A time for reflection
| 7 February, 2022 | Abbie nicholson |
In this blog, we look back on HRB Open Research’s most read articles of 2021.
HRB Open Research published 132 peer reviewed articles last year, sharing insights and results across a range of medical and health sciences, from coronavirus to oncology.
From an assortment of Research Articles, Systematic Reviews, Study Protocols, and Data Notes, we’ve identified the most read of these, based on the amount of views they received on HRB Open Research and PubMed where they are also indexed.
Let’s take a look at the five most read articles from 2021…
1. Concordance between PCR-based extraction-free saliva and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
Our number one publication captured the zeitgeist – a Research Article examining whether saliva tests could replace nose and throat swabbing for COVID-19. Given the level of testing at the time it is not surprising that this article has over 2000 views since its publication in July.
Robust testing and contact tracing has been a key approach to limiting cross-infection throughout the pandemic, so could saliva tests become the new ‘gold standard’ for diagnosis as we move towards an endemic? The Dublin-based research team put forward a strong case, concluding that saliva testing is not only an accurate method of detection – demonstrating 95.5% accuracy overall for saliva testing relative to nasal testing – it is also a valid alternative, offering a less invasive technique. The results could be critical as we move to more frequent testing in asymptomatic populations.
2. Interpersonal and communication skills development in nursing preceptorship education and training programmes: A Scoping Review Protocol [version 2; peer review: 3 approved]
Second on our list is a Study Protocol exploring teaching strategies used by staff nurses (preceptors) in clinical settings, focussing specifically on how the preceptorship structure develops crucial interpersonal and communication skills in student nurses.
The preceptorship model is a commonly adopted method of teaching within the clinical environment. However, there are numerous reports of negative interpersonal experiences for both staff nurses and students, and in some cases this has even filtered down to patients, resulting in a negative experience for them too. Given the controversy around preceptorship, it’s understandable that this Study Protocol has received almost 1300 views in less than a year. Findings from further research into this topic could ultimately outline teaching strategies that could enhance preceptor/student relationships, and patient experiences.
One peer reviewer, Karen Poole, comments: “The authors make a compelling case for conducting a scoping review on the pedagogic practices used to develop communication and interpersonal skills in nurse preceptors.”
3. A Study Protocol of qualitative data sharing practices in clinical trials in the UK and Ireland: towards the production of good practice guidance [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
As the open data movement continued to gain momentum throughout 2021, it’s unsurprising that our third most read article, a Study Protocol, considers the value of data sharing in clinical trials.
With 817 views in just several months, the authors have proposed a timely and much-needed investigation into an increasingly important issue for trials – the challenges surrounding qualitative data (videos, interviews, and observations), despite being more readily available than quantitative data.
“This protocol is the first I’ve seen describing a plan to explore issues around sharing of qualitative data…the proposed research strikes me as a valuable contribution aimed at addressing an important gap in knowledge.”
– Peer reviewer, Spencer Phillips Hey
4. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in preclinical research: A Scoping Review Protocol [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]
The positive impact of public, patient and carer involvement in research (PPI) continues, with funding bodies and policymakers increasingly emphasizing its relevance. In practice however, the role of PPI remains limited.
Our fourth most read article, a Study Protocol from researchers at the University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, addresses this by mapping the literature to support preclinical researchers involving the public, patients, or other service users in their work. Since publication of version one in May 2021, this article has received 760 views, demonstrating it’s of keen interest to HRB Open Research readers.
As the authors point out: “Existing guidance from UK Economic and Social Research Council applies to sharing qualitative data but does not address the additional challenges related to sharing qualitative data collected within trials, including the need to incorporate the necessary information and consent into already complex recruitment processes, with the additional sensitive nature of health-related data.”
The authors believe this scoping review protocol will help preclinical researchers in a range of fields, while also immediately impacting the development of their own PPI strategy for their spinal cord repair project.
5. Maternity care during COVID-19: A Protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis of women’s and maternity care providers’ views and experiences [version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
“The proposed research on maternity care during COVID-19 is highly relevant and has potential to provide valuable insights for those involved in providing maternity care to women during a global pandemic.”
– Peer reviewers, Meghan A. Bohren and Katherine Eddy
With over 700 views to date, the final article in our list is a Study Protocol. Why is it so popular among our readers?
In this article, the authors set out a plan for the systematic review of qualitative evidence from women who received maternity care during the pandemic, and the providers of this care, to really assess the impact these significant changes had.
To minimise the risk of COVID-19 transmission in pregnant women, swift and considerable changes were made to maternity care provision on a global scale, including restricting access to gynaecology, antenatal, and postnatal wards, and in some countries, even limiting the location of childbirths.
We want to take this opportunity to thank all our authors and peer reviewers who have published and reviewed with us this year. We look forward to reading even more of your articles and reports in 2022.
Are you HRB-funded and new to HRB Open Research? We look forward to welcoming your submissions for publication this year. Check out our How It Works page and our Article Guidelines to learn what to expect when submitting your research.