Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

HPHY 212 > Midterm #1 > Flashcards

Midterm #1 Flashcards

1
Q

Compare and contrast the steps of the scientific method

A
  1. Observations
  2. Lead to questions
  3. Questions form hypotheses
  4. Hypotheses must be tested through experimentation
  5. Analyze data
  6. Draw conclusions
  7. Share results
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What does it mean to behave scientifically

A
  • Pay attention to what other people have already done
  • Exposing ideas to testing
  • Assimilate the evidence
  • Openly communicate ideas and tests to others
    - Publish results, even if you did not find anything
  • Act with scientific integrity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Explain the complex and iterative process of scientific research and how it benefits society.

A
  • Science is prone to revision (ex. new data may require changes to the research question or the study design, or unexpected results may require a reinterpretation of the findings).
  • Science is non-linear and is ever changing
  • The benefits of scientific research to society is that they allow us to better understand the world, make informed decisions, and develop new technologies, medicines, and treatments.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Explain the differences between a theory, hypothesis and fact

A

Theory:
A wide range of phenomena
A well substantiated explanation of some aspect of the normal world that is acquired.
You can observe
Recorded in fields
Can lead to hypothesis
Which prompts observations
These can all contribute to a greater theory.
Bigger than hypothesis
Narrow set of phenomena

Hypothesis:
a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. It is a starting point. It should be:
Reasoned and informed
Able to explain the relationship between variables
Directional → quantifiable
Testable
Smaller than theory

Fact:
Repeated observations accepted as true.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

IV vs. DV

A

IV = manipulated to see effect on DV
DV = value depends on IV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Recognize the importance of social factors when developing and evaluating scientific studies

A

Generalizability of results onto marginalized / minority groups

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Differentiate between science and pseudo-science

A

Pseudoscience = a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Describe the importance of controls in an experiment.

A

Control groups in a treatment intervention provide a baseline for comparison
Controlled variables rule out alternate factors
Possible control groups:
- Nothing
- Placebo

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Describe the ways scientific information is communicated

A

Publishing findings is critical to the process of science, bit, we need to know that the information is trustworthy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Identify the steps and advantages/disadvantages of the peer review process

A
  1. An author creates a manuscript
  2. The author submits a paper (the first author typically did the most work and the last author is typically the principal investigator).
  3. The paper is sent to a journal editor (the author can only submit to one journal at a time).
  4. A reviewing editor then sends the paper to 3-5 experts in the field. The author is blinded (can’t see who the reviewers are) while the reviewers aren’t.
  5. After reviewing, a reviewer has three options: either accept, revise, or reject.
  6. Reviewing editor sees feedback and relays it to the author.
  7. Author can decide to withdraw paper after receiving feedback
  8. The PI applies for grant money relating to fees associated with submitting papers.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Evaluate the merit of scientific articles in the media and on the internet

A

New scientific knowledge (and the process by which it was obtained) is vetted by experts in the relevant field.
It instills trust but is not always perfect.

Advantages:
Standardized process
Saves time reviewing submissions
Vetted by experts
Level of quality and trust

Disadvantages:
Bias against findings / researchers
No quantitative indicators of quality
Different standards between journals
Time
Reviewers are human
Doesn’t mean that the science is correct

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

How do authors decide to where to publish

A
  • Research topic, field, discipline
  • Notoriety and prestige of journal
  • Novelty or quality of findings
  • Cost
  • Impact factor
  • Accessibility
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Explain the open access publication model (including predatory journals)

A

Open Access → provides free, immediate, online, available research articles

Benefits:
More available
Public access research they fund
Access to smaller libraries and low income economies
Makes use of modern technology

Predatory Journals → fake or low-quality academic journals that publish articles without conducting a rigorous peer-review process, often in exchange for a fee. Often deceive authors by promising a quick and easy publication process, while providing little to no editing, reviewing, or formatting services.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Explain retraction

A

The removal of a published article from a journal

What might lead to it?
Fraud (fabrication / manipulation of data)
Plagiarism
Duplicate publishing
Sometimes accidental
Not to be confused with a correction (error in numbers presented, but does not change conclusion / takeaway

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe each of the different levels of evidence

A

Levels of analysis = provides guidelines when searching for information based on:
- Methodological quality of design
- Validity
- Applicability to patient care
- Provide grade (strength) of recommendation
- Provides guidelines when searching for info
- Highest level of evidence might not be available or applicable to immediately answer your question

ORDER: Meta-Analysis, Systematic, Review, Randomized controlled trial, cohort study, Case-control, Case Series, Expert opinion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Meta-Analysis

A
  • Methods of combining the results of independent studies.
  • Integrates findings from many published studies
  • A type of systematic review
  • Systematic methodology for obtaining articles
  • A new statistical analysis using the data
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Systematic Review

A
  • Review involving a detailed and comprehensive plan
  • Systematic methodology for obtaining articles integrates findings from many published studies to answer a question
  • Reduces bias over traditional reviews of literature
  • Not all systematic reviews are meta-analysis
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Review

A
  • Range of material scrutinized may b broad or narrow, can encompass clinical material as well as experimental research or case reports
  • Informative and descriptive narrative of current research studies on a topic
  • Not systematic, so chosen articles can have selection bias
19
Q

Random Controlled Trial (RCT)

A

Work consisting of a clinical trial that involves at least one test treatment and one control treatment
Experimental process with a treatment / intervention
Uses randomly assigned treatment and control groups
“Gold standard” for reliable evidence testing

20
Q

Cohort

A

Studies in which subsets of a defined population are identified
Observational (no experimental treatment)
All subjects are from same group, linked by shared characteristics (cohort)
Divided into subsets from same group for comparisons
Can be prospective or retrospective

21
Q

Case-Control

A

Studies which start with the identification of persons with a disease of interest and a control (comparison)
Compares individuals with an existing condition / characteristic to a group without (controls from same source population).
Observational (no experimental treatment)
Usually retrospective (outcome already known
Start with outcome and look back for exposures

22
Q

Case Report / Case Study

A

Clinical presentations that may be followed by evaluative studies that eventually lead to a diagnosis
Detailed characterization of very few subjects
Observational (no experimental treatment)
Often novel or unique conditions being described
No control

23
Q

Expert Opinion

A

Presentation of pertinent data by one with special skill or knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject.
Direct knowledge obtained from an expert
Lowest level of scientific evidence

24
Q

How do Meta-Analyses, Systematic Reviews, and Literature Reviews differ?

