Library resource guides: Research support essentials: Overview

Spotlight

ANZCA signs first no-cost open-access publishing agreement

ANZCA has signed an agreement with Springer Medicine publishing which provides ANZCA researchers with the opportunity to publish their articles at no-cost in Springer/Palgrave hybrid journals. This includes such journals as: Journal of Anesthesia, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Intensive Care Medicine and Die Anaesthesiologie, plus many many more.

Open access publishing via ANZCA
This guide provides details of the Open Access (OA) publishing options available through the college.

Answering Clinical Questions by The University of Western Australia A guide to the UWA approach to answering clinical questions; an Evidence Based Practice approach. ACQ teaches Evidence Based Practice principles such as to individualise information for your patient’s situation, integrate the best available information with clinical expertise, patient values, and the health care environment, and to challenge dogma and avoid uncritical acceptance of ‘usual practice’. Developed to support students in the Doctor of Medicine degree.
Publication Date: © 2025 The University of Western Australia
Exploring AI in Pain Research and Management by Marco Cascella The book presents a unique and structured interdisciplinary approach, integrating insights from medicine, computer science, bioengineering, and other relevant fields. Due to this distinctive feature, the book offers a comprehensive exploration of the intricate relationship between potential AI applications and pain research and management. For example, one of its key aims is to provide valuable knowledge about AI for clinicians who may have limited familiarity with the subject, as well as for professionals in computer science and engineering. This approach is aimed at bridging the existing gap between these fields, offering clinicians insights into AI's potential applications, and providing computer scientists and engineers with a translational perspective on the practical needs in the clinical context. As widely demonstrated, the practical application of research faces a serious obstacle related to the limited communication and collaboration between research areas that are often very distant from each other. Therefore, this dual perspective could be useful to collocate the book as a valuable tool for fostering collaboration and understanding between these traditionally distinct domains. Furthermore, the structured framework of the book could not only facilitate learning but also serve as a foundation for future projects in the realm of AI and medicine. Specifically, it will be developed by following a framework useful for additional editorial projects, focusing more acutely on AI applications in anesthesia and critical care. By doing so, the book aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse and advancements in these specialized areas, filling a gap in the current literature. Therefore, the book seeks to make a meaningful contribution to the integration of AI in pain medicine, but also in other medical fields.
ISBN: 9783031788321
Publication Date: 2025-01-25
Introducing Scoping and Systematic Reviews by Erin Roga and Dr Karen Pruis An easy to read introduction for students and researchers when undertaking scoping or systematic reviews. The book leads readers through the stages of conducting a review, such as planning, searching, screening, appraising, synthesising, reporting and publishing. Includes H5P activities and is based on current best practices of methodology and reporting.
Publication Date: © 2025 Federation University Australia

Lewis O, Lloyd J, Ferry J, et al. Regional anaesthesia research priorities: a Regional Anaesthesia UK (RA-UK) priority setting partnership involving patients, carers and healthcare professionals. Anaesthesia. 2025;80(2):170-178. Keywords: patient safety; priority setting partnership; recovery from surgery; regional anaesthesia; research priorities.
more...less...
Abstract
Introduction: Regional anaesthesia provides important clinical benefits to patients but is underutilised. A barrier to widespread adoption may be the focus of regional anaesthesia research on novel techniques rather than evaluating and optimising existing approaches. Research priorities in regional anaesthesia identified by anaesthetists have been published, but the views of patients, carers and other healthcare professionals have not been considered previously. Therefore, we launched a multidisciplinary research priority setting partnership that aimed to establish key regional anaesthesia research priorities for the UK.

Methods: Research suggestions from key stakeholders (defined by their interaction with regional anaesthesia) were gathered using an online survey. These suggestions were analysed to identify common themes and then combined to formulate indicative research questions. After an extensive literature review, unanswered and partially answered questions were prioritised via an interim online survey and then ranked as a top 10 list during a final live virtual multidisciplinary prioritisation workshop.

Results: In total, 210 individuals completed the initial survey and suggested 518 research questions. Fifty-seven indicative questions were formed, of which three were considered fully answered after literature review and one not feasible. The interim online survey received 335 responses, which identified the 24 highest priority questions from the 53 presented. At the final live prioritisation workshop, through a nominal group process, we identified the top 10 regional anaesthesia research priorities. These aligned with three broad thematic areas: pain management (two questions); patient safety (six questions); and recovery from surgery (two questions).

