Sustaining large-scale infrastructure to promote pre-competitive biomedical research: lessons from mouse genomics.

Bio-repositories and databases for biomedical research enable the efficient community-wide sharing of reagents and data. These archives play an increasingly prominent role in the generation and dissemination of bioresources and data essential for fundamental and translational research. Evidence suggests, however, that current funding and governance models, generally short-term and nationally focused, do not adequately support the role of archives in long-term, transnational endeavours to make and share high-impact resources. Our qualitative case study of the International Knockout Mouse Consortium and the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium examines new governance mechanisms for archive sustainability. Funders and archive managers highlight in interviews that archives need stable public funding and new revenue-generation models to be sustainable. Sustainability also requires archives, journal publishers, and funders to implement appropriate incentives, associated metrics, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that researchers use archives to deposit reagents and data to make them publicly accessible for academia and industry alike.This work was supported by the NorCOMM2 Project funded by Genome Canada [AM and TB]; the Ontario Genome Institute [TB]; and the Canadian Stem Cell Network [TB]. The authors have no competing interests. The funders of the study exerted no influence on the design and conduct of the study or on the analysis and presentation of results. We thank Lesley Dacks, Lorna Skaley and Dr Ann Flenniken for research support and project coordination. We thank the participants who took time out of their busy schedules for interviews and to review our analyses. We thank Dr Farah Huzair for feedback and the IMPC leadership for permission to use a modified version (Figure 1) of the Consortium's map of its global membership (http://www.mousephenotype.org/about-impc/impc-members). We are grateful to Drs Andy Smith and John Hancock for advice on the ELIXIR funding and governance model.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2015.10.00

An Analysis of News Media Coverage of Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Background: To examine the accuracy and adequacy of lay media news stories about complementary and alternative medicines and therapies. Methodol./Principal Findings: A descriptive anal. of news stories about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the Australian media using a national medical news monitoring website, mediadoctor.org.au. Each story was rated against 10 criteria by two individuals. Consensus scores of 222 news articles reporting therapeutic claims about complementary medicines posted on mediadoctor.org.au between 1 Jan. 2004 and 1 Sept. 2007 were calculated. The overall rating score for 222 CAM articles was 50% (95% CI 47% to 53%). There was a statistically significant (F = 3.68, p = 0.006) difference in cumulative mean scores according to type of therapy: biol. based practices (54%, 95% CI 50% to 58%); manipulative body based practices (46%, 95% CI 39% to 54%), whole medical systems (45%, 95% CI 32% to 58%), mind body medicine (41%, 95% CI 31% to 50%) and energy medicine (33%, 95% CI 11% to 55%). There was a statistically significant difference in cumulative mean scores (F = 3.72, p = 0.0001) according to the clin. outcome of interest with stories about cancer treatments (62%, 95% CI 54% to 70%) scoring highest and stories about treatments for children's behavioral and mental health concerns scoring lowest (31%, 95% CI 19% to 43%). Significant differences were also found in scores between media outlets. Conclusions/Significance: There is substantial variability in news reporting practices about CAM. Overall, although they may be improving, the scores remain generally low. It appears that much of the information the public receives about CAM is inaccurate or incomplete

Medicine in the Popular Press: The Influence of the Media on Perceptions of Disease

In an age of increasing globalization and discussion of the possibility of global pandemics, increasing rates of reporting of these events may influence public perception of risk. The present studies investigate the impact of high levels of media reporting on the perceptions of disease. Undergraduate psychology and medical students were asked to rate the severity, future prevalence and disease status of both frequently reported diseases (e.g. avian flu) and infrequently reported diseases (e.g. yellow fever). Participants considered diseases that occur frequently in the media to be more serious, and have higher disease status than those that infrequently occur in the media, even when the low media frequency conditions were considered objectively ‘worse’ by a separate group of participants. Estimates of severity also positively correlated with popular print media frequency in both student populations. However, we also see that the concurrent presentation of objective information about the diseases can mitigate this effect. It is clear from these data that the media can bias our perceptions of disease