Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic

Reconciling data actionability and accountability in global health research: The case of SARS-CoV-2

The requirements for actionability and accountability in data infrastructures are often viewed as incompatible, creating a trade-off where enhancing one diminishes the other. Through a comparative analysis of two data infrastructures used to share genomic data about the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we argue that making data actionable for knowledge development involves a commitment to ensuring that the data in question are representative of the phenomena being studied and accountable to data subjects and users. This in turn presupposes that: (1) enough data are contributed by a wide and diverse set of relevant sources; (2) mechanisms of feedback and inclusion are set up to ensure that data contributors can participate in data governance and interpretation, thereby helping to adequately contextualise data; and (3) accountability extends to the ways in which data infrastructures are run, financed and positioned vis-à-vis the communities they are meant to serve. Such a model of data sharing can only work on the understanding that data do not need to be easily accessible to be actionable; rather, actionability depends on the responsiveness and accountability of data infrastructures, and the efforts invested in ensuring open communication among contributors.

Why is it important to implement meta-research in universities and institutes with medical research activities?

In recent years, there has been a growing concern over questionable practices and a lack of rigor in scientific activities, particularly in health and medical sciences. Universities and research institutes are key players in the development of science, technology, and innovation. Academic institutions, whose primary mission is to generate and disseminate knowledge, bear the responsibility in many parts of the world to act as consultants and guardians of scientific integrity in health research. Then, universities and research institutes must act as guardians of the research and technological development process, utilizing methodological and operational evaluation tools to validate the rigor and quality of medical research. Meta-research is defined as the research of research itself. Some of the most important specific objectives of meta-research include the assessment of research relevance, the evaluation of evidence validity, and the exploration of scientific integrity. A significant portion of evidence in the medical and health sciences literature has been found to be redundant, misleading, or inconsistent. Although this issue is of great importance in global health, discussions about practical and tangible solutions remain fragmented and limited. The aim of this manuscript is to highlight the significance of employing meta-research within universities and research institutes as a tool to monitor scientific rigor and promote responsible practices in medical research.

How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change

As the impacts of climate change continue to intensify, humans face new challenges to long-term survival. Humans will likely be battling these problems long after 2100, when many climate projections currently end. A more forward-thinking view on our science and its direction may help better prepare for the future of our species. Researchers may consider datasets the basic units of knowledge, whose preservation is arguably more important than the articles that are written about them. Storing data and code in long-term repositories offers insurance against our uncertain future. To ensure open data are useful, data must be FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) and be complete with all appropriate metadata. By embracing open science practices, contemporary scientists give the future of humanity the information to make better decisions, save time and other valuable resources, and increase global equity as access to information is made free. This, in turn, could enable and inspire a diversity of solutions, to the benefit of many. Imagine the collective science conducted, the models built, and the questions answered if all of the data researchers have collectively gathered were organized and immediately accessible and usable by everyone. Investing in open science today may ensure a brighter future for unborn generations.

Precise Embodied Data Selection with Haptic Feedback while Retaining Room-Scale Visualisation Context

Room-scale immersive data visualisations provide viewers a wide-scale overview of a large dataset, but to interact precisely with individual data points they typically have to navigate to change their point of view. In traditional screen-based visualisations, focus-and-context techniques allow visualisation users to keep a full dataset in view while making detailed selections. Such techniques have been studied extensively on desktop to allow precise selection within large data sets, but they have not been explored in immersive 3D modalities. In this paper we develop a novel immersive focus-and-context technique based on a "magic portal" metaphor adapted specifically for data visualisation scenarios. An extendable-hand interaction technique is used to place a portal close to the region of interest. The other end of the portal then opens comfortably within the user's physical reach such that they can reach through to precisely select individual data points. Through a controlled study with 12 participants, we find strong evidence that portals reduce overshoots in selection and overall hand trajectory length, reducing arm and shoulder fatigue compared to ranged interaction without the portal. The portals also enable us to use a robot arm to provide haptic feedback for data within the limited volume of the portal region. In a second study with another 12 participants we found that haptics provided a positive experience (qualitative feedback) but did not significantly reduce fatigue. We demonstrate applications for portal-based selection through two use-case scenarios.

Do randomised clinical trials on dental caries adopt Open Science practices?

BACKGROUND

Open Science Practices (OSPs) are essential when assessing research integrity and quality of Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs). As dental caries represents a significant oral health burden, our objective was to identify and analyse the adoption of OSPs within RCTs focused on addressing this disease.

METHODS

We searched PubMed to retrieve RCTs related to dental caries published from January 2000 to March 2022. Two independent researchers assessed a random sample of these articles to evaluate their eligibility until reaching the minimum sample size. Then, the same examiners reviewed the included texts regarding the OSPs adopted in the articles. The collected variables related to OSPs were reporting guidelines, protocol registration, detailed methodology available, open-source software, statistical analysis code sharing, statistical analysis plan, data sharing, open peer review, and open access. Association analyses using logistic regression were conducted considering the publication year, the continent of the first author, impact factor and open-access policy of the journals (explanatory variables), and adoption of at least one OSP or one OSP other than open access (outcomes). The recommendations for adopting OSPs were assessed by reviewing the "Instructions for Authors" section of the most frequently used journals where the included papers were published.

RESULTS

64.8% of the articles (95% Confidence Interval = 59.3-70.1%) adopted at least one OSP. However, no individual OSP was adopted by more than 50% of the articles. The most adopted practices were protocol registration (37.1%), the use of reporting guidelines (33.1%) and publishing open access (37.3%). These are also the OSPs most often recommended by journals in the Instructions for Authors. A few articles adopted other practices. Older articles presented a lower frequency of adopting these practices, and articles published in higher impact factor journals were positively associated with both outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The RCTs published on dental caries demonstrate a low frequency of adoption of most OSPs. However, a trend toward increased adoption of these practices has been notable in recent years.

How the pandemic affected psychological research

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many journals swiftly changed their editorial policies and peer-review processes to accelerate the provision of knowledge about COVID-related issues to a wide audience. These changes may have favoured speed at the cost of accuracy and methodological rigour. In this study, we compare 100 COVID-related articles published in four major psychological journals between 2020 and 2022 with 100 non-COVID articles from the same journal issues and 100 pre-COVID articles published between 2017 and 2019. Articles were coded with regard to design features, sampling and recruitment features, and openness and transparency practices. Even though COVID research was, by and large, more 'observational' in nature and less experimentally controlled than non- or pre-COVID research, we found that COVID-related studies were more likely to use 'stronger' (i.e. more longitudinal and fewer cross-sectional) designs, larger samples, justify their sample sizes based on a priori power analysis, pre-register their hypotheses and analysis plans and make their data, materials and code openly available. Thus, COVID-related psychological research does not appear to be less rigorous in these regards than non-COVID research.