A

Meta-Analysis
Performs new data analysis with reviewed study

Systematic Review
Systematic process (pre-planned design with inclusion criteria)

Literature Review
Highlights knowledge about an area
Potential bias in what studies are presented

25
Q

How do Randomized-Controlled Trial, Cohort, and Case-Control differ?

A

Randomized-Controlled Trial
Experimental process

Cohort
All subjects linked with a shared characteristic
Divided into subgroups based on shared characteristics
observational

Case-Control
Some subjects with a condition (cases) compared to subjects known to be free of condition (controls)
Retrospective
Observational

26
Q

Levels of Evidence Considerations

A

Considerations
observational less validity bc harder to eliminate confounding variables
retrospective difficult if historical reporting inaccurate

why do we do cohort or case-control studies if RCTs are higher lvl of evidence?
unethical to induce conditions
Cost-effective

27
Q

MeSH

A

Medical Subject Headings:
A predicted set of terms
Purpose: organizes articles by assigning specific words to describe content.
It works like a labeling or keyword search
A star indicates that certain terms better describe the paper over others.

28
Q

Boolean Logic Operators

A

OR = everything
AND = just the two when they are talked about together
NOT = excludes
() = like a math equation → can be put around a phrase to indicate all of it
The more identifiers, the narrower the results

29
Q

Footnote Chasing

A

Looking up individual references cited in a source, often by searching for the source using the bibliographic information provided in the footnote or reference list.

30
Q

Pearling

A

Involves following the trail of references beyond the original source, often by looking up additional sources cited in the references of the original source.

31
Q

Times Cited

A

Can be used to find related articles

32
Q

Identify and describe the parts of a peer-reviewed scientific article.

A

Title → concise and descriptive, and should accurately reflect the content of the article

Author

Abstract → a brief summary of the article, including the research question, methods, results, and conclusions

Introduction → provides background information on the research topic, including a review of the existing literature, the research question, and the objectives of the study

Article Text

Publication Information

Figures, charts, graphs, equations
A good figure legend includes a title (brief, declarative, and applies to the entire figure) and materials and methods (description of techniques used).

Conclusion → summarizes the main findings and their implications, and may include recommendations for future research or practice

Article information

References → lists the sources cited in the article

33
Q

Define and describe animal ethics in scientific and medical research

A

Animal ethics → describes human - animal relationships and how animals should be managed and treated

The three R’s
Replace the use of animals
Reduce the number of animals (as few numbers of trials possible).
Refine (minimize the stress of animals)

34
Q

Explain how animal research has benefited society

A

Research to understand the body in health and illness
Safety testing of medicines
Research and developments

35
Q

Discuss the role and importance of governing bodies in animal research

A

Setting ethical and welfare standards → standards are designed to ensure that animals are treated humanely and with respect, and that their welfare is safeguarded throughout the research process.

Reviewing research proposals → review research proposals to ensure that they meet ethical and welfare standards, and that the research is scientifically sound and justified.

Inspecting research facilities → governing bodies may conduct regular inspections of research facilities to ensure that they meet ethical and welfare standards, and that animals are being housed and cared for in a safe and appropriate manner.

Enforcing regulations → enforce regulations and guidelines relating to animal research, and may take action against researchers or institutions that violate these standards.

36
Q

Define and describe human ethics in scientific and medical research

A

Human ethics → principles and guidelines that govern the ethical conduct of research involving human participants. These principles are designed to protect the rights, safety, and welfare of human participants, and to ensure that research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner.

37
Q

Explain how human research has benefited society

A

Development of medical treatments
Technology advancements
Disease prevention and treatment

38
Q

Describe the three major guiding principles of the Belmont report.

A

Respect for persons → protect the autonomy of people
- Autonomy = a person’s ability to act on their own values and interests
- Informed consent
- No deception
- Protection for vulnerable participants

Beneficence → do no harm
- How to maximize benefits of the project, while minimizing risks to the research participants.

Justice → fair distribution
- Fair distribution of cost and benefit
- Who bares the burden
- Who benefits

39
Q

Explain the purpose, make-up and role played by the IRB

A

IRB → an independent committee responsible for reviewing and approving research studies that involve human participants.

Purpose → ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, and that the rights, safety, and welfare of human participants are protected.

Their role → review research studies to ensure that they meet established ethical and regulatory standards. The IRB may also require modifications to the study design or informed consent process to ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner.

Make-up:
Scientists with expertise in the field
Healthcare professionals (not required)
Community members (non-scientists)
IRB administrators

40
Q

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)

A

an internal oversight committee that oversees animal research activities at institutions that receive federal funding.

41
Q

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

A

oversees research activities involving animals and sets guidelines for the humane treatment of animals used in research.

42
Q

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

A

enforces the Animal Welfare Act, which sets standards for the care and use of animals in research.

43
Q

Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW)

A

part of the NIH and provides guidance on the ethical use of animals in research.

HPHY 212 (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions