Neurotrauma clinicians' perspectives on the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up following traumatic brain injury in low-income and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global public health concern; however, low/middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden. The WHO recognises the significant differences between patient outcomes following injuries in high-income countries versus those in LMICs. Outcome data are not reliably recorded in LMICs and despite improved injury surveillance data, data on disability and long-term functional outcomes remain poorly recorded. Therefore, the full picture of outcome post-TBI in LMICs is largely unknown. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a cross-sectional pragmatic qualitative study using individual semistructured interviews with clinicians who have experience of neurotrauma in LMICs. The aim of this study is to understand the contextual challenges associated with long-term follow-up of patients following TBI in LMICs. For the purpose of the study, we define 'long-term' as any data collected following discharge from hospital. We aim to conduct individual semistructured interviews with 24-48 neurosurgeons, beginning February 2020. Interviews will be recorded and transcribed verbatim. A reflexive thematic analysis will be conducted supported by NVivo software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee approved this study in February 2020. Ethical issues within this study include consent, confidentiality and anonymity, and data protection. Participants will provide informed consent and their contributions will be kept confidential. Participants will be free to withdraw at any time without penalty; however, their interview data can only be withdrawn up to 1 week after data collection. Findings generated from the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders such as the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies and disseminated in conference presentations and journal publications

Neurosurgeons’ experiences of conducting and disseminating clinical research in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative study protocol

Low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) face the greatest burden of neurotrauma. However, most of the research published in scientific journals originates from high-income countries, suggesting those in LMICs are either not engaging in research or are not publishing it. Evidence originating in high-income countries may not be generalisable to LMICs; therefore, it is important to nurture research capacity in LMICs so that a relevant evidence base can be developed. However, little is published about specific challenges or contextual issues relevant to increasing research activity of neurosurgeons in LMICs. Therefore, the aim of this study was to understand neurosurgeons’ experiences of, aspirations for and ability to conduct and disseminate clinical research in LMICs.Methods and analysisThis is a pragmatic qualitative study situated within the naturalistic paradigm using focus groups and interviews with a purposive sample of neurosurgeons from LMICs. First, we will conduct asynchronous online focus groups with 36 neurosurgeons to broadly explore issues relevant to the study aim. Second, we will select 20 participants for follow-up semistructured interviews to explore concepts in more depth and detail than could be achieved in the focus group. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis will be conducted following Braun and Clarke’s six stages and will be supported by NVIVO software.Ethics and disseminationThe University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee reviewed this study and provided a favourable opinion in January 2020 (REF PRE.2020.006). Participants will provide informed consent, be able to withdraw at any time and will have their contributions kept confidential. The findings of the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders and disseminated in conference presentations and journal publications.</jats:sec

The World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Young Neurosurgeons Survey (Part II): Barriers to Professional Development and Service Delivery in Neurosurgery.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening health systems requires attention to workforce, training needs, and barriers to service delivery. The World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Young Neurosurgeons Committee survey sought to identify challenges for residents, fellows, and consultants within 10 years of training. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to various neurosurgical societies, personal contacts, and social media platforms (April-November 2018). Responses were grouped by World Bank income classification into high-income countries (HICs), upper middle-income countries (UMICs), low-middle-income countries (LMICs), and low-income countries (LICs). Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: In total, 953 individuals completed the survey. For service delivery, the limited number of trained neurosurgeons was seen as a barrier for 12.5%, 29.8%, 69.2%, and 23.9% of respondents from HICs, UMICs, LMICs, and LICs, respectively (P < 0.0001). The most reported personal challenge was the lack of opportunities for research (HICs, 34.6%; UMICs, 57.5%; LMICs, 61.6%; and LICs, 61.5%; P = 0.03). Other differences by income class included limited access to advice from experienced/senior colleagues (P < 0.001), neurosurgical journals (P < 0.0001), and textbooks (P = 0.02). Assessing how the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies could best help young neurosurgeons, the most frequent requests (n = 953; 1673 requests) were research (n = 384), education (n = 296), and subspecialty/fellowship training (n = 232). Skills courses and access to cadaver dissection laboratories were also heavily requested. CONCLUSIONS: Young neurosurgeons perceived that additional neurosurgeons are needed globally, especially in LICs and LMICs, and primarily requested additional resources for research and subspecialty training

Automatic Discovery of Families of Network Generative Processes

International audienceDesigning plausible network models typically requires scholars to form a priori intuitions on the key drivers of network formation. Oftentimes, these intuitions are supported by the statistical estimation of a selection of network evolution processes which will form the basis of the model to be developed. Machine learning techniques have lately been introduced to assist the automatic discovery of generative models. These approaches may more broadly be described as "symbolic regression", where fundamental network dynamic functions, rather than just parameters, are evolved through genetic programming. This chapter first aims at reviewing the principles, efforts and the emerging literature in this direction, which is very much aligned with the idea of creating artificial scientists. Our contribution then aims more specifically at building upon an approach recently developed by us [Menezes & Roth, 2014] in order to demonstrate the existence of families of networks that may be described by similar generative processes. In other words, symbolic regression may be used to group networks according to their inferred genotype (in terms of generative processes) rather than their observed phenotype (in terms of statistical/topological features). Our empirical case is based on an original data set of 238 anonymized ego-centered networks of Facebook friends, further yielding insights on the formation of sociability networks