Collaborative Forensic Autopsy Documentation and Supervised Report Generation Using a Hybrid Mixed-Reality Environment and Generative AI

Forensic investigation is a complex procedure involving experts working together to establish cause of death and report findings to legal authorities. While new technologies are being developed to provide better post-mortem imaging capabilities-including mixed-reality (MR) tools to support 3D visualisation of such data-these tools do not integrate seamlessly into their existing collaborative workflow and report authoring process, requiring extra steps, e.g. to extract imagery from the MR tool and combine with physical autopsy findings for inclusion in the report. Therefore, in this work we design and evaluate a new forensic autopsy report generation workflow and present a novel documentation system using hybrid mixed-reality approaches to integrate visualisation, voice and hand interaction, as well as collaboration and procedure recording. Our preliminary findings indicate that this approach has the potential to improve data management, aid reviewability, and thus, achieve more robust standards. Further, it potentially streamlines report generation and minimise dependency on external tools and assistance, reducing autopsy time and related costs. This system also offers significant potential for education. A free copy of this paper and all supplemental materials are available at https://osf.io/ygfzx.

An analysis of the effects of sharing research data, code, and preprints on citations

Calls to make scientific research more open have gained traction with a range of societal stakeholders. Open Science practices include but are not limited to the early sharing of results via preprints and openly sharing outputs such as data and code to make research more reproducible and extensible. Existing evidence shows that adopting Open Science practices has effects in several domains. In this study, we investigate whether adopting one or more Open Science practices leads to significantly higher citations for an associated publication, which is one form of academic impact. We use a novel dataset known as Open Science Indicators, produced by PLOS and DataSeer, which includes all PLOS publications from 2018 to 2023 as well as a comparison group sampled from the PMC Open Access Subset. In total, we analyze circa 122'000 publications. We calculate publication and author-level citation indicators and use a broad set of control variables to isolate the effect of Open Science Indicators on received citations. We show that Open Science practices are adopted to different degrees across scientific disciplines. We find that the early release of a publication as a preprint correlates with a significant positive citation advantage of about 20.2% (±.7) on average. We also find that sharing data in an online repository correlates with a smaller yet still positive citation advantage of 4.3% (±.8) on average. However, we do not find a significant citation advantage for sharing code. Further research is needed on additional or alternative measures of impact beyond citations. Our results are likely to be of interest to researchers, as well as publishers, research funders, and policymakers.

Desiderata for discoverability and FAIR adoption of health data hubs

BACKGROUND

The future European Health Research and Innovation Cloud (HRIC), as fundamental part of the European Health Data Space (EHDS), will promote the secondary use of data and the capabilities to push the boundaries of health research within an ethical and legally compliant framework that reinforces the trust of patients and citizens.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyse health data management mechanisms in Europe to determine their alignment with FAIR principles and data discovery generating best. practices for new data hubs joining the HRIC ecosystem. In this line, the compliance of health data hubs with FAIR principles and data discovery were assessed, and a set of best practices for health data hubs was concluded.

METHODS

A survey was conducted in January 2022, involving 99 representative health data hubs from multiple countries, and 42 responses were obtained in June 2022. Stratification methods were employed to cover different levels of granularity. The survey data was analysed to assess compliance with FAIR and data discovery principles. The study started with a general analysis of survey responses, followed by the creation of specific profiles based on three categories: organization type, function, and level of data aggregation.

RESULTS

The study produced specific best practices for data hubs regarding the adoption of FAIR principles and data discoverability. It also provided an overview of the survey study and specific profiles derived from category analysis, considering different types of data hubs.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that a significant number of health data hubs in Europe did not fully comply with FAIR and data discovery principles. However, the study identified specific best practices that can guide new data hubs in adhering to these principles. The study highlighted the importance of aligning health data management mechanisms with FAIR principles to enhance interoperability and reusability in the future HRIC.

Sharing Is Caring? International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology Review and Recommendations for Sharing Programming Code

PURPOSE

There is increasing recognition of the importance of transparency and reproducibility in scientific research. This study aimed to quantify the extent to which programming code is publicly shared in pharmacoepidemiology, and to develop a set of recommendations on this topic.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review identifying all studies published in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (PDS) between 2017 and 2022. Data were extracted on the frequency and types of programming code shared, and other key open science practices (clinical codelist sharing, data sharing, study preregistration, and stated use of reporting guidelines and preprinting). We developed six recommendations for investigators who choose to share code and gathered feedback from members of the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE).

RESULTS

Programming code sharing by articles published in PDS ranged from 1.8% in 2017 to 9.5% in 2022. It was more prevalent among articles with a methodological focus, simulation studies, and papers which also shared record-level data.

CONCLUSION

Programming code sharing is rare but increasing in pharmacoepidemiology studies published in PDS. We recommend improved reporting of whether code is shared and how available code can be accessed. When sharing programming code, we recommend the use of permanent digital identifiers, appropriate licenses, and, where possible, adherence to good software practices around the provision of metadata and documentation, computational reproducibility, and data privacy.

One Health Ethics and the Ethics of Zoonoses: A Silent Call for Global Action

This paper presents a critical review of key issues related to the emergence of new networks for the spread of zoonotic diseases amid the mass extinction of species. Zoonotic and infectious diseases account for approximately 70% of new and existing diseases affecting humans and animals. The initial section argues that the term "zoonoses" should not be confined to single-cause events within veterinary medicine. Instead, zoonoses should be viewed as complex, systemic phenomena shaped by interrelated factors, including environmental, sociocultural, and economic elements, influenced by anthropogenic climate change. The second section presents bioethical principles and potential strategies for those engaged in zoonotic disease prevention. The third section uses the slaughter of animals in disaster settings as a case study to illustrate the need for further clarification of normative and interspecies justice conflicts in One Health ethics. This section concludes with an outlook on "zoonoethics". Section four develops the analysis of the interlinked elements that trigger zoonoses and examines antimicrobial resistance (AMR) from an ethical and political standpoint, concluding with policy recommendations for addressing AMR. Section five offers a critical reflection, integrating contributions from zoonoethics, human ecology, and the ecotheological turn. Finally, section six concludes with a call to action and policy recommendations for an inclusive, intercultural, and gender-sensitive One Health approach.

