Main Page/Featured article of the week/2021

From LIMSWiki
Revision as of 16:29, 21 June 2021 by Shawndouglas (talk | contribs) (Added last week's article of the week)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Featured article of the week archive - 2021

Welcome to the LIMSwiki 2021 archive for the Featured Article of the Week.

Featured article of the week: June 14–20:

Fig3 Fairchild FrontPubHealth2018 6.jpg

"Epidemiological data challenges: Planning for a more robust future through data standards"

Accessible epidemiological data are of great value for emergency preparedness and response, understanding disease progression through a population, and building statistical and mechanistic disease models that enable forecasting. The status quo, however, renders acquiring and using such data difficult in practice. In many cases, a primary way of obtaining epidemiological data is through the internet, but the methods by which the data are presented to the public often differ drastically among institutions. As a result, there is a strong need for better data sharing practices. This paper identifies, in detail and with examples, the three key challenges one encounters when attempting to acquire and use epidemiological data: (1) interfaces, (2) data formatting, and (3) reporting. (Full article...)


Featured article of the week: June 7–13:

Fig1 Udesky EnviroHealth2019 18.png

"Wrangling environmental exposure data: Guidance for getting the best information from your laboratory measurements"

Environmental health and exposure researchers can improve the quality and interpretation of their chemical measurement data, avoid spurious results, and improve analytical protocols for new chemicals by closely examining lab and field quality control (QC) data. Reporting QC data along with chemical measurements in biological and environmental samples allows readers to evaluate data quality and appropriate uses of the data (e.g., for comparison to other exposure studies, association with health outcomes, use in regulatory decision-making). However many studies do not adequately describe or interpret QC assessments in publications, leaving readers uncertain about the level of confidence in the reported data. One potential barrier to both QC implementation and reporting is that guidance on how to integrate and interpret QC assessments is often fragmented and difficult to find, with no centralized repository or summary. In addition, existing documents are typically written for regulatory scientists rather than environmental health researchers, who may have little or no experience in analytical chemistry. (Full article...)