ICTD Work, Plus mFeel : improving communication in resource-poor settings

This issue's Works-In-Progress department has four entries related to the issue's theme, Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICTD). They are “Sustainable ICT in Agricultural Value Chains”, “Measuring Social Inclusion in Primary Schools”, “An Architecture for Green Mobile Computation”, and “Improving Communication in Resource-Poor Settings”. A fifth entry, “mFeel: An Affective Mobile System”, covers the mFeel mobile system, which combines context awareness with affective and cognitive techniques

The Moral Duty of Self-Preservation

UIDB/00183/2020 UIDP/00183/2020This chapter provides an in-depth examination of Kant’s view of suicide. After a contextualization of Kant’s prohibition of suicide (§2.1), seven different arguments against the moral permissibility of suicide are identified: three from the Lectures on Ethics (§2.2) and four from the published writings (§2.3). Each argument is presented (with possible variations) and explained. Strengths and flaws are pointed out, and possible objections and counter-objections are discussed, taking into consideration the abundant bibliography on the subject. The conclusion is that, against a recent trend in secondary literature, which tends to read Kant as justifying not only a right, but even a duty to suicide, Kant does not allow for any exception to his strict prohibition of suicide.authorsversionpublishe

The BARRIERS scale -- the barriers to research utilization scale: A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A commonly recommended strategy for increasing research use in clinical practice is to identify barriers to change and then tailor interventions to overcome the identified barriers. In nursing, the BARRIERS scale has been used extensively to identify barriers to research utilization.</p> <p>Aim and objectives</p> <p>The aim of this systematic review was to examine the state of knowledge resulting from use of the BARRIERS scale and to make recommendations about future use of the scale. The following objectives were addressed: To examine how the scale has been modified, to examine its psychometric properties, to determine the main barriers (and whether they varied over time and geographic locations), and to identify associations between nurses' reported barriers and reported research use.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Medline (1991 to September 2009) and CINHAL (1991 to September 2009) were searched for published research, and ProQuest^®digital dissertations were searched for unpublished dissertations using the BARRIERS scale. Inclusion criteria were: studies using the BARRIERS scale in its entirety and where the sample was nurses. Two authors independently assessed the study quality and extracted the data. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Sixty-three studies were included, with most using a cross-sectional design. Not one study used the scale for tailoring interventions to overcome identified barriers. The main barriers reported were related to the setting, and the presentation of research findings. Overall, identified barriers were consistent over time and across geographic locations, despite varying sample size, response rate, study setting, and assessment of study quality. Few studies reported associations between reported research use and perceptions of barriers to research utilization.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The BARRIERS scale is a nonspecific tool for identifying general barriers to research utilization. The scale is reliable as reflected in assessments of internal consistency. The validity of the scale, however, is doubtful. There is no evidence that it is a useful tool for planning implementation interventions. We recommend that no further descriptive studies using the BARRIERS scale be undertaken. Barriers need to be measured specific to the particular context of implementation and the intended evidence to be implemented.</p

Competition and moral behavior: A meta-analysis of forty-five crowd-sourced experimental designs

Significance Using experiments involves leeway in choosing one out of many possible experimental designs. This choice constitutes a source of uncertainty in estimating the underlying effect size which is not incorporated into common research practices. This study presents the results of a crowd-sourced project in which 45 independent teams implemented research designs to address the same research question: Does competition affect moral behavior? We find a small adverse effect of competition on moral behavior in a meta-analysis involving 18,123 experimental participants. Importantly, however, the variation in effect size estimates across the 45 designs is substantially larger than the variation expected due to sampling errors. This “design heterogeneity” highlights that the generalizability and informativeness of individual experimental designs are limited. Abstract Does competition affect moral behavior? This fundamental question has been debated among leading scholars for centuries, and more recently, it has been tested in experimental studies yielding a body of rather inconclusive empirical evidence. A potential source of ambivalent empirical results on the same hypothesis is design heterogeneity—variation in true effect sizes across various reasonable experimental research protocols. To provide further evidence on whether competition affects moral behavior and to examine whether the generalizability of a single experimental study is jeopardized by design heterogeneity, we invited independent research teams to contribute experimental designs to a crowd-sourced project. In a large-scale online data collection, 18,123 experimental participants were randomly allocated to 45 randomly selected experimental designs out of 95 submitted designs. We find a small adverse effect of competition on moral behavior in a meta-analysis of the pooled data. The crowd-sourced design of our study allows for a clean identification and estimation of the variation in effect sizes above and beyond what could be expected due to sampling variance. We find substantial design heterogeneity—estimated to be about 1.6 times as large as the average standard error of effect size estimates of the 45 research designs—indicating that the informativeness and generalizability of results based on a single experimental design are limited. Drawing strong conclusions about the underlying hypotheses in the presence of substantive design heterogeneity requires moving toward much larger data collections on various experimental designs testing the same hypothesis

Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div

Non-cationic proteins are associated with HIV neutralizing activity in genital secretions of female sex workers.

CAPRISA, 2015.Abstract available in pdf

The interstitium in cardiac repair: role of the immune-stromal cell interplay

Cardiac regeneration, that is, restoration of the original structure and function in a damaged heart, differs from tissue repair, in which collagen deposition and scar formation often lead to functional impairment. In both scenarios, the early-onset inflammatory response is essential to clear damaged cardiac cells and initiate organ repair, but the quality and extent of the immune response vary. Immune cells embedded in the damaged heart tissue sense and modulate inflammation through a dynamic interplay with stromal cells in the cardiac interstitium, which either leads to recapitulation of cardiac morphology by rebuilding functional scaffolds to support muscle regrowth in regenerative organisms or fails to resolve the inflammatory response and produces fibrotic scar tissue in adult mammals. Current investigation into the mechanistic basis of homeostasis and restoration of cardiac function has increasingly shifted focus away from stem cell-mediated cardiac repair towards a dynamic interplay of cells composing the less-studied interstitial compartment of the heart, offering unexpected insights into the immunoregulatory functions of cardiac interstitial components and the complex network of cell interactions that must be considered for clinical intervention in heart diseases