The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review

Open Science (OS) aims, in part, to drive greater societal impact of academic research. Government, funder and institutional policies state that it should further democratize research and increase learning and awareness, evidence-based policy-making, the relevance of research to society's problems, and public trust in research. Yet, measuring the societal impact of OS has proven challenging and synthesized evidence of it is lacking. This study fills this gap by systematically scoping the existing evidence of societal impact driven by OS and its various aspects, including Citizen Science (CS), Open Access (OA), Open/FAIR Data (OFD), Open Code/Software and others. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews and searches conducted in Web of Science, Scopus and relevant grey literature, we identified 196 studies that contain evidence of societal impact. The majority concern CS, with some focused on OA, and only a few addressing other aspects. Key areas of impact found are education and awareness, climate and environment, and social engagement. We found no literature documenting evidence of the societal impact of OFD and limited evidence of societal impact in terms of policy, health, and trust in academic research. Our findings demonstrate a critical need for additional evidence and suggest practical and policy implications.

Inverting social innovation to transform health system responses to climate change adaptation and mitigation in the global south

Systems thinking is aimed at understanding and solving complex problems that cut across sectors, an approach that requires accurate, timely, and multisectoral data. Citizen-driven big data can advance systems thinking, considering the widespread use of digital devices. Using digital platforms, data from these devices can transform health systems to predict and prevent global health crises and respond rapidly to emerging crises by providing citizens with real-time support. For example, citizens can obtain real-time support to help with public health risks via a digital app, which can predict evolving risks. These big data can be aggregated and visualized on digital dashboards, which can provide decision-makers with advanced data analytics to facilitate jurisdiction-level rapid responses to evolving climate change impacts (e.g., direct public health crisis communication). In the context of climate change, digital platforms can strengthen rapid responses by integrating information across systems (e.g., food, health, and social services) via citizen big data. More importantly, these big data can be used for rapid decision-making,a paradigm-changing approach that can invert social innovation, which we define as co-conceptualizing societal solutions with vulnerable communities to improve economic development with a focus on community wellbeing. However, to foster equitable and inclusive digital partnerships that invert social innovation, it is critical to avoid top-down approaches that sometimes result when researchers in the Global North and South collaborate. Equitable Global South-North partnerships can be built by combining digital citizen science and community-based participatory research to ethically leverage citizen-driven big data for rapid responses across international jurisdictions.

Challenges in conducting clinical research in primary care dentistry

The integration of dentistry into primary health care is crucial for promoting patient well-being. However, clinical studies in dentistry face challenges, including issues with study design, transparency, and relevance to primary care. Clinical trials in dentistry often focus on specific issues with strict eligibility criteria, limiting the generalizability of findings. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) face challenges in reflecting real-world conditions and using clinically relevant outcomes. The need for more pragmatic approaches and the inclusion of clinically relevant outcomes (CROs) is discussed, such as tooth loss or implant success. Solutions proposed include well-controlled observational studies, optimized data collection tools, and the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) for predictive modelling, computer-aided diagnostics and automated diagnosis. In this position paper advocates for more efficient trials with a focus on patient-centred outcomes, as well as the adoption of pragmatic study designs reflecting real-world conditions. Collaborative research networks, increased funding, enhanced data retrieval, and open science practices are also recommended. Technology, including intraoral scanners and AI, is highlighted for improving efficiency in dental research. AI is seen as a key tool for participant recruitment, predictive modelling, and outcome evaluation. However, ethical considerations and ongoing validation are emphasized to ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of AI-driven solutions in dental research. In conclusion, the efficient conduct of clinical research in primary care dentistry requires a comprehensive approach, including changes in study design, data collection, and analytical methods. The integration of AI is seen as pivotal in achieving these objectives in a meaningful and efficient way.

Immunotherapy and Cannabis: A Harmful Drug Interaction or Reefer Madness?

A retrospective (N = 140) and a prospective (N = 102) observational Israeli study by Bar-Sela and colleagues about cannabis potentially adversely impacting the response to immunotherapy have together been cited 202 times, including by clinical practice guidelines. There have also been concerns on PubPeer outlining irregularities and unverifiable information in their statistics and numerous errors in calculating percentages. This reanalysis attempted to verify the data analysis while including non-parametric statistics. The corrected prospective report contained 22 p-values, but only one (4.5%) could be verified despite the authors being transparent about the N and statistics employed. Cannabis users were significantly (p < 0.0025) younger than non-users, but this was not reported in the retrospective report. There were also errors in percentage calculations (e.g., 13/34 reported as 22.0% instead of 38.2%). Overall, these observational investigations, and especially the prospective, appear to contain gross inaccuracies which could impact the statistical decisions (i.e., significant findings reported as non-significant or vice-versa). Although it is mechanistically plausible that cannabis could have immunosuppressive effects which inhibit the response to immunotherapy, these two reports should be viewed cautiously. Larger prospective studies of this purported drug interaction that account for potential confounds (e.g., greater nicotine smoking among cannabis users) may be warranted.

Towards transparency: adoption of WHO best practices in clinical trial registration and reporting among top medical research funders in the USA

OBJECTIVE

To assess to what extent the clinical trial policies of the largest public and philanthropic funders of clinical research in the United States meet WHO best practices in trial registration and reporting.

METHODS

Public and philanthropic funders of clinical trials in the USA with >US$50 million annual spend were selected. The funders were assessed using an 11-item scoring tool based on WHO Joint Statement benchmarks. These 11 items fell into 4 categories, namely: trial registration, academic publication, monitoring and sanctions. An additional item captured whether and how funders referred to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) within their trial policies. Each funder was independently assessed by two or three researchers. Funders were contacted to flag possible errors and omissions. Ambiguous or difficult-to-score items were settled by an independent adjudicator.

RESULTS

Fourteen funders were assessed. Our cross-sectional study found that, on average, funders have only implemented 4.1/11 (37%) of WHO best practices in clinical trial transparency. The most frequently adopted requirement was open access publishing (14/14 funders). The least frequently adopted were (1) requiring trial ID to appear in all publications (2/14 funders, 14%) and (2) making compliance reports public (2/14 funders, 14%). Public funders, on average, adopted more policy elements (5.2/11 items, 47%) than philanthropic funders (2.8/11 items, 25%). Only one funder's policy documents mentioned the CONSORT statement.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant variation between the number of best practice policy items adopted by medical research funders in the USA. Many funders fell significantly short of WHO Joint Statement benchmarks. Each funder could benefit from policy revision and strengthening.

