mariskaleeflang.bsky.social
Professor in Clinical epidemiology, with a focus on medical tests and diagnostic test accuracy #SystematicReviews. Interested in #reproducibility of science.
#AcademicSky #EpiSky
101 posts
2,483 followers
428 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
After a practical on AI generated manuscripts, we finish with a co-presentation of Ewoud Baarsma and Kees Niks, about patient participation in research.
With tips and tricks from BMC Rheumatol 2023;7:2 - Fig 1
Both days were fantastic and full of information. Thanks to everyone involved!
comment in response to
post
Marc Bonten challenges the audience to think about how to measure the impact of your scientific work.
- by the number of QALYs gained for patients?
- number of citations?
- impact factors?
- number of media interactions?
- amount if social media attention?
- that you learn something?
comment in response to
post
Fifth presentation is about rejections and appeals, by CMI's EiC:
- appeals are rarely effective
- immediate rejections are a mixed blessing
- for CMI, negative results are no reason to reject
- at CMI authors can submit previous peer review reports
comment in response to
post
Fourth presentation of second day by Michal Paul: addressing editors and reviewers:
- cover letter has to be clear and short (but not all editors read them)
- editors are humans: it is okay to communicate with the editor if unsure about requested revisions
- the peer-reviewer is not your enemy
comment in response to
post
Thomas Tangdèn talks about peer reviewing. What to check:
- are the conclusions justified by the findings?
- check the figures and references
- you do not need to copy-edit for language (unless you spot it anyway)
- don't write your recommendation in your peer review report
- be respectful
comment in response to
post
I talked about tables and figures. With mainly reference to other sources, such as
researcheracademy.elsevier.com
comment in response to
post
Angela Huttner talks next, about the art if writing:
- punctuation matters!
- read a lot, to get examples
- if you can say it with many words or few words, choose the few-words option
- limit use of 'the'
- "that" is not preceded by a comma; "which" is preceded by a comma
- "between" vs "among"
comment in response to
post
Kwart over vijf en al een uur klaarwakker. Goedemorgen!
comment in response to
post
After lunch, we discussed manuscripts submitted by participants - in small groups of 3-4 pple.
Last presentation was about mistakes that have been made in the past
Overwhelmingly much information, but also many tips and tools.
See you all tomorrow!
comment in response to
post
Miranda Langendam asked us to design a very DIShonest systematic review:
- Have a team with vested interest
- Vague and retrospective question formulation
- Tweaking eligibility criteria
- Search one database and sloppy single screening
- Sloppy data-extraction and RoB assessments
Nice exercise!
comment in response to
post
Ed Kuijper talks about honest reporting of laboratory studies, but also ventures into very valuable practical tips for doing research:
- find a supervisor who has time for you
- in-house tests have their own challenges (check ivdr)
- be aware that digital enhanced tests may depend on system updates
comment in response to
post
Fourth presentation by Leonard Leibovici - on honest reporting of clinical papers:
- for each percentage, report nominator and denominator
- be wary of small numbers (too narrow confidence intervals for 5, 6 patients)
- ethics statement: if approved by ethics committee, report which one plus number
comment in response to
post
Third presentation by Jesús Rodriguez Baño, about reporting guidelines and reproducibility:
- main problems for replicability are missings, eligibility criteria, outcome measurement, timelines
- Use reporting guidelines
- Check Repeat framework bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10....
comment in response to
post
Next: Ursula Hofer about translating your research into a paper.
- paper is not synonym to study
- decide on authorship and -requirements at the beginning of the study
- don't forget to report protocol deviations!
- use reference software instead of doing references by hand
comment in response to
post
Mini world?
comment in response to
post
Dank je wel!
comment in response to
post
En vergeet ook de achterkant niet. Zo mooi! En zoveel aandacht aan besteed