Evaluating QualiCO. An ontology to facilitate qualitative methods sharing to support open science

Qualitative science methods have largely been omitted from discussions of open science. Platforms focused on qualitative science that support open science data and method sharing are rare. Sharing and exchanging coding schemas has great potential for supporting traceability in qualitative research as well as for facilitating the reuse of coding schemas. In this study, we present and evaluate QualiCO, an ontology to describe qualitative coding schemas. Twenty qualitative researchers used QualiCO to complete two coding tasks. In our findings, we present task performance and interview data that focus participants\u27 attention on the ontology. Participants used QualiCO to complete the coding tasks, decreasing time on task, while improving accuracy, signifying that QualiCO enabled the reuse of qualitative coding schemas. Our discussion elaborates some issues that participants had and highlights how conceptual and prior practice frames their interpretation of how QualiCO can be used. (DIPF/Orig.

Requirements for generic anti-epileptic medicines: a regulatory perspective

Contains fulltext : 81660.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

Interchangeability of generic anti-epileptic drugs: a quantitative analysis of topiramate and gabapentin.

Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the so-called "shift" or "drift" problem might occur when generic anti-epileptic drugs are interchanged, and thus to assess if generic anti-epileptic drugs are interchangeable and can be used in an efficacious and safe way on the basis of their bioequivalence to one and the same reference product. METHODS: The bioequivalence of topiramate and gabapentin generics was evaluated. For proper interstudy comparison, individual exposure data (AUC and C(max)) for each bioequivalence study present in the registration dossier was normalized based on the absolute exposure data of one of two innovators. The exposure-normalized plasma concentration curves of the generic product arms between studies were compared, providing indirect evidence of bioequivalence of the different generics. Additionally, comparisons were made for generic-generic as well as innovator-innovator exchange based on absolute exposure data from individual bioequivalence studies. RESULTS: In almost all cases, estimated 90% confidence intervals of the AUC and C(max) ratios for generic-generic interchange were within the routine 80-125% criterion. When absolute, non-corrected exposure data were used for this interstudy comparison, in a number of cases 90% confidence intervals outside the 80-125% criterion were found upon interchanging generics from two studies. However, a similar pattern of 90% confidence intervals outside the 80-125% criterion was observed for the comparison of innovator arms, despite the fact that the innovator was identical in all studies. CONCLUSION: Our results strongly indicate that the so-called drifting problem upon generic-generic substitution does not result in important differences in exposure upon exchanging topiramate generics or gabapentin generics.01 oktober 201