Design and validation of a conceptual model regarding impact of open science on healthcare research processes

INTRODUCTION

The development and use of digital tools in various stages of research highlight the importance of novel open science methods for an integrated and accessible research system. The objective of this study was to design and validate a conceptual model of open science on healthcare research processes.

METHODS

This research was conducted in three phases using a mixed-methods approach. The first phase employed a qualitative method, namely purposive sampling and semi-structured interview guides to collect data from healthcare researchers and managers. Influential factors of open science on research processes were extracted for refining the components and developing the proposed model; the second phase utilized a panel of experts and collective agreement through purposive sampling. The final phase involved purposive sampling and Delphi technique to validate the components of the proposed model according to researchers' perspectives.

FINDINGS

From the thematic analysis of 20 interview on the study topic, 385 codes, 38 sub-themes, and 14 main themes were extracted for the initial proposed model. These components were reviewed by expert panel members, resulting in 31 sub-themes, 13 main themes, and 4 approved themes. Ultimately, the agreed-upon model was assessed in four layers for validation by the expert panel, and all the components achieved a score of > 75% in two Delphi rounds. The validated model was presented based on the infrastructure and culture layers, as well as supervision, assessment, publication, and sharing.

CONCLUSION

To effectively implement these methods in the research process, it is essential to create cultural and infrastructural backgrounds and predefined requirements for preventing potential abuses and privacy concerns in the healthcare system. Applying these principles will lead to greater access to outputs, increasing the credibility of research results and the utilization of collective intelligence in solving healthcare system issues.

How the COVID-19 pandemic signaled the demise of Antarctic exceptionalism

This paper explores how the COVID-19 pandemic affected science and tourism activities and their governance in the Antarctic and Southern Ocean. The pandemic reduced the ability of Antarctic Treaty Parties to make decisions on policy issues and placed a considerable burden on researchers. Tourism was effectively suspended during the 2020-2021 Antarctic season and heavily reduced in 2021-2022 but rebounded to record levels in 2022-2023. The pandemic stimulated reflection on practices to facilitate dialog, especially through online events. Opportunities arose to integrate innovations developed during the pandemic more permanently into Antarctic practices, in relation to open science, reducing operational greenhouse gas footprints and barriers of access to Antarctic research and facilitating data sharing. However, as well as the long-term impacts arising directly from the pandemic, an assemblage of major geopolitical drivers are also in play and, combined, these signal a considerable weakening of Antarctic exceptionalism in the early Anthropocene.

A pathway to strengthening open science: comments on the draft South African Ethics in Health Research Guidelines

The recently released draft South African Ethics in Health Research Guidelines: Principles, Processes and Structures (Draft Guidelines) by the National Health Research Ethics Council recognize open data and provide guiding principles for this in the context of health research in South Africa. While its inclusion is a positive development, there is room for improvement. Although the Draft Guidelines leverage the Draft National Policy on Data and Cloud, it lacks incorporation of other relevant government policies, notably the Draft National Open Science Policy, and fails to sufficiently detail the principles of open science and open access. This limited scope and lack of comprehensive definition and detailed guidance present challenges for researchers in conducting ethical and responsible health research in South Africa. It constrains the Draft Guidelines from fully aligning with national imperatives and from fostering African-centric approaches. To address these issues, it is recommended that the Draft Guidelines integrate broader policies and principles, enhance clarity through comprehensive definitions, provide detailed guidance on open access, and promote African-centric approaches. Implementing these solutions will strengthen the Draft Guidelines, aligning them with national visions of open science, and thereby harnessing the full potential of South Africa's diverse scientific community in advancing health research.

Accelerating the open research agenda to solve global challenges

Harnessing science-based policy is key to addressing global challenges like the biodiversity and climate crises. Open research principles underpin effective science-based policy, but the uptake of these principles is likely constrained by the politicisation, commoditisation and conflicting motives of stakeholders in the research landscape. Here, using the mission and vision statements from 129 stakeholders from across the research landscape, we explore alignment in open research principles between stakeholders. We find poor alignment between stakeholders, largely focussed around journals, societies and funders, all of which have low open research language-use. We argue that this poor alignment stifles knowledge flow within the research landscape, ultimately limiting the mobilisation of impactful science-based policy. We offer recommendations on how the research landscape could embrace open research principles to accelerate societies' ability to solve global challenges.

Clinical trials and their impact on policy during COVID-19: a review

Background

Of over 8,000 recorded randomised trials addressing COVID-19, around 80% were of treatments, and 17% have reported results. Approximately 1% were adaptive or platform trials, with 25 having results available, across 29 journal articles and 10 preprint articles.

Methods

We conducted an extensive literature review to address four questions about COVID-19 trials, particularly the role and impact of platform/adaptive trials and lessons learned.

Results

The key findings were: Q1. Social value in conducting trials and uptake into policy? COVID-19 drug treatments varied substantially and changed considerably, with drugs found effective in definitive clinical trials replacing unproven drugs. Dexamethasone has likely saved ½-2 million lives, and was cost effective across a range of countries and populations, whereas the cost effectiveness of remdesivir is uncertain. Published economic and health system impacts of COVID-19 treatments were infrequent. Q2. Issues with adaptive trial designs. Of the 77 platform trials registered, 6 major platform trials, with approximately 50 treatment arms, recruited ~135,000 participants with funding over $100 million. Q3. Models of good practice. Streamlined set-up processes such as flexible and fast-track funding, ethics, and governance approvals are vital. To facilitate recruitment, simple and streamlined research processes, and pre-existing research networks to coordinate trial planning, design, conduct and practice change are crucial to success. Q4. Potential conflicts to avoid? When treating patients through trials, balancing individual and collective rights and allocating scarce resources between healthcare and research are challenging. Tensions occur between commercial and non-commercial sectors, and academic and public health interests, such as publication and funding driven indicators and the public good.

Conclusion

There is a need to (i) reduce small, repetitive, single centre trials, (ii) increase coordination to ensure robust research conducted for treatments, and (iii) a wider adoption of adaptive/platform trial designs to respond to fast-evolving evidence landscape.

