BMJ Open Science最新文献

{"title":"Effects of cannabinoids in Parkinson's disease animal models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Berzenn Urbi,&nbsp;Yunjoo Lee,&nbsp;Ian Hughes,&nbsp;Sarah Thorning,&nbsp;Simon A Broadley,&nbsp;Arman Sabet,&nbsp;Saman Heshmat","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2022-100302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2022-100302","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Cannabis has been proposed as a potential treatment for Parkinson's disease (PD) due to its neuroprotective benefits. However, there has been no rigorous review of preclinical studies to evaluate any potential treatment effect. This systematic review was undertaken to provide evidence in support or against a treatment effect of cannabinoids in animal models of PD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Databases were searched for any controlled comparative studies that assessed the effects of any cannabinoid, cannabinoid-based treatment or endocannabinoid transport blocker on behavioural symptoms in PD animal models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 41 studies were identified to have met the criteria for this review. 14 of these studies were included in meta-analyses of rotarod, pole and open field tests. Meta-analysis of rotarod tests showed a weighted mean difference of 31.63 s for cannabinoid-treated group compared with control. Meta-analysis of pole tests also showed a positive treatment effect, evidenced by a weighted mean difference of -1.51 s for cannabinoid treat group compared with control. However, meta-analysis of open field test demonstrated a standardised mean difference of only 0.36 indicating no benefit.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review demonstrates cannabinoid treatment effects in alleviating motor symptoms of PD animal models and supports the conduct of clinical trials of cannabis in PD population. However, there is no guarantee of successful clinical translation of this outcome because of the many variables that might have affected the results, such as the prevalent unclear and high risk of bias, the different study methods, PD animal models and cannabinoids used.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"6 1","pages":"e100302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9812814/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10507614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Analysis of rod-cone dystrophy genes reveals unique mutational patterns.","authors":"Lama Jaffal,&nbsp;Mariam Ibrahim,&nbsp;Said El Shamieh","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2022-100291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2022-100291","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rod-cone dystrophy (RCD) is the most common inherited retinal disease that is characterised by the progressive degeneration of retinal photoreceptors. RCD genes classification is based exclusively on gene mutations' prevalence and does not consider the implication of the same gene in different phenotypes. Therefore, we first investigated the mutations occurrence in autosomal recessive RCD (arRCD) and non-arRCD conditions. Then, finally, we identified arRCD enriched mutational patterns in specific genes and coding exons.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>The mutations patterns differed according to arRCD (p=0.001). Specifically, When compared with missense; insertions/deletions (OR=1.2, p=0.007), nonsense (OR=1.2, p=0.014) and splice-site mutations (OR=1.6, p=0.038) increased the OR of arRCD by 20%-60% versus non-arRCD conditions. The gene-based analysis identified that <i>EYS, IMPG2, RP1L1</i> and <i>USH2A</i> mutations were enriched in arRCD (p<0.05). The exon-based analysis revealed specific mutation patterns in exons of <i>CRB1</i>, <i>RP1L1</i> and exons 12, 60 and 62 coding for Lamin EGF and FTIII domains of <i>USH2A</i>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current analysis showed that many aRCD genes have unique mutational patterns.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":"6 1","pages":"e100291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9812813/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10512822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluation of bone marrow-derived cell-based therapies in the hindlimb ischaemia model: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Femke Christina Ching Chuan van Rhijn-Brouwer,&nbsp;Robin Wilhelmus Maria Vernooij,&nbsp;Kimberley Wever,&nbsp;Iris Schilt,&nbsp;Joos Ougust Fledderus,&nbsp;Maria Christina Verhaar,&nbsp;Hendrik Gremmels","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100209","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Bone marrow(BM)-derived cell-based therapies for critical limb ischamia showed less clinical benefit than expected. While this might be due to patient-specific factors, it remains possible that important details were lost in the bench-to-clinic translation. The hindlimb ischaemia model is the golden standard to evaluate cell-based therapies aimed at promoting neovascularisation. To inform future trial design and identify potential knowledge gaps, we propose a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical evidence to assess the efficacy of BM-derived cell administration in restoring relative perfusion in the hind limb model and identify determinants of therapeutic efficacy.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>PubMed and EMBASE were searched for prospective studies in which the hindlimb ischaemia model was used to assess BM-derived therapies.</p><p><strong>Screening and annotation: </strong>Studies with an outcome measure related to relative perfusion of the hindlimb will be included. Study characteristics which include model-related factors as well as details on BM therapy will be extracted.</p><p><strong>Data management and reporting: </strong>For the primary analysis, a random effects model will be constructed using the mean difference calculated from the maximum relative perfusion for each study arm in each study. A separate model will be constructed using the relative perfusion at the latest time point in each study. We will also assess the risk of bias using the SYRCLE tool for internal validity. Subgroup analysis will be performed on animal characteristics, administration route, dose and cell characteristics such as the cell donor.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>This protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD2021226592).