ORCID Profile
0000-0003-2961-9117
Current Organisation
La Trobe University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: F1000 Research Ltd
Date: 02-04-2020
DOI: 10.12688/WELLCOMEOPENRES.15821.1
Abstract: Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, a strong response from the research community has been observed with the proliferation of independent clinical trials assessing diagnostic methods, therapeutic and prophylactic strategies. While there is no intervention for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 with proven clinical efficacy to date, tools to distil the current research landscape by intervention, level of evidence and those studies likely powered to address future research questions is essential. This living systematic review aims to provide an open, accessible and frequently updated resource summarising the characteristics of COVID-19 clinical trial registrations. Weekly search updates of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and source registries will be conducted. Data extraction by two independent reviewers of trial characteristic variables including categorisation of trial design, geographic location, intervention type and targets, level of evidence and intervention adaptability to low resource settings will be completed. Descriptive and thematic synthesis will be conducted. A searchable and interactive visualisation of the results database will be created, and made openly available online. Weekly results from the continued search updates will be published and made available on the Infectious Diseases Data Observatory (IDDO) website ( COVID-19 website ). This living systematic review will provide a useful resource of COVID-19 clinical trial registrations for researchers in a rapidly evolving context. In the future, this sustained review will allow prioritisation of research targets for in idual patient data meta-analysis.
Publisher: Emerald
Date: 06-01-2012
DOI: 10.1108/09555341211191535
Abstract: Increasing pressure to enhance research coupled with a desire for a broadening of academic input, are prompting greater levels of collaboration. Research collaboration can generate notable benefits but can also pose a variety of challenges. The purpose of this paper is to explore the reasons, facilitators, benefits and challenges of academic collaboration. It also provides suggestions to manage identifiable risks and enhance team dynamics. This is a conceptual paper exploring prior literature in relation to the contentious points of research collaboration, particularly in regard to authorship attribution. The authors present two checklists that researchers can utilise to ensure the successful completion of collaborative projects. The checklists incorporate the main factors required for effective collaborative work and research, and form a foundation for discussion among team members. The paper draws upon experiences, observations, academic literature and protocols, and provides strategies and recommendations to enhance collaboration and authorship attribution. The two checklists presented in the paper are value‐adding for team members.
No related grants have been discovered for Linda Kalejs.