Making science public: a review of journalists' use of Open Access research

Science journalists are uniquely positioned to increase the societal impact of open research outputs by contextualizing and communicating findings in ways that highlight their relevance and implications for non-specialist audiences. Yet, it is unclear to what degree journalists use open research outputs, such as open access publications or preprints, in their reporting; what factors motivate or constrain this use; and how the recent surge in openly available research seen during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected this. This article examines these questions through a review of relevant literature published from 2018 onwards-particularly literature relating to the COVID-19 pandemic-as well as seminal articles outside the search dates. We find that research that explicitly examines journalists' engagement with open access publications or preprints is scarce, with existing literature mostly addressing the topic tangentially or as a secondary concern, rather than a primary focus. Still, the limited body of evidence points to several factors that may hamper journalists' use of these outputs and thus warrant further exploration. These include an overreliance on traditional criteria for evaluating scientific quality; concerns about the trustworthiness of open research outputs; and challenges using and verifying the findings. We also find that, while the COVID-19 pandemic encouraged journalists to explore open research outputs such as preprints, the extent to which these explorations will become established journalistic practices remains unclear. Furthermore, we note that current research is overwhelmingly authored and focused on the Global North, and the United States specifically. We conclude with recommendations for future research that attend to issues of equity and diversity, and more explicitly examine the intersections of open access and science journalism.

Research misconduct as a challenge for academic institutions and scientific journals

Research misconduct refers to a set of unethical practices in research and publication and is the main reason for retraction of articles published in the academic literature. Research misconduct has negative consequences and has generated public scepticism about research, which has led to increasing distrust in science. In this context, a joint effort by the scientific community, academic institutions, scientific journals and research funders is needed to identify and prevent research misconduct. In this paper, we will evaluate what has already been done and what is needed to do to better address research misconduct. The focus of this paper will be on the actions taken by academic institutions, as the first line of defence, and scientific journals, as the gatekeepers of science. However, scientific journals and academic institutions are only a part of a much larger and multistakeholder effort needed to address the challenges scientific research is facing.

Research integrity during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives of health science researchers at an Academic Health Science Center

During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, a complex mix of political pressure, social urgency, public panic, and scientific curiosity has significantly impacted the context of research and development. The goal of this study is to understand if and how researchers are shifting their practices and adjusting norms and beliefs regarding research ethics and integrity. We have conducted 31 interviews with Health Science Researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch which were then analyzed using integrated deductive and inductive coding. We categorized participant views into four main areas: 1) limitations to the research design, 2) publication, 3) duplication of studies, and 4) research pipeline. Although certain researchers were in keeping to the status quo, more were willing to modify norms to address social need and urgency. Notably, they were more likely to opt for systemic change rather than modifications within their own research practices.

Reconciling the ideals of open science with data privacy in the context of health research in Nigeria: A legal analysis

Background

The Nigerian Revised National Policy on Science, Technology and Innovation 2022 formally proposed the adoption of open science principles among researchers and all other stakeholders in Nigeria. With regard to health research, open science would allow the dissemination and sharing of scientific data and other research outputs among health researchers, thereby accelerating the scientific process and the development of innovative solutions for health challenges. However, in this context, the existing privacy and data protection rules can profoundly affect the adoption and sustainability of open science in Nigeria. This is because researchers rely heavily on accessing and sharing personal information and the biological samples of human subjects. Therefore, this study identifies and examines possible legal issues and challenges arising from the existing privacy and data protection rules as researchers adopt an open science approach to health research in Nigeria.

Methods

This study adopts a qualitative approach, providing a legal analysis of existing national, regional and international instruments on privacy, data protection and health research in the context of open science in Nigeria. The study also draws on relevant research and non-research articles on open science, health research, privacy and data protection published in English. Searches for the articles were conducted on various sites through the Google search engine, using terms such as 'sharing of data', 'data privacy', 'principles of data protection', 'open science', etc.

Results/Conclusion

The study finds that the right to privacy and data protection could affect the promotion, adoption and sustainability of open science among health researchers in Nigeria, as well as their ability to engage in open collaborative research with their peers in Africa and other jurisdictions. To prevent infringements of the privacy and data protection rules by researchers and thereby ensure the adoption of open science approaches in health research, the study further identifies various legal options for researchers, including using personal data or material transfer arrangements, which, among other things, require recipients or users of human data or biological samples to commit not to re-identify human subjects.

Connectome-based modelling of neurodegenerative diseases: towards precision medicine and mechanistic insight

Neurodegenerative diseases are the most common cause of dementia. Although their underlying molecular pathologies have been identified, there is substantial heterogeneity in the patterns of progressive brain alterations across and within these diseases. Recent advances in neuroimaging methods have revealed that pathological proteins accumulate along specific macroscale brain networks, implicating the network architecture of the brain in the system-level pathophysiology of neurodegenerative diseases. However, the extent to which 'network-based neurodegeneration' applies across the wide range of neurodegenerative disorders remains unclear. Here, we discuss the state-of-the-art of neuroimaging-based connectomics for the mapping and prediction of neurodegenerative processes. We review findings supporting brain networks as passive conduits through which pathological proteins spread. As an alternative view, we also discuss complementary work suggesting that network alterations actively modulate the spreading of pathological proteins between connected brain regions. We conclude this Perspective by proposing an integrative framework in which connectome-based models can be advanced along three dimensions of innovation: incorporating parameters that modulate propagation behaviour on the basis of measurable biological features; building patient-tailored models that use individual-level information and allowing model parameters to interact dynamically over time. We discuss promises and pitfalls of these strategies for improving disease insights and moving towards precision medicine.

Translational Research and Communities

Impactful translational research requires new approaches to computational analysis and bioethics, both of which have been advanced by adoption of community-engagement strategies. Community knowledge and experience will hone data collection, research, and insights and accelerate the impact of derived translational applications to improve individual health, medical decision-making, and public health policy. In the context of translational research with big health data, meaningful community-researcher engagement will require developing and deploying coengagement tools across the research life cycle and developing approaches for novel coproduction.

Raising concerns on questionable ethics approvals - a case study of 456 trials from the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection

BACKGROUND

The practice of clinical research is strictly regulated by law. During submission and review processes, compliance of such research with the laws enforced in the country where it was conducted is not always correctly filled in by the authors or verified by the editors. Here, we report a case of a single institution for which one may find hundreds of publications with seemingly relevant ethical concerns, along with 10 months of follow-up through contacts with the editors of these articles. We thus argue for a stricter control of ethical authorization by scientific editors and we call on publishers to cooperate to this end.

METHODS

We present an investigation of the ethics and legal aspects of 456 studies published by the IHU-MI (Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire Méditerranée Infection) in Marseille, France.