Discussion: This initiative has resulted in a list of research questions prioritised by patients, carers and a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals that should be used to inform and support future regional anaesthesia research in the UK.
Jing X, Zhou Y, Cimino JJ, et al. Development, validation, and usage of metrics to evaluate the quality of clinical research hypotheses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2025;25(1):11. Keywords: Clinical hypothesis evaluation; Clinical research; Instrument development; Metrics; Scientific hypothesis evaluation; Validation.
more...less...
Abstract
Objectives: Metrics and instruments can provide guidance for clinical researchers to assess their potential research projects at an early stage before significant investment. Furthermore, metrics can also provide structured criteria for peer reviewers to assess others' clinical research manuscripts or grant proposals. This study aimed to develop, test, validate, and use evaluation metrics and instruments to accurately, consistently, systematically, and conveniently assess the quality of scientific hypotheses for clinical research projects.

Materials and methods: Metrics development went through iterative stages, including literature review, metrics and instrument development, internal and external testing and validation, and continuous revisions in each stage based on feedback. Furthermore, two experiments were conducted to determine brief and comprehensive versions of the instrument.

Results: The brief version of the instrument contained three dimensions: validity, significance, and feasibility. The comprehensive version of metrics included novelty, clinical relevance, potential benefits and risks, ethicality, testability, clarity, interestingness, and the three dimensions of the brief version. Each evaluation dimension included 2 to 5 subitems to evaluate the specific aspects of each dimension. For example, validity included clinical validity and scientific validity. The brief and comprehensive versions of the instruments included 12 and 39 subitems, respectively. Each subitem used a 5-point Likert scale.

Conclusion: The validated brief and comprehensive versions of metrics can provide standardized, consistent, systematic, and generic measurements for clinical research hypotheses, allow clinical researchers to prioritize their research ideas systematically, objectively, and consistently, and can be used as a tool for quality assessment during the peer review process.
Mishra T, Sutanto E, Rossanti R, et al. Use of large language models as artificial intelligence tools in academic research and publishing among global clinical researchers. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):31672. Keywords: Academic writing; Artificial intelligence; Biomedical research; Large language models
more...less...
Abstract
With breakthroughs in Natural Language Processing and Artificial Intelligence (AI), the usage of Large Language Models (LLMs) in academic research has increased tremendously. Models such as Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) are used by researchers in literature review, abstract screening, and manuscript drafting. However, these models also present the attendant challenge of providing ethically questionable scientific information. Our study provides a snapshot of global researchers' perception of current trends and future impacts of LLMs in research. Using a cross-sectional design, we surveyed 226 medical and paramedical researchers from 59 countries across 65 specialties, trained in the Global Clinical Scholars' Research Training certificate program of Harvard Medical School between 2020 and 2024. Majority (57.5%) of these participants practiced in an academic setting with a median of 7 (2,18) PubMed Indexed published articles. 198 respondents (87.6%) were aware of LLMs and those who were aware had higher number of publications (p < 0.001). 18.7% of the respondents who were aware (n = 37) had previously used LLMs in publications especially for grammatical errors and formatting (64.9%); however, most (40.5%) did not acknowledge its use in their papers. 50.8% of aware respondents (n = 95) predicted an overall positive future impact of LLMs while 32.6% were unsure of its scope. 52% of aware respondents (n = 102) believed that LLMs would have a major impact in areas such as grammatical errors and formatting (66.3%), revision and editing (57.2%), writing (57.2%) and literature review (54.2%). 58.1% of aware respondents were opined that journals should allow for use of AI in research and 78.3% believed that regulations should be put in place to avoid its abuse. Seeing the perception of researchers towards LLMs and the significant association between awareness of LLMs and number of published works, we emphasize the importance of developing comprehensive guidelines and ethical framework to govern the use of AI in academic research and address the current challenges.

Upcoming webinars

Title: Covidence Extraction 1 tool

Date/Time: Thursday, 3 April 2025; Live 1-2AM (ADST) - 1 hr

This session is a deep dive into Covidence's newly revamped Extraction 1 tool. It is aimed at researchers who are familiar with the platform and are working on intervention reviews, i.e. reviews that study the effect of drugs, therapies, vaccines, medical devices, procedures, or public health policies.

