• Save
Will Wade : Thinking Outside the Box. Ways to generate R/research and find it.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Will Wade : Thinking Outside the Box. Ways to generate R/research and find it.

on

  • 1,788 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,788
Views on SlideShare
1,787
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.slideshare.net 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Will Wade : Thinking Outside the Box. Ways to generate R/research and find it. Will Wade : Thinking Outside the Box. Ways to generate R/research and find it. Presentation Transcript

  • Thinking outside the box!
    • Creative ideas to aid r/Research
  • Research
    • Big R: Trials, RCTs, Systematic Reviews, Formal audits etc..
    • Little r: Evidence Based Practice; identifying and generating research in a “informal” manner (that may latter become big R!). E.g. Audit, literature review, critical appraisal, presentations or just “whats the best practice?” or even “what does that mean?!”
  • Tools to find
    • Tools to find the R/r
      • Alternative methods!
    • Tools to create the R/r
      • The Journal system
    • A possible future..
    • Be aware: What it is the reason for your search?
    • “Standard Library” Databases. CINAHL, Pubmed, AMED etc.
    • Google Scholar
    • Become a power searcher! (become a geek!)
    • OT specific tools
      • OT Seeker : Systematic Reviews & RCTs
      • OT DBase : OK but look at the main routes first (e.g. CINAHL, Pubmed etc)
  • Alternative methods!
  • Two-Way Knowledge
    • COT Forums. E.g. Advice, Generating ideas
    • Real contact! (Journal Clubs, Organised Research)
    • Email lists (e.g. MOHO list)
  • Wikipedia
    • Is it all that bad?
    • If “yes” then make it better!
    • OT WikiFlash is occurring! :
      • http://otwikiflash.net
  • Blogs
    • Blogs. Create, Publish, Comment.
      • Reflective tool
      • Quick response
      • Make it yours
      • Rapidly increasing number of users
  • Tools to generate
  • The Journal System
    • Traditional
      • Reader pays to read
    • Open access
      • Reader pays nothing
      • Hybrid open access (Author pays)
      • Full open (Author pays nothing, Reader pays nothing). Rare.
  • Open + Online Rocks
    • More visible
    • More highly cited than those in non-open access journals (Eysenbach 2006)
    • You retain ownership, copyright and control of your work
    • Others who choose to use your work must attribute you, not the journal, and must in turn use an open license to distribute their work
  • Knowledge is not yours!
  • Sharing is good!
  • Openmedicine.ca
    • Open Medicine applies the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike License to works we publish, because we believe that there should be no financial barriers to access to information that can benefit medical practice.
    • We also believe that authors should retain copyright to the article they have worked so hard to produce. This Creative Commons license means that anyone is able to freely copy, download, reprint, reuse, distribute, display or perform the work we publish.
    • They are also free to make derivative works (alter, transform, or build upon) so long as they distribute the resulting work only under a license identical to this one. Any derivative or non-derivative work must be attributed to the author and to Open Medicine.
    • Any of these conditions can be waived with permission from the copyright holder, including the right to modification or commercial distribution. These conditions do not negate or supersede Fair Use laws in any country.
  • Hmm.. But I can’t see myself ever having anything to publish!
  •  
  • An idea
    • Open access style “Magazine”
    • Makes it easy to publish
    • Makes it easy to read
    • Makes it easy for people to comment, disagree and provide springboard for discussion
  • Metaot.com
    • Provides current resources under a open licence (e.g. Assessment database, Quick-Notes, OT Course list)
    • Has “some” content from a wider audience, e.g. Lit Reviews
    • But totally unedited. Wild. Good thing?
  • Precedings.nature.com
    • “Nature Precedings is a permanent, citable archive for pre-publication research and preliminary findings. It is a place for researchers to share documents, including presentations, posters, white papers, technical papers, supplementary findings, and non-peer-reviewed manuscripts. It provides a rapid way to disseminate emerging results and new theories, solicit opinions, and record the provenance of ideas. It also makes such material easy to archive, share and cite.”
  • Is an OT site for this “grey research matter” a good idea?
  • Possible Pros
    • Provide OT with some ownership over their content
    • Be unique for AHP’s, and to a certain degree medicine. For once - could be - ahead of the game
    • Provide rapid upscaling of research/knowledge curve
    • Provide a resource for other features.
  • Possible cons
    • Slow uptake due to lack of understanding. Requires critical mass
    • The Pre-Publish leads to no publish problem
    • Misusing information / service
    • Need for editorial overview.
  • Other needs
    • Need to connect clinical with academia
      • Dissertation ideas & help online
    • Provide community
    • Provide OT a friendly, scientifically sound image