RESULTS

We identified a wide range of issues with the stated research authorization and ethics of the published studies with respect to the Institutional Review Board and the approval presented. Among the studies investigated, 248 were conducted with the same ethics approval number, even though the subjects, samples, and countries of investigation were different. Thirty-nine (39) did not even contain a reference to the ethics approval number while they present research on human beings. We thus contacted the journals that published these articles and provide their responses to our concerns. It should be noted that, since our investigation and reporting to journals, PLOS has issued expressions of concerns for several publications we analyze here.

CONCLUSION

This case presents an investigation of the veracity of ethical approval, and more than 10 months of follow-up by independent researchers. We call for stricter control and cooperation in handling of these cases, including editorial requirement to upload ethical approval documents, guidelines from COPE to address such ethical concerns, and transparent editorial policies and timelines to answer such concerns. All supplementary materials are available.

Scoping review of the methodology of large health surveys conducted in Spain early on in the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The use of health surveys has been key in the scientific community to promptly communicate results about the health impact of COVID-19. But what information was collected, where, when and how, and who was the study population?

Objective

To describe the methodological characteristics used in large health surveys conducted in Spain early on in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Scoping review. Inclusion criteria: observational studies published between January 2020 and December 2021, with sample sizes of over 2,000 persons resident in Spain. Databases consulted: PubMed, CINAHL, Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en CC de la Salud, Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, Sociological Abstracts, Dialnet and Web of Science Core Collection. We analyzed the characteristics of the literature references, methodologies and information gathered in the surveys selected. Fifty five studies were included.

Results

Sixty percentage of the studies included had mental health as their main topic and 75% were conducted on the general adult population. Thirteen percentage had a longitudinal design, 93% used the internet to gather information and the same percentage used non-probability sampling. Thirty percentage made some type of sampling correction to reduce coverage or non-response biases, but not selection biases. Sixty seven percentage did not state the availability of their data.

Conclusions

Consistent with the extensive use of non-probability sampling without any bias correction in the extraordinary setting created by COVID-19, quality population frameworks are required so that probability and representative samples can be extracted quickly to promptly address other health crises, as well as to reduce potential coverage, non-response and particularly selection biases by utilizing reweighting techniques. The low data accessibility despite the huge opportunity that COVID-19 provided for Open Science-based research is striking.

Transparency of COVID-19-related research: A meta-research study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the adherence to five transparency practices (data availability, code availability, protocol registration and conflicts of interest (COI), and funding disclosures) from open access Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related articles.

METHODS

We searched and exported all open access COVID-19-related articles from PubMed-indexed journals in the Europe PubMed Central database published from January 2020 to June 9, 2022. With a validated and automated tool, we detected transparent practices of three paper types: research articles, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and reviews. Basic journal- and article-related information were retrieved from the database. We used R for the descriptive analyses.

RESULTS

The total number of articles was 258,678, of which we were able to retrieve full texts of 186,157 (72%) articles from the database Over half of the papers (55.7%, n = 103,732) were research articles, 10.9% (n = 20,229) were review articles, and less than one percent (n = 1,202) were RCTs. Approximately nine-tenths of articles (in all three paper types) had a statement to disclose COI. Funding disclosure (83.9%, confidence interval (CI): 81.7-85.8 95%) and protocol registration (53.5%, 95% CI: 50.7-56.3) were more frequent in RCTs than in reviews or research articles. Reviews shared data (2.5%, 95% CI: 2.3-2.8) and code (0.4%, 95% CI: 0.4-0.5) less frequently than RCTs or research articles. Articles published in 2022 had the highest adherence to all five transparency practices. Most of the reviews (62%) and research articles (58%) adhered to two transparency practices, whereas almost half of the RCTs (47%) adhered to three practices. There were journal- and publisher-related differences in all five practices, and articles that did not adhere to transparency practices were more likely published in lowest impact journals and were less likely cited.

CONCLUSION

While most articles were freely available and had a COI disclosure, adherence to other transparent practices was far from acceptable. A much stronger commitment to open science practices, particularly to protocol registration, data and code sharing, is needed from all stakeholders.

The rise of preprints in earth sciences

The rate of science information's spread has accelerated in recent years. In this context, it appears that many scientific disciplines are beginning to recognize the value and possibility of sharing open access (OA) online manuscripts in their preprint form. Preprints are academic papers that are published but have not yet been evaluated by peers. They have existed in research at least since the 1960s and the creation of ArXiv in physics and mathematics. Since then, preprint platforms-which can be publisher- or community-driven, profit or not for profit, and based on proprietary or free and open source software-have gained popularity in many fields (for example, bioRxiv for the biological sciences). Today, there are many platforms that are either disciplinary-specific or cross-domain, with exponential development over the past ten years. Preprints as a whole still make up a very small portion of scholarly publishing, but a large group of early adopters are testing out these value-adding tools across a much wider range of disciplines than in the past. In this opinion article, we provide perspective on the three main options available for earth scientists, namely EarthArXiv, ESSOAr/ESS Open Archive and EGUsphere.

Health data hubs: an analysis of existing data governance features for research

BACKGROUND

Digital transformation in healthcare and the growth of health data generation and collection are important challenges for the secondary use of healthcare records in the health research field. Likewise, due to the ethical and legal constraints for using sensitive data, understanding how health data are managed by dedicated infrastructures called data hubs is essential to facilitating data sharing and reuse.

METHODS

To capture the different data governance behind health data hubs across Europe, a survey focused on analysing the feasibility of linking individual-level data between data collections and the generation of health data governance patterns was carried out. The target audience of this study was national, European, and global data hubs. In total, the designed survey was sent to a representative list of 99 health data hubs in January 2022.

RESULTS

In total, 41 survey responses received until June 2022 were analysed. Stratification methods were performed to cover the different levels of granularity identified in some data hubs' characteristics. Firstly, a general pattern of data governance for data hubs was defined. Afterward, specific profiles were defined, generating specific data governance patterns through the stratifications in terms of the kind of organization (centralized versus decentralized) and role (data controller or data processor) of the health data hub respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of the responses from health data hub respondents across Europe provided a list of the most frequent aspects, which concluded with a set of specific best practices on data management and governance, taking into account the constraints of sensitive data. In summary, a data hub should work in a centralized way, providing a Data Processing Agreement and a formal procedure to identify data providers, as well as data quality control, data integrity and anonymization methods.

