Download Free Research Needs Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Research Needs and write the review.

This symposium, which was held on March 10-11, 2003, at UNESCO headquarters in Paris, brought together policy experts and managers from the government and academic sectors in both developed and developing countries to (1) describe the role, value, and limits that the public domain and open access to digital data and information have in the context of international research; (2) identify and analyze the various legal, economic, and technological pressures on the public domain in digital data and information, and their potential effects on international research; and (3) review the existing and proposed approaches for preserving and promoting the public domain and open access to scientific and technical data and information on a global basis, with particular attention to the needs of developing countries.
Research in veterinary science is critical for the health and well-being of animals, including humans. Food safety, emerging infectious diseases, the development of new therapies, and the possibility of bioterrorism are examples of issues addressed by veterinary science that have an impact on both human and animal health. However, there is a lack of scientists engaged in veterinary research. Too few veterinarians pursue research careers, and there is a shortage of facilities and funding for conducting research. This report identifies questions and issues that veterinary research can help to address, and discusses the scientific expertise and infrastructure needed to meet the most critical research needs. The report finds that there is an urgent need to provide adequate resources for investigators, training programs, and facilities involved in veterinary research.
In the realm of health care, privacy protections are needed to preserve patients' dignity and prevent possible harms. Ten years ago, to address these concerns as well as set guidelines for ethical health research, Congress called for a set of federal standards now known as the HIPAA Privacy Rule. In its 2009 report, Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research, the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Health Research and the Privacy of Health Information concludes that the HIPAA Privacy Rule does not protect privacy as well as it should, and that it impedes important health research.
Includes National Education Association National Commission on Safety Education reports "Critical Analysis of Driver Education Research," 1957 (p. 129-186) and "How Experienced Teachers Develop Good Traffic Citizens," 1958 (p. 187-251).
The identification of gaps from systematic reviews is essential to the practice of ''evidence-based research.'' Health care research should begin and end with a systematic review. A comprehensive and explicit consideration of the existing evidence is necessary for the identification and development of an unanswered and answerable question, for the design of a study most likely to answer that question, and for the interpretation of the results of the study. In a systematic review, the consideration of existing evidence often highlights important areas where deficiencies in information limit our ability to make decisions. We define a research gap as a topic or area for which missing or inadequate information limits the ability of reviewers to reach a conclusion for a given question. A research gap may be further developed, such as through stakeholder engagement in prioritization, into research needs. Research needs are those areas where the gaps in the evidence limit decision making by patients, clinicians, and policy makers. A research gap may not be a research need if filling the gap would not be of use to stakeholders that make decisions in health care. The clear and explicit identification of research gaps is a necessary step in developing a research agenda. Evidence reports produced by Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) have always included a future research section. However, in contrast to the explicit and transparent steps taken in the completion of a systematic review, there has not been a systematic process for the identification of research gaps. We developed a framework to systematically identify research gaps from systematic reviews. This framework facilitates the classification of where the current evidence falls short and why the evidence falls short. The framework included two elements: (1) the characterization the gaps and (2) the identification and classification of the reason(s) for the research gap. The PICOS structure (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome and Setting) was used in this framework to describe questions or parts of questions inadequately addressed by the evidence synthesized in the systematic review. The issue of timing, sometimes included as PICOTS, was considered separately for Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome. The PICOS elements were the only sort of framework we had identified in an audit of existing methods for the identification of gaps used by EPCs and other related organizations (i.e., health technology assessment organizations). We chose to use this structure as it is one familiar to EPCs, and others, in developing questions. It is not only important to identify research gaps but also to determine how the evidence falls short, in order to maximally inform researchers, policy makers, and funders on the types of questions that need to be addressed and the types of studies needed to address these questions. Thus, the second element of the framework was the classification of the reasons for the existence of a research gap. For each research gap, the reason(s) that most preclude conclusions from being made in the systematic review is chosen by the review team completing the framework. To leverage work already being completed by review teams, we mapped the reasons for research gaps to concepts from commonly used evidence grading systems. Our objective in this project was to complete two types of further evaluation: (1) application of the framework across a larger sample of existing systematic reviews in different topic areas, and (2) implementation of the framework by EPCs. These two objectives were used to evaluate the framework and instructions for usability and to evaluate the application of the framework by others, outside of our EPC, including as part of the process of completing an EPC report. Our overall goal was to produce a revised framework with guidance that could be used by EPCs to explicitly identify research gaps from systematic reviews.
Based on information gathered from the internationally used Spiritual Needs Questionnaire, this book offers analyses of the spiritual and existential needs among different groups of people such as the chronically ill, elderly, adolescents, mothers of sick children, refugees, patients' relatives, and others. The theoretical background, specific empirical findings and the relevance of addressing spiritual needs is discussed by experts from different professions and cultural contexts. Supporting a person's spiritual needs remains an important task of future healthcare systems that wish to more comprehensively care for the healthcare needs of patients, and of religious communities to ensure that spiritual concerns of all persons, independent of their religious orientations, are met in and outside healthcare settings.
This report contains the proceedings of a one-day workshop organized by the National Research Council's Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP), in conjunction with a study by a panel of the NRC Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT). This combined activity was commissioned by the Science Resources Statistics Division (SRS) of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to recommend improvements in the Foundation's portfolio of surveys of research and development spending by the federal government, state governments, private industry, the nation's universities and colleges, and other nonprofit institutions.