-
The American Psychologist Oct 2019The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is one of psychology's most famous studies. It has been criticized on many grounds, and yet a majority of textbook authors have...
The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is one of psychology's most famous studies. It has been criticized on many grounds, and yet a majority of textbook authors have ignored these criticisms in their discussions of the SPE, thereby misleading both students and the general public about the study's questionable scientific validity. Data collected from a thorough investigation of the SPE archives and interviews with 15 of the participants in the experiment further question the study's scientific merit. These data are not only supportive of previous criticisms of the SPE, such as the presence of demand characteristics, but provide new criticisms of the SPE based on heretofore unknown information. These new criticisms include the biased and incomplete collection of data, the extent to which the SPE drew on a prison experiment devised and conducted by students in one of Zimbardo's classes 3 months earlier, the fact that the guards received precise instructions regarding the treatment of the prisoners, the fact that the guards were not told they were subjects, and the fact that participants were almost never completely immersed by the situation. Possible explanations of the inaccurate textbook portrayal and general misperception of the SPE's scientific validity over the past 5 decades, in spite of its flaws and shortcomings, are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Adult; Data Collection; History, 20th Century; Humans; Interpersonal Relations; Prisons; Psychology, Social; Reproducibility of Results; Research; Social Behavior; Young Adult
PubMed: 31380664
DOI: 10.1037/amp0000401 -
American Journal of Pharmaceutical... Jan 2020Attributes of rigor and quality and suggested best practices for qualitative research design as they relate to the steps of designing, conducting, and reporting... (Review)
Review
Attributes of rigor and quality and suggested best practices for qualitative research design as they relate to the steps of designing, conducting, and reporting qualitative research in health professions educational scholarship are presented. A research question must be clear and focused and supported by a strong conceptual framework, both of which contribute to the selection of appropriate research methods that enhance trustworthiness and minimize researcher bias inherent in qualitative methodologies. Qualitative data collection and analyses are often modified through an iterative approach to answering the research question. Researcher reflexivity, essentially a researcher's insight into their own biases and rationale for decision-making as the study progresses, is critical to rigor. This article reviews common standards of rigor, quality scholarship criteria, and best practices for qualitative research from design through dissemination.
Topics: Data Collection; Education, Pharmacy; Fellowships and Scholarships; Humans; Qualitative Research; Quality Indicators, Health Care; Research Design; Research Personnel
PubMed: 32292186
DOI: 10.5688/ajpe7120 -
Annual Review of Public Health Apr 2020Disease surveillance systems are a cornerstone of public health tracking and prevention. This review addresses the use, promise, perils, and ethics of social media- and... (Review)
Review
Disease surveillance systems are a cornerstone of public health tracking and prevention. This review addresses the use, promise, perils, and ethics of social media- and Internet-based data collection for public health surveillance. Our review highlights untapped opportunities for integrating digital surveillance in public health and current applications that could be improved through better integration, validation, and clarity on rules surrounding ethical considerations. Promising developments include hybrid systems that couple traditional surveillance data with data from search queries, social media posts, and crowdsourcing. In the future, it will be important to identify opportunities for public and private partnerships, train public health experts in data science, reduce biases related to digital data (gathered from Internet use, wearable devices, etc.), and address privacy. We are on the precipice of an unprecedented opportunity to track, predict, and prevent global disease burdens in the population using digital data.
Topics: Confidentiality; Data Collection; Humans; Internet; Public Health; Public Health Surveillance; Social Media; Wearable Electronic Devices
PubMed: 31905322
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040119-094402 -
American Journal of Public Health Dec 2021The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) is a unique source of national data on the health and nutritional status of the US population, collecting...
The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) is a unique source of national data on the health and nutritional status of the US population, collecting data through interviews, standard exams, and biospecimen collection. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, NHANES data collection was suspended, with more than a year gap in data collection. NHANES resumed operations in 2021 with the NHANES 2021-2022 survey, which will monitor the health and nutritional status of the nation while adding to the knowledge of COVID-19 in the US population. This article describes the reshaping of the NHANES program and, specifically, the planning of NHANES 2021-2022 for data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Details are provided on how NHANES transformed its participant recruitment and data collection plans at home and at the mobile examination center to safely collect data in a COVID-19 environment. The potential implications for data users are also discussed. (. 2021;111(12):2149-2156. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306517).
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Communicable Disease Control; Data Collection; Female; Humans; Interviews as Topic; Male; Middle Aged; Nutrition Surveys; Nutritional Status; Pandemics; Physical Examination; SARS-CoV-2; United States; Young Adult
PubMed: 34878854
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306517 -
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Sep 2019Due to the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) and legislation on meaningful use in recent decades, health systems are increasingly interdependent on EHR... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Due to the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) and legislation on meaningful use in recent decades, health systems are increasingly interdependent on EHR capabilities, offerings, and innovations to better capture patient data. A novel capability offered by health systems encompasses the integration between EHRs and wearable health technology. Although wearables have the potential to transform patient care, issues such as concerns with patient privacy, system interoperability, and patient data overload pose a challenge to the adoption of wearables by providers.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to review the landscape of wearable health technology and data integration to provider EHRs, specifically Epic, because of its prevalence among health systems. The objectives of the study were to (1) identify the current innovations and new directions in the field across start-ups, health systems, and insurance companies and (2) understand the associated challenges to inform future wearable health technology projects at other health organizations.