FAIR-Checker: supporting digital resource findability and reuse with Knowledge Graphs and Semantic Web standards

The current rise of Open Science and Reproducibility in the Life Sciences requires the creation of rich, machine-actionable metadata in order to better share and reuse biological digital resources such as datasets, bioinformatics tools, training materials, etc. For this purpose, FAIR principles have been defined for both data and metadata and adopted by large communities, leading to the definition of specific metrics. However, automatic FAIRness assessment is still difficult because computational evaluations frequently require technical expertise and can be time-consuming. As a first step to address these issues, we propose FAIR-Checker, a web-based tool to assess the FAIRness of metadata presented by digital resources. FAIR-Checker offers two main facets: a "Check" module providing a thorough metadata evaluation and recommendations, and an "Inspect" module which assists users in improving metadata quality and therefore the FAIRness of their resource. FAIR-Checker leverages Semantic Web standards and technologies such as SPARQL queries and SHACL constraints to automatically assess FAIR metrics. Users are notified of missing, necessary, or recommended metadata for various resource categories. We evaluate FAIR-Checker in the context of improving the FAIRification of individual resources, through better metadata, as well as analyzing the FAIRness of more than 25 thousand bioinformatics software descriptions.

COVID-19 trials were not more likely to report intent to share individual data than non-COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov

OBJECTIVES

To compare intent to share individual participant data (IPD) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. We also evaluated factors independently associated with intent to share IPD and whether intent to share IPD has improved as compared with the prepandemic period.

METHODS

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov for all interventional phase 3 studies registered between 01/09/2020, and 01/03/2021. Then, we identified COVID-19 trials and selected a random sample of non-COVID-19 trials with a ratio 2:1. We compared the intent to share IPD between these trials and with 292 trials registered between 01/12/2019, and 01/03/2020 (prepandemic period).

RESULTS

We included 148 COVID-19 trials and 296 non-COVID-19 trials. Intent to share IPD did not significantly differ between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 trials (22.3% vs. 27.0%, P = 0.3). Intent to share IPD was independently associated with industry-sponsorship (odds ratio [OR] = 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65-5.27) and location in the United States (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.64-5.41) or the European Union (OR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.03-4.19). The intent to share IPD has not significantly improved compared with the prepandemic period (P = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

Data-sharing intent at registration does not seem better for COVID-19 trials.

Building awareness and capacity of bioinformatics and open science skills in Kenya: a sensitize, train, hack, and collaborate model

We have applied the sensitize-train-hack-community model to build awareness of and capacity in bioinformatics in Kenya. Open science is the practice of science openly and collaboratively, with tools, techniques, and data freely shared to facilitate reuse and collaboration. Open science is not a mandatory curriculum course in schools, whereas bioinformatics is relatively new in some African regions. Open science tools can significantly enhance bioinformatics, leading to increased reproducibility. However, open science and bioinformatics skills, especially blended, are still lacking among students and researchers in resource-constrained regions. We note the need to be aware of the power of open science among the bioinformatics community and a clear strategy to learn bioinformatics and open science skills for use in research. Using the OpenScienceKE framework-Sensitize, Train, Hack, Collaborate/Community-the BOSS (Bioinformatics and Open Science Skills) virtual events built awareness and empowered researchers with the skills and tools in open science and bioinformatics. Sensitization was achieved through a symposium, training through a workshop and train-the-trainer program, hack through mini-projects, community through conferences, and continuous meet-ups. In this paper, we discuss how we applied the framework during the BOSS events and highlight lessons learnt in planning and executing the events and their impact on the outcome of each phase. We evaluate the impact of the events through anonymous surveys. We show that sensitizing and empowering researchers with the skills works best when the participants apply the skills to real-world problems: project-based learning. Furthermore, we have demonstrated how to implement virtual events in resource-constrained settings by providing Internet and equipment support to participants, thus improving accessibility and diversity.

Predictive stability, novel HPLC-MS analysis and semi-automatic compounding process for the emergency implementation of a production line of pancuronium in injectable solution

During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the international medical product supply chain was tight, causing breaks in the availability of neuromuscular blocking agents essential for the treatment of patients in intensive care units. The present study describes the pharmaceutical development of an injectable 2 mg/mL solution of pancuronium bromide (PC) in a very short lapse of time. The sterile solution was compounded into a good manufacturing practice grade A clean room, filtered (0.2 µm) and filled into 10 mL type I glass, manually sealed with bromobutyl rubber stoppers. A novel HPLC-MS stability indicating method for pancuronium quantification and its degradation product was developed and validated. This fast, sensitive and straightforward method was used to study the stability of the formulation using a semi-predictive method, enabling a very fast attribution of a temporary shelf-life, which was confirmed by a classic prospective stability study. The production line and the analytical tools set-up were performed in six weeks and the semi-predictive stability study was conducted in 90 days, allowing us to predict a shelf life, which was successfully confirmed by prospective study. In conclusion, using innovative methods, we were able to rapidly overcome the shortage of a critical drug.

Structural under-reporting of informed consent, data handling and sharing, ethical approval, and application of Open Science principles as proxies for study quality conduct in COVID-19 research: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic required science to provide answers rapidly to combat the outbreak. Hence, the reproducibility and quality of conducting research may have been threatened, particularly regarding privacy and data protection, in varying ways around the globe. The objective was to investigate aspects of reporting informed consent and data handling as proxies for study quality conduct.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was performed by searching PubMed and Embase. The search was performed on November 8th, 2020. Studies with hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 over 18 years old were eligible for inclusion. With a focus on informed consent, data were extracted on the study design, prestudy protocol registration, ethical approval, data anonymisation, data sharing and data transfer as proxies for study quality. For reasons of comparison, data regarding country income level, study location and journal impact factor were also collected.

RESULTS

972 studies were included. 21.3% of studies reported informed consent, 42.6% reported waivers of consent, 31.4% did not report consent information and 4.7% mentioned other types of consent. Informed consent reporting was highest in clinical trials (94.6%) and lowest in retrospective cohort studies (15.0%). The reporting of consent versus no consent did not differ significantly by journal impact factor (p=0.159). 16.8% of studies reported a prestudy protocol registration or design. Ethical approval was described in 90.9% of studies. Information on anonymisation was provided in 17.0% of studies. In 257 multicentre studies, 1.2% reported on data sharing agreements, and none reported on Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable data principles. 1.2% reported on open data. Consent was most often reported in the Middle East (42.4%) and least often in North America (4.7%). Only one report originated from a low-income country.

DISCUSSION

Informed consent and aspects of data handling and sharing were under-reported in publications concerning COVID-19 and differed between countries, which strains study quality conduct when in dire need of answers.

