or other types of diversity, as is the case with these examples, the trustworthiness of the research itself and its benefit for society are undermined, as it becomes questionable whether the research has employed the right questions and methods to elicit relevant findings for society. Therefore, inclusion of diverse perspectives should not just focus on improving participation of patients and other citizens in research—good practices highlighted in the HKP’s article—but also by improving representation in research teams themselves.Second, in our view, current researcher assessment practices are funding allocation schemes or human resource policies of research institutions, which affect individual researchers and systematically disadvantage entire groups of researchers, including women and those from a minority background [6]. For instance, the focus on number of publications in researcher assessment disadvantages researchers (mostly female) who need to temporarily take leave to have children [7]. To improve representation in relation to gender and diversity within research teams and departments, it is essential to pay attention to their influence beyond individual assessment performance. The HKP article [1] describes how recognizing other tasks, such as peer review and mentoring, leads to an increase in the number of women promoted (p. 8). Other research suggests that using altmetrics to assess research impact might help narrow the gap between men and women [8]. Hence, the individual assessment of researchers is intimately related to group performance. It is disappointing that the HKP fail to recognize this or to call for attention to the impact of their recommended assessment criteria on diversity issues.Our plea to the research integrity community is to take gender and diversity considerations seriously, especially in the pursuit of fostering research integrity. This means researcher assessment approaches which acknowledge that systemic disadvantages can be introduced or exacerbated with individual assessment criteria and which contribute toward improving representation within research teams and across seniority levels.     

Chemical safety in animal care,use, and research

Chemical safety is an essential element of an effective occupational health and safety program. Controlling exposures to chemical agents requires a careful process of hazard recognition, risk assessment, development of control measures, communication of the risks and control measures, and training to ensure that the indicated controls will be utilized. Managing chemical safety in animal care and use presents a unique challenge, in part because research is frequently conducted in two very different environments--the research laboratory and the animal care facility. The chemical agents specific to each of these environments are typically well understood by the employees working there; however, the extent of understanding may not be adequate when these individuals, or chemicals, cross over into the other environment. In addition, many chemicals utilized in animal research are not typically used in the research laboratory, and therefore the level of employee knowledge and proficiency may be less compared with more routinely used materials. Finally, the research protocol may involve the exposure of laboratory animals to either toxic chemicals or chemicals with unknown hazards. Such animal protocols require careful review to minimize the potential for unanticipated exposures of the research staff or animal care personnel. Numerous guidelines and regulations are cited, which define the standard of practice for the safe use of chemicals. Key chemical safety issues relevant to personnel involved in the care and use of research animals are discussed.     

Sampling in Qualitative Research: Rationale, Issues, and Methods

In gerontology the most recognized and elaborate discourse about sampling is generally thought to be in quantitative research associated with survey research and medical research. But sampling has long been a central concern in the social and humanistic inquiry, albeit in a different guise suited to the different goals. There is a need for more explicit discussion of qualitative sampling issues. This article will outline the guiding principles and rationales, features, and practices of sampling in qualitative research. It then describes common questions about sampling in qualitative research. In conclusion it proposes the concept of qualitative clarity as a set of principles (analogous to statistical power) to guide assessments of qualitative sampling in a particular study or proposal.     

Menstruation, perimenopause, and chaos theory

This article argues that menstruation, including the transition to menopause, results from a specific kind of complex system, namely, one that is nonlinear, dynamical, and chaotic. A complexity-based perspective changes how we think about and research menstruation-related health problems and positive health. Chaotic systems are deterministic but not predictable, characterized by sensitivity to initial conditions and strange attractors. Chaos theory provides a coherent framework that qualitatively accounts for puzzling results from perimenopause research. It directs attention to variability within and between women, adaptation, lifespan development, and the need for complex explanations of disease. Whether the menstrual cycle is chaotic can be empirically tested, and a summary of our research on 20- to 40-year-old women is provided.     

