Disciplina Discipline VCI5796
O Trabalho Científico num Contexto Internacional

Scientific Work in an International Context

Área de Concentração: 10132

Concentration area: 10132

Criação: 13/09/2022

Creation: 13/09/2022

Ativação: 13/09/2022

Activation: 13/09/2022

Nr. de Créditos: 4

Credits: 4

Carga Horária:

Workload:

Teórica

(por semana)

Theory

(weekly)

Prática

(por semana)

Practice

(weekly)

Estudos

(por semana)

Study

(weekly)

Duração Duration Total Total
15 10 5 2 semanas 2 weeks 60 horas 60 hours

Docentes Responsáveis:

Professors:

Ana Claudia Oliveira Carreira Nishiyama

Juliano Rodrigues Sangalli

Rodrigo da Silva Nunes Barreto

Concepta Margaret McManus Pimentel

Objetivos:

Apresentar aos alunos as etapas de execução de um projeto de pesquisa, desde a elaboração da pergunta de pesquisa até sua publicação. Nesta disciplina propomos atividades teóricas e práticas sobre como pesquisar a literatura científica e avaliar a qualidade da evidência recuperada, como formular uma pergunta de pesquisa e como apresentar (tabelas, figuras) e discutir os resultados. As atividades ainda abrangem as principais etapas da comunicação dos resultados de pesquisa sob a forma de artigo científico, pôster, comunicação oral e tese. As atividades serão desenvolvidas em língua inglesa, potencializando a capacidade de internacionalização da pesquisa produzida pelos alunos.

Objectives:

Present to students the stages of execution of a research project, from the preparation of the research questions to its publication. In this discipline we propose theoretical and practical activities on how to research the scientific literature and to evaluate the quality of the evidence recovered, how to formulate a research question and how to present it (tables, figures) and discuss the results. The activities also cover the main stages of research results communication, in the form of scientific articles, posters, oral communication and thesis. The activities will be developed in English, enhancing the ability to internationalize the research produced by the students.

Justificativa:

Embora a submissão de um artigo científico seja uma exigência para a conclusão de curso de diversos programas de pós-graduação, muitos acabam retornando sem o aceite. Algumas vezes os artigos não são aceitos por fragilidades metodológicas da pesquisa passíveis de serem corrigidas. Mesmo quando a metodologia do estudo é robusta, fatores como a forma de apresentação e discussão dos resultados, a escolha da revista e dificuldades com a língua inglesa podem contribuir para a recusa do artigo. Esta disciplina é uma oportunidade para os alunos reverem seus projetos de pesquisa em grupo com a colaboração de três professores com formações diferentes, ampliando o potencial de alcance de publicação de seus trabalhos.

Rationale:

Although the submission of a scientific article is a requirement for the completion of a course of several graduate programs, many of them ended up rejected. Sometimes these articles are not accepted due to the a methodological weaknesses of the research that could be corrected. Even when the study methodology is robust, factors such as the way the results are presented and discussed, the choice of the journal and difficulties with the English language may contribute to the article refusal. This course is an opportunity for students to review their group research projects with the collaboration of three teachers with different backgrounds, expanding the potential for their work publication scope.

Conteúdo:

Temas Equilíbrio entre trabalho e vida O contexto da ciência Pesquisa e hipóteses Escrevendo um projeto Introdução Revisão da Literatura Revisão crítica e revisão sistemática Escrevendo um artigo e o processo de publicação Apresentação de dados Discussão Conclusão Resumo Palavras chaves e descritores Apresentação pública de dos resultados de um estudo

Content:

Themes Work-life balance The context of science Research and hypotheses Writing a project Introduction Literature Review Critical review and systematic review Writing an article and publishing process Data presentation Discussion Conclusion Summary Keywords and descriptors Public presentation of study results

Forma de Avaliação:

Apresentação do projeto de pesquisa, artigo ou pôster relacionado ao trabalho desenvolvido pelo aluno no curso de pós-graduação, cuja nota final (0-10) determinará o conceito final (A,B,C,R), considerando os respectivos intervalos: 10-9 (A); 8-7 (B); 6-5 (C); 4-0 (R).

Type of Assessment:

Research project presentation,development of an article or poster related to the graduate students work, whose final grade (0-10) will determine the final concept (A,B,C,R), considering the respective intervals: 10-9 (A); 8-7 (B); 6-5 (C); 4-0 (R).

Bibliografia:

1. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/how-to-get-published-1-preparing-your-manuscript 2. Mess A. Placental Evolution within the Supraordinal Clades of Eutheria with the Perspective of Alternative Animal Models for Human Placentation. Advances in Biology Volume 2014, Article ID 639274, 21 pages 3. Jüni P. Risk of cardiovascular events and rofecoxib: cumulative meta-analysis. Lancet 2004; 364: 2021–29 4. Charalambous M1, Brodbelt D, Volk HA. Treatment in canine epilepsy--a systematic review. BMC Vet Res. 2014 Oct 22;10:257. 5. Mark Petticrew. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ. 2001. 322(7278): 98–101. 5. Larsen PO. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics. 2010 Sep;84(3):575-603. Epub 2010 Mar 10. 6. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992 Jul 8;268(2):240-8. 7. Cochane Library http://www.cochranelibrary.com/ 8. Diretrizes Ministério da Saúde para Revisão Sistemática http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/diretrizes_metodologicas_fatores_risco_prognostico.pdf 9. Hooijmans CR, Leenaars M, Ritskes-Hoitinga M. A gold standard publication checklist to improve the quality of animal studies, to fully integrate the Three Rs, and to make systematic reviews more feasible. Altern Lab Anim. 2010 May;38(2):167-82. 10. Krauth D, Woodruff TJ, Bero L. Instruments for assessing risk of bias and other methodological criteria of published animal studies: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect. 2013 Sep;121(9):985-92. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1206389. Epub 2013 Jun 14. 11. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412. 12. McGrath JC, McLachlan EM, Zeller R. Transparency in Research involving Animals: The Basel Declaration and new principles for reporting research in BJP manuscripts. Br J Pharmacol. 2015 May;172(10):2427-32. doi: 10.1111/bph.12956. 13. John C McGrath1 and Elliot Lilley. Implementing guidelines on reporting research using animals (ARRIVE etc.): new requirements for publication in BJP British Journal of Pharmacology (2015) 172 3189–3193 3189. 14. Du Sert, N. P., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., ... & Würbel, H. (2020). Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS biology, 18(7), e3000411. 15. Percie du Sert, N., Hurst, V., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., ... & Würbel, H. (2020). The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism, 40(9), 1769-1777. 16. Heinrich, M., Appendino, G., Efferth, T., Fürst, R., Izzo, A. A., Kayser, O., ... & Viljoen, A. (2020). Best practice in research–overcoming common challenges in phytopharmacological research. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 246, 112230. 17. Pound, P., & Ritskes-Hoitinga, M. (2018). Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail. Journal of translational medicine, 16(1), 1-8. 18. Leenaars, C. H., Kouwenaar, C., Stafleu, F. R., Bleich, A., Ritskes-Hoitinga, M., De Vries, R., & Meijboom, F. L. (2019). Animal to human translation: A systematic scoping review of reported concordance rates. Journal of translational medicine, 17(1), 1-22. 19. Smith, A. J., Clutton, R. E., Lilley, E., Hansen, K. E. A., & Brattelid, T. (2018). PREPARE: guidelines for planning animal research and testing. Laboratory animals, 52(2), 135-141.

Bibliography:

1. https://www.elsevier.com/connect/how-to-get-published-1-preparing-your-manuscript 2. Mess A. Placental Evolution within the Supraordinal Clades of Eutheria with the Perspective of Alternative Animal Models for Human Placentation. Advances in Biology Volume 2014, Article ID 639274, 21 pages 3. Jüni P. Risk of cardiovascular events and rofecoxib: cumulative meta-analysis. Lancet 2004; 364: 2021–29 4. Charalambous M1, Brodbelt D, Volk HA. Treatment in canine epilepsy--a systematic review. BMC Vet Res. 2014 Oct 22;10:257. 5. Mark Petticrew. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ. 2001. 322(7278): 98–101. 5. Larsen PO. The rate of growth in scientific publication and the decline in coverage provided by Science Citation Index. Scientometrics. 2010 Sep;84(3):575-603. Epub 2010 Mar 10. 6. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992 Jul 8;268(2):240-8. 7. Cochane Library http://www.cochranelibrary.com/ 8. Diretrizes Ministério da Saúde para Revisão Sistemática http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/diretrizes_metodologicas_fatores_risco_prognostico.pdf 9. Hooijmans CR, Leenaars M, Ritskes-Hoitinga M. A gold standard publication checklist to improve the quality of animal studies, to fully integrate the Three Rs, and to make systematic reviews more feasible. Altern Lab Anim. 2010 May;38(2):167-82. 10. Krauth D, Woodruff TJ, Bero L. Instruments for assessing risk of bias and other methodological criteria of published animal studies: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect. 2013 Sep;121(9):985-92. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1206389. Epub 2013 Jun 14. 11. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412. 12. McGrath JC, McLachlan EM, Zeller R. Transparency in Research involving Animals: The Basel Declaration and new principles for reporting research in BJP manuscripts. Br J Pharmacol. 2015 May;172(10):2427-32. doi: 10.1111/bph.12956. 13. John C McGrath1 and Elliot Lilley. Implementing guidelines on reporting research using animals (ARRIVE etc.): new requirements for publication in BJP British Journal of Pharmacology (2015) 172 3189–3193 3189. 14. Du Sert, N. P., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., Browne, W. J., ... & Würbel, H. (2020). Reporting animal research: Explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS biology, 18(7), e3000411. 15. Percie du Sert, N., Hurst, V., Ahluwalia, A., Alam, S., Avey, M. T., Baker, M., ... & Würbel, H. (2020). The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism, 40(9), 1769-1777. 16. Heinrich, M., Appendino, G., Efferth, T., Fürst, R., Izzo, A. A., Kayser, O., ... & Viljoen, A. (2020). Best practice in research–overcoming common challenges in phytopharmacological research. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 246, 112230. 17. Pound, P., & Ritskes-Hoitinga, M. (2018). Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail. Journal of translational medicine, 16(1), 1-8. 18. Leenaars, C. H., Kouwenaar, C., Stafleu, F. R., Bleich, A., Ritskes-Hoitinga, M., De Vries, R., & Meijboom, F. L. (2019). Animal to human translation: A systematic scoping review of reported concordance rates. Journal of translational medicine, 17(1), 1-22. 19. Smith, A. J., Clutton, R. E., Lilley, E., Hansen, K. E. A., & Brattelid, T. (2018). PREPARE: guidelines for planning animal research and testing. Laboratory animals, 52(2), 135-141.

Tipo de oferecimento da disciplina:

Presencial

Class type:

Presencial