Data sharing: A Long COVID perspective, challenges, and road map for the future

'Long COVID' is the term used to describe the phenomenon in which patients who have survived a COVID-19 infection continue to experience prolonged SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. Millions of people across the globe are affected by Long COVID. Solving the Long COVID conundrum will require drawing upon the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic, during which thousands of experts across diverse disciplines such as epidemiology, genomics, medicine, data science, and computer science collaborated, sharing data and pooling resources to attack the problem from multiple angles. Thus far, there has been no global consensus on the definition, diagnosis, and most effective treatment of Long COVID. In this work, we examine the possible applications of data sharing and data science in general with a view to, ultimately, understand Long COVID in greater detail and hasten relief for the millions of people experiencing it. We examine the literature and investigate the current state, challenges, and opportunities of data sharing in Long COVID research.

Assessing the publishing priorities and preferences among STEM researchers at a large R1 institution

The cost of academic publishing has increased substantially despite the ease with which information can be shared on the web. Open Access publishing is a key mechanism for amplifying research access, inclusivity, and impact. Despite this, shifting to a free-to-read publishing environment requires navigating complex barriers that vary by career status and publishing expectations. In this article, we investigate the motivations and preferences of researchers situated within our large research institution as a case study for publishing attitudes at similar institutions. We surveyed the publishing priorities and preferences of researchers at various career stages in STEM fields as they relate to openness, data practices, and assessment of research impact. Our results indicate that publishing preferences, data management experience and research impact assessment vary by career status and departmental approaches to promotion. We find that open access publishing is widely appreciated regardless of career status, but financial limitations and publishing expectations were common barriers to publishing in Open Access journals. Our findings shed light on publishing attitudes and preferences among researchers at a major R1 research institution, and offer insight into advocacy strategies that incentivize open access publishing.

Changes in health communication in the age of COVID-19: A study on the dissemination of preprints to the public

Introduction

Preprints have become an important tool for meeting the challenges of health communication in the context of COVID-19. They allow scientists to disseminate their results more quickly due to the absence of a peer review process. Preprints have been well-received by scientists, however, there have been concerns about the exposure of wider public audiences to preprints due in part to this lack of peer review.

Methods

The aim of this study is to examine the dissemination of preprints on medRxiv and bioRxiv during the COVID-19 pandemic using content analysis and statistical analysis.

Results

Our findings show that preprints have played an unprecedented role in disseminating COVID-19-related science results to the public.

Discussion

While the overall media coverage of preprints is unsatisfactory, digital native news media performed better than legacy media in reporting preprints, which means that we could make the most of digital native media to improve health communication. This study contributes to understanding how science communication has evolved in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and provides some practical recommendations.

Scientific Integrity Requires Publishing Rebuttals and Retracting Problematic Papers

Recently, an article by Seneff et al. entitled "Innate immunosuppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs" was published in Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT). Here, we describe why this article, which contains unsubstantiated claims and misunderstandings such as "billions of lives are potentially at risk" with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, is problematic and should be retracted. We report here our request to the editor of FCT to have our rebuttal published, unfortunately rejected after three rounds of reviewing. Fighting the spread of false information requires enormous effort while receiving little or no credit for this necessary work, which often even ends up being threatened. This need for more scientific integrity is at the heart of our advocacy, and we call for large support, especially from editors and publishers, to fight more effectively against deadly disinformation.

Spatial and spatio-temporal epidemiological approaches to inform COVID-19 surveillance and control: a systematic review of statistical and modelling methods in Africa

OBJECTIVE

Various studies have been published to better understand the underlying spatial and temporal dynamics of COVID-19. This review sought to identify different spatial and spatio-temporal modelling methods that have been applied to COVID-19 and examine influential covariates that have been reportedly associated with its risk in Africa.

DESIGN

Systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Thematically mined keywords were used to identify refereed studies conducted between January 2020 and February 2022 from the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE via Proquest, CINHAL via EBSCOhost and Coronavirus Research Database via ProQuest. A manual search through the reference list of studies was also conducted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Peer-reviewed studies that demonstrated the application of spatial and temporal approaches to COVID-19 outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

A standardised extraction form based on critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies checklist was used to extract the meta-data of the included studies. A validated scoring criterion was used to assess studies based on their methodological relevance and quality.

RESULTS

Among 2065 hits in five databases, title and abstract screening yielded 827 studies of which 22 were synthesised and qualitatively analysed. The most common socioeconomic variable was population density. HIV prevalence was the most common epidemiological indicator, while temperature was the most common environmental indicator. Thirteen studies (59%) implemented diverse formulations of spatial and spatio-temporal models incorporating unmeasured factors of COVID-19 and the subtle influence of time and space. Cluster analyses were used across seven studies (32%) to explore COVID-19 variation and determine whether observed patterns were random.

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 modelling in Africa is still in its infancy, and a range of spatial and spatio-temporal methods have been employed across diverse settings. Strengthening routine data systems remains critical for generating estimates and understanding factors that drive spatial variation in vulnerable populations and temporal variation in pandemic progression.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021279767.

Strategic priorities for reproducibility reform

Increasing the reproducibility of research should be a top priority. Great work is being done, but more work is needed to combine efforts and maximize our actions to enable true reproducibility reform.

The Chinese Open Science Network (COSN): Building an Open Science Community From Scratch

Open Science is becoming a mainstream scientific ideology in psychology and related fields. However, researchers, especially early-career researchers (ECRs) in developing countries, are facing significant hurdles in engaging in Open Science and moving it forward. In China, various societal and cultural factors discourage ECRs from participating in Open Science, such as the lack of dedicated communication channels and the norm of modesty. To make the voice of Open Science heard by Chinese-speaking ECRs and scholars at large, the Chinese Open Science Network (COSN) was initiated in 2016. With its core values being grassroots-oriented, diversity, and inclusivity, COSN has grown from a small Open Science interest group to a recognized network both in the Chinese-speaking research community and the international Open Science community. So far, COSN has organized three in-person workshops, 12 tutorials, 48 talks, and 55 journal club sessions and translated 15 Open Science-related articles and blogs from English to Chinese. Currently, the main social media account of COSN (i.e., the WeChat Official Account) has more than 23,000 subscribers, and more than 1,000 researchers/students actively participate in the discussions on Open Science. In this article, we share our experience in building such a network to encourage ECRs in developing countries to start their own Open Science initiatives and engage in the global Open Science movement. We foresee great collaborative efforts of COSN together with all other local and international networks to further accelerate the Open Science movement.