Phenotyping of genetically engineered mice: humane, ethical, environmental, and husbandry issues

The growing use of genetically engineered (GE) mice in scientific research has raised many concerns about the animal welfare of such mice. The types of welfare concerns may differ within the three stages that comprise the establishment of GE animal models: development, production, and research use. The role and impact of the members of the research team on these concerns may also vary with each stage. To make both scientific and animal welfare decisions at each stage, it is necessary to have a thorough knowledge of the animal model-in this case, the phenotypic expression of the GE animal. Phenotype screening is the analysis of visible or measurable characteristics of an animal that result from the genotype and its interaction with the environment. Phenotypes expressed that are relevant to the research program are usually carefully investigated; however, those that may have an impact on the animal's welfare but have little or no impact on the disease process under study are often less carefully studied. Thorough analysis and documentation of the animal welfare aspects of phenotype provide the research team with the information they need to control the environment to minimize negative animal welfare effects. Such information is also essential to allow members of the institutional animal care and use committee to perform necessary cost:benefit ethical review of proposed GE animal studies. Investigators who submit information about models for publication should document all aspects of a phenotype, including the area of scientific interest as well as those areas that affect animal welfare, for clarity and for subsequent research with the respective models.     

Race, ethnicity, and racism in medical anthropology, 1977-2002

Researchers across the health sciences are engaged in a vigorous debate over the role that the concepts of "race" and "ethnicity" play in health research and clinical practice. Here we contribute to that debate by examining how the concepts of race, ethnicity, and racism are used in medical-anthropological research. We present a content analysis of Medical Anthropology and Medical Anthropology Quarterly, based on a systematic random sample of empirical research articles (n = 283) published in these journals from 1977 to 2002. We identify both differences and similarities in the use of race, ethnicity, and racism concepts in medical anthropology and neighboring disciplines, and we offer recommendations for ways that medical anthropologists can contribute to the broader debate over racial and ethnic inequalities in health.     

社会-生态系统:研究态势、主题演进与地域实践

社会-生态系统综合了人类社会治理与自然环境利用研究视角,为解决全球生态问题提供新途径,是人地系统研究的热点。梳理和归纳社会-生态系统研究的发展历程和近今态势,总结前沿议题和地域实践,对人地系统耦合研究和可持续发展具有重要意义。主要发现如下：社会-生态系统研究领域整体发文量较少,发展阶段受国际重要研究计划和组织的直接影响;欧洲、北美洲和澳大利亚的高校、研究所和政府机构是领域内的主要研究力量,核心作者间合作紧密;我国社会-生态系统研究受资助力度逐年增加,研究内容不断深入,但在国际相关学术话语体系构建和关键作用发挥上仍有较大提升空间。社会-生态系统具有复杂性、地域性和动态性等特点,研究内容涵盖自然生态系统、气候变化、土地利用、社会治理与管理政策等主题,是综合了环境科学、生态学、地理学等自然科学与经济学、政治学和社会学等社会科学的多学科交叉领域;以脆弱性和韧性研究为起点,社会-生态系统研究的发展受到诸多人地关系研究工作的启发和推动,Olsson的动态连接分析、Redman的社会模式与过程和生态格局与过程、Ostrom的公共资源治理是目前影响较广的三个社会-生态系统研究框架。扰沌为解释社会-生态系统快速与慢速交互作用、局部与全球适应性变化提供理论基础,干扰响应机制、系统自组织过程、学习与适应性治理成为社会-生态系统研究核心。海岸带、干旱区和城市等生态环境与社会环境敏感区是社会-生态系统研究最受关注的地域。未来的工作应注重结合我国广泛的地域实践,推动社会-生态系统的理论与方法体系的完善。相关发现为社会-生态系统领域凝炼研究方向和深化科学问题提供了参考。     

Adjuncts in diagnosis,prognosis, and clinical monitoring of breast,gynecologic, and hematolymphopoietic malignancies: Third Joint International Workshop,Lacco Ameno d'Ischia,Italy, October 2001

The aim of the third edition of this workshop was to address the most relevant topics and the latest achievements in the diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical monitoring of breast, gynecologic, and hematolymphopoietic malignancies. As with the two previous editions, scientific leaders in the fields of pathology, clinical oncology, and basic research have been gathered together to promote a continuous flow of theoretical and practical information among basic research, diagnosis, and therapeutic innovation in order to achieve timely and effective progresses in defeating human cancer.     

