Personalised medicine (PM) research programmes represent the modern paradigm of complex cross-disciplinary research, integrating innovative methodologies and technologies. Methodological research is required to ensure that these programmes generate robust and reproducible evidence. The PERMIT project developed methodological recommendations for each stage of the PM research pipeline.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOur aim was to describe the research practices of doctoral students facing a dilemma to research integrity and to assess the impact of inappropriate research environments, i.e. exposure to (a) a post-doctoral researcher who committed a Detrimental Research Practice (DRP) in a similar situation and (b) a supervisor who did not oppose the DRP.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjective: Personalised medicine (PM) allows treating patients based on their individual demographic, genomic or biological characteristics for tailoring the 'right treatment for the right person at the right time'. Robust methodology is required for PM clinical trials, to correctly identify groups of participants and treatments. As an initial step for the development of new recommendations on trial designs for PM, we aimed to present an overview of the study designs that have been used in this field.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjective: To describe the bias assessment practice in recently published systematic reviews of mediation studies and to evaluate the quality of different bias assessment tools for mediation analysis proposed in the literature.
Method: We conducted an overview of systematic reviews by searching MEDLINE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (OvidSP), and PubMed databases for systematic reviews of mediation studies published from 2007 to 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the title, abstracts, and full texts of the identified reports and extracted the data.
Objective: To develop a tool to assess the quality of peer-review reports in biomedical research.
Methods: We conducted an online survey intended for biomedical editors and authors. The survey aimed to (1) determine if participants endorse the proposed definition of peer-review report quality; (2) identify the most important items to include in the final version of the tool and (3) identify any missing items.