</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749269/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39710958","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Misinformation: an empirical study with scientists and communicators during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Lisa Parker, Jennifer A Byrne, Micah Goldwater, Nick Enfield","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100188","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100188","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To study the experiences and views within the health science community regarding the spread and prevention of science misinformation within and beyond the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An exploratory study with an empirical ethics approach using qualitative interviews with Australians who produce, communicate and study health science research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Key elements that participants considered might facilitate misinformation included: the production of low-quality, fraudulent or biased science research; inadequate public access to high-quality research; insufficient public reading of high-quality research. Strategies to reduce or prevent misinformation could come from within the academic community, academic and lay media publishing systems, government funders and educators of the general public. Recommended solutions from within the scientific community included: rewarding research translation, encouraging standardised study design, increasing use of automated quality assessment tools, mandating study protocol registration, transparent peer review, facilitating wider use of open access and use of newer technologies to target public audiences. There was disagreement over whether preprints were part of the problem or part of the solution.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is concern from within the health science community about systemic failings that might facilitate the production and spread of false or misleading science information. We advocate for further research into ways to minimise the production and spread of misinformation about COVID-19 and other science crises in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8749236/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39710955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Protocol for a preclinical systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacological targeting of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in experimental renal injury.","authors":"William P Martin, Yeong H D Chuah, Emer Conroy, Alison L Reynolds, Conor Judge, Francisco J López-Hernández, Carel W le Roux, Neil G Docherty","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100240","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100240","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Impaired lipid metabolism in the renal tubule plays a prominent role in the progression of renal fibrosis following acute kidney injury (AKI) and in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are promising druggable targets to mitigate renal fibrosis by redirecting metabolism, including restoration of fatty acid oxidation (FAO) capacity. We aim to synthesise evidence from preclinical studies of pharmacological PPAR targeting in experimental renal injury, and inform the design of future studies evaluating PPAR-mediated restoration of FAO in AKI and CKD.</p><p><strong>Methods and analysis: </strong>Studies reporting on the impact of pharmacological PPAR modulation in animal models of renal injury will be collected from MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase and Web of Science databases. Predefined eligibility criteria will exclude studies testing medications which are not specific ligands of one or more PPARs and studies involving multimodal pharmacological treatment. The Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation risk of bias tool and Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Experimental Studies checklist will be used to assess quality of the included studies. Data extraction will be followed by a narrative synthesis of the data and meta-analysis where feasible. Analysis will be performed separately for AKI, CKD and renal transplant models. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on study design characteristics, PPAR isotype(s) targeted, and classes of PPAR-targeting medications used. Risk of publication bias will be assessed using funnel plotting, Egger's regression and trim-and-fill analysis.</p><p><strong>Ethics and dissemination: </strong>Ethical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific meetings.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42021265550.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7612047/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39793177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Stability testing of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine: a translational study in UK vaccination centres.","authors":"Laila Kudsiova,&nbsp;Alison Lansley,&nbsp;Greg Scutt,&nbsp;Marcus Allen,&nbsp;Lucas Bowler,&nbsp;Sian Williams,&nbsp;Samantha Lippett,&nbsp;Selma Stafford,&nbsp;Michael Tarzi,&nbsp;Michael Cross,&nbsp;Michael Okorie","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100203","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The roll-out of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine has brought many logistical challenges, such as the absence of comprehensive stability data leading to strict handling instructions during dilution and administration. Accidental mishandling therefore presents challenging clinical dilemmas, which often led vaccine providers to err on the side of caution and discard mishandled vials rather than risk administering ineffective vaccine. This study aims to answer key questions about the vaccine's stability to allow for a more informed decision-making process should a non-conformity occur.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Residual vaccine in freshly used, but appropriately stored vials collected from vaccination centres in Brighton, UK, were tested after exposure to various handling conditions and analysed by dynamic light scattering to determine the size of the lipid-mRNA nanoparticles, and gel electrophoresis to visualise the mRNA integrity and separation from the lipid formulation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Knocking or dropping vaccine samples from small heights resulted in lowest levels of instability, indicating low risk of compromising clinical efficacy. However, repeated drawing and injecting through 23 G needles at high speed and, more significantly, shaking and vortexing led to progressive increase in the size and polydispersity index of the lipid-mRNA nanoparticles, coupled with or caused by up to ~50% release of mRNA from the lipid formulation. This is thought to impact the vaccine's efficacy due to lack of free mRNA protection and cellular internalisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results reiterate the importance of adhering to the manufacturer's instructions on handling, especially with regard to shaking and exposing the vaccine to excessive vibration.