METHODS
We used a scoping process to survey existing efforts through Epic's Web-based hub and discussion forum, UserWeb, and on the general Web, PubMed, and Google Scholar. We contacted Epic, because of their position as the largest commercial EHR system, for information on published client work in the integration of patient-collected data. Results from our searches had to meet criteria such as publication date and matching relevant search terms.
RESULTS
Numerous health institutions have started to integrate device data into patient portals. We identified the following 10 start-up organizations that have developed, or are in the process of developing, technology to enhance wearable health technology and enable EHR integration for health systems: Overlap, Royal Philips, Vivify Health, Validic, Doximity Dialer, Xealth, Redox, Conversa, Human API, and Glooko. We reported sample start-up partnerships with a total of 16 health systems in addressing challenges of the meaningful use of device data and streamlining provider workflows. We also found 4 insurance companies that encourage the growth and uptake of wearables through health tracking and incentive programs: Oscar Health, United Healthcare, Humana, and John Hancock.
CONCLUSIONS
The future design and development of digital technology in this space will rely on continued analysis of best practices, pain points, and potential solutions to mitigate existing challenges. Although this study does not provide a full comprehensive catalog of all wearable health technology initiatives, it is representative of trends and implications for the integration of patient data into the EHR. Our work serves as an initial foundation to provide resources on implementation and workflows around wearable health technology for organizations across the health care industry.
Topics: Biomedical Technology; Data Collection; Electronic Health Records; Humans; Wearable Electronic Devices
PubMed: 31512582
DOI: 10.2196/12861 -
Medical Teacher Sep 2019The qualitative research interview is an important data collection tool for a variety of methods used within the broad spectrum of medical education research. However,...
The qualitative research interview is an important data collection tool for a variety of methods used within the broad spectrum of medical education research. However, many medical teachers and life science researchers undergo a steep learning curve when they first encounter qualitative interviews, both in terms of new theory but also regarding new methods of inquiry and data collection. This article introduces the concept of qualitative research interviews for novice researchers within medical education, providing 12 tips for conducting qualitative research interviews.
Topics: Data Collection; Humans; Interviews as Topic; Qualitative Research; Research Design
PubMed: 30261797
DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1497149 -
PloS One 2020Data saturation is the most commonly employed concept for estimating sample sizes in qualitative research. Over the past 20 years, scholars using both empirical research...
Data saturation is the most commonly employed concept for estimating sample sizes in qualitative research. Over the past 20 years, scholars using both empirical research and mathematical/statistical models have made significant contributions to the question: How many qualitative interviews are enough? This body of work has advanced the evidence base for sample size estimation in qualitative inquiry during the design phase of a study, prior to data collection, but it does not provide qualitative researchers with a simple and reliable way to determine the adequacy of sample sizes during and/or after data collection. Using the principle of saturation as a foundation, we describe and validate a simple-to-apply method for assessing and reporting on saturation in the context of inductive thematic analyses. Following a review of the empirical research on data saturation and sample size estimation in qualitative research, we propose an alternative way to evaluate saturation that overcomes the shortcomings and challenges associated with existing methods identified in our review. Our approach includes three primary elements in its calculation and assessment: Base Size, Run Length, and New Information Threshold. We additionally propose a more flexible approach to reporting saturation. To validate our method, we use a bootstrapping technique on three existing thematically coded qualitative datasets generated from in-depth interviews. Results from this analysis indicate the method we propose to assess and report on saturation is feasible and congruent with findings from earlier studies.
Topics: Data Collection; Humans; Qualitative Research; Research Design; Sample Size
PubMed: 32369511
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232076 -
Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition... Sep 2019The aim of this report is to critically review existing questionnaires and tools to assess nutritional status in different populations and pathological conditions. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The aim of this report is to critically review existing questionnaires and tools to assess nutritional status in different populations and pathological conditions.
RECENT FINDINGS
A total of 16 instruments to evaluate nutritional status were recorded, which were based on anthropometrical determinations, biochemical markers, clinical examinations and subjective questionnaires, depending on the nutritional assessment focus, involving different concepts: screening of the risk, diagnosis and severity of malnutrition, as well as the consequences of undernutrition or overnutrition.
SUMMARY
A variety of questionnaires, equations and tools were found with ability to assess nutritional status for metabolic care or clinical nutrition purposes, but apparently there is no optimal, universal and reliable nutritional status screening system for all metabolic conditions. Novel assessment instruments should provide high sensibility and specificity, be precise and reliable as well as inexpensive and simple, in order to avoid the additional burden of excessive loads of costs, work and time while dynamically overcoming the influence of disease diversity.
Topics: Data Collection; Humans; Nutrition Assessment; Nutritional Sciences; Nutritional Status; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 31246586
DOI: 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000581 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2021
Topics: Biomedical Research; Data Accuracy; Data Collection; Female; Gender Identity; Health Status Disparities; Humans; Male; Risk Factors; Sex; Sex Characteristics; Sex Determination Analysis; Sex Distribution; Sex Factors
PubMed: 33741563
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n735 -
The Lancet. Global Health Aug 2021
Topics: COVID-19; Data Collection; Disabled Persons; Global Health; Humans
PubMed: 34297946
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00312-0