A review of the benefits and drawbacks to virtual field guides in today’s Geoscience higher education environment

Virtual Field Guides are a way for educators to tackle the growing issue of funding pressures in areas of higher education, such as geography. Virtual Field Guides are however underutilised and can offer students a different way of learning. Virtual Field Guides have many benefits to students, such as being more inclusive, building student skills and confidence in a controlled environment pre fieldtrip and can increase engagement in the topic studied. There are also benefits to the educator, such as reduced cost, more efficient students on fieldwork tasks and the ability to tailor and update their field guides to suit their needs. However there are drawbacks in the challenge of creation and their outcome as educational standalone tools. This paper reviews the literature around the benefits and draw backs to the creation and incorporation of virtual field guides in geoscience education. © 2017, The Author(s)

Genetic susceptibility of intervertebral disc degeneration among young Finnish adults

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Disc degeneration (DD) is a common condition that progresses with aging. Although the events leading to DD are not well understood, a significant genetic influence has been found. This study was undertaken to assess the association between relevant candidate gene polymorphisms and moderate DD in a well-defined and characterized cohort of young adults. Focusing on young age can be valuable in determining genetic predisposition to DD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated the associations of existing candidate genes for DD among 538 young adults with a mean age of 19 belonging to the 1986 Northern Finland Birth Cohort. Nineteen single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in 16 genes were genotyped. We evaluated lumbar DD using the modified Pfirrmann classification and a 1.5-T magnetic resonance scanner for imaging.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 538 individuals studied, 46% had no degeneration, while 54% had DD and 51% of these had moderate DD. The risk of DD was significantly higher in subjects with an allele G of <it>IL6 </it>SNPs rs1800795 (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.07-1.96) and rs1800797 (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02-1.85) in the additive inheritance model. The role of <it>IL6 </it>was further supported by the haplotype analysis, which resulted in an association between the GGG haplotype (SNPs rs1800797, rs1800796 and rs1800795) and DD with an OR of 1.51 (95% CI 1.11-2.04). In addition, we observed an association between DD and two other polymorphisms, <it>SKT </it>rs16924573 (OR 0.27 95% CI 0.07-0.96) and <it>CILP </it>rs2073711 in women (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.07-3.89).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results indicate that <it>IL6</it>, <it>SKT </it>and <it>CILP </it>are involved in the etiology of DD among young adults.</p

Key stakeholder perceptions about consent to participate in acute illness research: a rapid, systematic review to inform epi/pandemic research preparedness

Background A rigorous research response is required to inform clinical and public health decision-making during an epi/pandemic. However, the ethical conduct of such research, which often involves critically ill patients, may be complicated by the diminished capacity to consent and an imperative to initiate trial therapies within short time frames. Alternative approaches to taking prospective informed consent may therefore be used. We aimed to rapidly review evidence on key stakeholder (patients, their proxy decision-makers, clinicians and regulators) views concerning the acceptability of various approaches for obtaining consent relevant to pandemic-related acute illness research. Methods We conducted a rapid evidence review, using the Internet, database and hand-searching for English language empirical publications from 1996 to 2014 on stakeholder opinions of consent models (prospective informed, third-party, deferred, or waived) used in acute illness research. We excluded research on consent to treatment, screening, or other such procedures, non-emergency research and secondary studies. Papers were categorised, and data summarised using narrative synthesis. Results We screened 689 citations, reviewed 104 full-text articles and included 52. Just one paper related specifically to pandemic research. In other emergency research contexts potential research participants, clinicians and research staff found third-party, deferred, and waived consent to be acceptable as a means to feasibly conduct such research. Acceptability to potential participants was motivated by altruism, trust in the medical community, and perceived value in medical research and decreased as the perceived risks associated with participation increased. Discrepancies were observed in the acceptability of the concept and application or experience of alternative consent models. Patients accepted clinicians acting as proxy-decision makers, with preference for two decision makers as invasiveness of interventions increased. Research regulators were more cautious when approving studies conducted with alternative consent models; however, their views were generally under-represented. Conclusions Third-party, deferred, and waived consent models are broadly acceptable to potential participants, clinicians and/or researchers for emergency research. Further consultation with key stakeholders, particularly with regulators, and studies focused specifically on epi/pandemic research, are required. We highlight gaps and recommendations to inform set-up and protocol development for pandemic research and institutional review board processes