Standard of Care,Institutional Obligations,and Distributive Justice

The problem of standard of care in clinical research concerns the level of treatment that investigators must provide to subjects in clinical trials. Commentators often formulate answers to this problem by appealing to two distinct types of obligations: professional obligations and natural duties. In this article, I investigate whether investigators also possess institutional obligations that are directly relevant to the problem of standard of care, that is, those obligations a person has because she occupies a particular institutional role. I examine two types of institutional contexts: (1) public research agencies – agencies or departments of states that fund or conduct clinical research in the public interest; and (2) private‐for‐profit corporations. I argue that investigators who are employed or have their research sponsored by the former have a distinctive institutional obligation to conduct their research in a way that is consistent with the state's duty of distributive justice to provide its citizens with access to basic health care, and its duty to aid citizens of lower income countries. By contrast, I argue that investigators who are employed or have their research sponsored by private‐for‐profit corporations do not possess this obligation nor any other institutional obligation that is directly relevant to the ethics of RCTs. My account of the institutional obligations of investigators aims to contribute to the development of a reasonable, distributive justice‐based account of standard of care.     

Race, Ethnicity, and Racism in Medical Anthropology, 1977–2002

Researchers across the health sciences are engaged in a vigorous debate over the role that the concepts of "race" and "ethnicity" play in health research and clinical practice. Here we contribute to that debate by examining how the concepts of race, ethnicity, and racism are used in medical–anthropological research. We present a content analysis of Medical Anthropology and Medical Anthropology Quarterly , based on a systematic random sample of empirical research articles ( n = 283) published in these journals from 1977 to 2002. We identify both differences and similarities in the use of race, ethnicity, and racism concepts in medical anthropology and neighboring disciplines, and we offer recommendations for ways that medical anthropologists can contribute to the broader debate over racial and ethnic inequalities in health.     

土壤病毒之奥秘:研究进展、挑战及未来展望

土壤病毒是土壤生物多样性的重要组成部分,数量繁多,在调控微生物多样性、群落组成和养分循环等方面具有重要的生态功能。然而,由于土壤自身的复杂性及其动态变化特征,病毒在土壤生态系统中发挥的功能及其作用机理,一直是该研究领域的薄弱环节,也是当前土壤生物学、微生态学和环境科学等领域的研究热点和前沿。近年来,分子生物学技术的突破及生态学理论的广泛应用极大地推动了土壤病毒研究领域的发展。为客观全面地分析土壤病毒研究领域的动态和热点,本研究借助文献计量分析方法,对土壤病毒研究现状及热点进行了综述,展示了土壤病毒研究的发展态势,并结合土壤环境特征,对土壤病毒研究领域未来发展方向进行了展望,主要包括土壤病毒多样性、生物学特征、环境影响因素、作用机制及其在农业上的应用。随着多学科交叉融合及研究技术手段的进步,土壤病毒研究迎来了一个高速发展阶段,而土壤病毒研究在养分循环、生态系统服务及生物调控等方面所取得的重要成果,可以更好地服务于土壤健康以及碳中和计划。     

Specific pathogen-free macaques: definition, history, and current production

Specific pathogen-free (SPF) macaque colonies are now requested frequently as a resource for research. Such colonies were originally conceived as a means to cull diseased animals from research-dedicated colonies, with the goal of eliminating debilitating or fatal infectious agents from the colony to improve the reproductive capacity of captive research animals. The initial pathogen of concern was Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb.), recognized for many years as a pathogen of nonhuman primates as well as a human health target. More recently attention has focused on four viral pathogens as the basis for an SPF colony: simian type D retrovirus (SRV), simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV), simian T cell lymphotropic/leukemia virus (STLV), and Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 (CHV-1). New technologies, breeding, and maintenance schemes have emerged to develop and provide SPF primates for research. In this review we focus on the nonhuman primates (NHPs) most common to North American NHP research facilities, Asian macaques, and the most common current research application of these animals, modeling of human AIDS.