We will walk you through the steps of:

Creating, modifying, and publishing data extraction templates in Extraction 1
Managing reviewers
Extracting data from studies
Producing consensus data so that the final data are ready for export
Exporting data from Covidence

Bonus: You will have the opportunity to explore the latest updates in Extraction 1 and learn how decisions taken on the set up of the template affect the format of the export. This is in addition to valuable tips and tricks to accelerate your review workflow, as well as the opportunity to get your specific questions answered by our experts. We highly recommend watching Covidence 101 before joining this session to ensure familiarity with the platform. If you can't attend the live session, register anyway and you will receive a recording 24 hrs after the session.

Register here

FPM Research Webinar: How to Successfully Publish your Research

Title: "How to successfully publish your research"

This webinar guides you through the steps to publishing a research paper.

Presented by: Nikki Frescos, Prof Peter Drummond and Anne Austin
Presented: 29 August 2024
Duration: 57 mins

CPD Value: CPD participants may claim this under Knowledge and skills Learning sessions activity.

NEJM Evidence now available

NEJM Evidence offers a behind-the-scenes view of clinical trials that enables readers to develop a deeper understanding of the statistical methods used in trials, to become more sophisticated evaluators of medical evidence, and to learn from trial participants whose stories can help shape and inform the future direction of clinical trial design.

NEJM Evidence
Online: Vol. 1, 1977 - Vol. 46, 2022
>> Alternate/direct access via NEJM.
more...less...
NEJM Evidence offers a behind-the-scenes view of clinical trials that enables readers to develop a deeper understanding of the statistical methods used in trials, to become more sophisticated evaluators of medical evidence, and to learn from trial participants whose stories can help shape and inform the future direction of clinical trial design.

Research Review Spotlight

New Zealand Anaesthesia and Pain Management Research Review - Issue 28 (2023)
- O2 administration during surgery and postoperative organ injury
- Remifentanil vs. NMB during rapid sequence intubation in patients at aspiration risk
- Surgeon-delivered nerve block after lumbosacral spine surgery
- Predicting massive transfusion during surgery
- Impact of intraoperative esketamine on PSD after gynaecological laparoscopy
- Pain science education + exercise for chronic Achilles tendinopathy
- Cortical function and sensorimotor plasticity associated with future LBP after acute episode
- Structural imaging studies in chronic pain
- Prognostic factors for quality of life after interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation for chronic pain
- Health coaching for LBP and hip/knee OA
Pain Management Research Review - Issue 65 (April 2022)
- Dose reductions among chronic opioid therapy recipients
- Enhanced mindfulness-based stress reduction in episodic migraine
- Effect of relevant education on long-term opioid use before spinal surgery
- Education of opioid use risk prior to elective lower-extremity surgery
- ‘Embodied’ VR intervention for low back pain
- Mindfulness-oriented recovery enhancement in patients misusing opioids for chronic pain
- Wearable TENS for knee OA pain
- ESPB for pain control after spinal surgery
- Closed-loop SCS for chronic back and leg pain: clinical and QOL outcome durability
- SCS-related adverse events reported to TGA
Anaesthesia Research Review - Issue 25 (2022)
- Situational awareness of opioid consumption
- Bolus lidocaine to prevent tourniquet-induced hypertension
- Transversus abdominis plane block vs wound infiltration after hernia repairs
- Antithrombotic drugs and the risk of bloody punctures
- Arthroscopic shoulder surgery interscalene block with levobupivacaine
- Ketamine vs dexmedetomidine plus total IV anaesthesia
- Rhomboid intercostal, erector spinae plane, or serratus plane block
- Anaesthesiologist staffing ratio and patient morbidity and mortality
- Carbetocin vs oxytocin: Low- and high-dose regimens
- General endotracheal anaesthesia vs sedation in infants
- Patient-centred surgical care for older patients

ANZCA: Research Support Essentials
Previous issues of Research Review can be accessed on the Journals & Articles tab of the Research Support Essentials guide.

CPD Value: CPD participants may claim this under Knowledge and skills journal reading activity.

Want to learn more about the research lifecycle at ANZCA? Check out the Research Support Toolkit (RSTK).

Need help with your research project? Request support via our Research Consultation Service.

MeSH 2024 Reload

The Ovid MEDLINE database implemented the 204 MeSH thesaurus in early March 2024.

Talk to us

We rely on your feedback to further develop and support the ANZCA library. Use the link below to provide content suggestions, as well as to make recommendations, report issues, and to give general feedback.

Library feedback form