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647588/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39710957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Call for emergency action to limit global temperature increases, restore biodiversityand protect health.","authors":"Lukoye Atwoli,&nbsp;Abdullah H Baqui,&nbsp;Thomas Benfield,&nbsp;Raffaella Bosurgi,&nbsp;Fiona Godlee,&nbsp;Stephen Hancocks,&nbsp;Richard Horton,&nbsp;Laurie Laybourn-Langton,&nbsp;Carlos Augusto Monteiro,&nbsp;Ian Norman,&nbsp;Kirsten Patrick,&nbsp;Nigel Praities,&nbsp;Marcel Gm Olde Rikkert,&nbsp;Eric J Rubin,&nbsp;Peush Sahni,&nbsp;Richard Smith,&nbsp;Nicholas J Talley,&nbsp;Sue Turale,&nbsp;Damián Vázquez","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100241","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647538/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39947900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How a few poorly designed COVID-19 studies may have contributed to misinformation in Brazil: the case for evidence-based communication of science.","authors":"Charles Phiilipe de Lucena Alves,&nbsp;João de Deus Barreto Segundo,&nbsp;Gabriel Gonçalves da Costa,&nbsp;Tatiana Pereira-Cenci,&nbsp;Kenio Costa Lima,&nbsp;Flávio Fernando Demarco,&nbsp;Inácio Crochemore-Silva","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2021-100202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2021-100202","url":null,"abstract":"© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Reuse permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. INTRODUCTION The emergence of SARSCoV-2 in the end of 2019, an aetiologic agent responsible for the SARS plunged the world into an unprecedented sanitary crisis. Papers on COVID-19 have been fasttracked since then. Accelerated time from submission to publication and qualitative changes in peer review, associated with empirical evidence that duplicate and implausible clinical trials have been carried out during the pandemic, could perhaps imply lower quality of peer review in COVID-19 research. Accumulating empirical evidence has also been indicating the pandemic era output to be less reliable than its prepandemic counterpart. 10–14 A systematic review to evaluate the methodological quality of COVID-19 peerreviewed clinical studies compared with historical controls found methodological quality scores to be lower in COVID-19 articles across all study designs. Meanwhile, data sharing practices remained largely unchanged during the first year of the pandemic. 14 With no mandates of data sharing in place for COVID-19 studies, the reproducibility of these data on COVID-19 is yet to be independently verified as well. However, more efficiency in scientific publication did manifest in accelerated publication, journals tearing down their paywalls for their COVID-19 output, an increased usage of life and medical sciences preprint servers to increase speed and transparency, not to mention the intense international collaboration that resulted in the development of multiple highefficacy vaccines within the first year of the pandemic. On the other hand, some pratices that reduce the reliability of clinical trials may have gained some traction during 2020, such as executing underpowered studies with small samples, multiplicity of trials testing ideas with low prior probability of being true, forgoing blinding to test interventions 11 14 17–20 and incomplete reporting of findings, which was already an issue before the pandemic. 21 To what extent that has dominated the general output in medical interventions for COVID-19 and how much of it turned into actual clinical pratice is something that has not yet been thoroughly assessed and is, thus, still open for debate. 14 Notwithstanding, it is likely that poor science, even if it being the exception within an overall output, when carelessly amplified within a context of sanitary crisis and political polarisation, may be consequential, as it has been the case of the now infamous hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) study, that strengthened a trend in nonevidencebased interventions for COVID-19 and divided the Brazilian medical community to this date. 24 The mechanism of how that type of misinformation plays out in the current media environment is the topic of interest of this brief communication as disseminating scientific findings through press releases and press conferences but without timely access to the study nor to its data has also gain","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647590/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39710956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Technological advances in preclinical meta-research.","authors":"Alexandra Bannach-Brown, Kaitlyn Hair, Zsanett Bahor, Nadia Soliman, Malcolm Macleod, Jing Liao","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2020-100131","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjos-2020-100131","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647618/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39710953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Combined meta-analysis of preclinical cell therapy studies shows overlapping effect modifiers for multiple diseases.","authors":"Peter-Paul Zwetsloot,&nbsp;Ana Antonic-Baker,&nbsp;Hendrik Gremmels,&nbsp;Kimberley Wever,&nbsp;Chris Sena,&nbsp;Sanne Jansen Of Lorkeers,&nbsp;Steven Chamuleau,&nbsp;Joost Sluijter,&nbsp;David W Howells","doi":"10.1136/bmjos-2020-100061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjos-2020-100061","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cell therapy has been studied in many different research domains. Cellular replacement of damaged solid tissues is at an early stage of development, with much still to be understood. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are widely used to aggregate data and find important patterns of results within research domains.We set out to find common biological denominators affecting efficacy in preclinical cell therapy studies for renal, neurological and cardiac disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used datasets of five previously published meta-analyses investigating cell therapy in preclinical models of chronic kidney disease, spinal cord injury, stroke and ischaemic heart disease. We transformed primary outcomes to ratios of means to permit direct comparison across disease areas. Prespecified variables of interest were species, immunosuppression, cell type, cell origin, dose, delivery and timing of the cell therapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The five datasets from 506 publications yielded data from 13 638 animals. Animal size affects therapeutic efficacy in an inverse manner. Cell type influenced efficacy in multiple datasets differently, with no clear trend for specific cell types being superior. Immunosuppression showed a negative effect in spinal cord injury and a positive effect in cardiac ischaemic models. There was a dose-dependent relationship across the different models. Pretreatment seems to be superior compared with administration after the onset of disease.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preclinical cell therapy studies are affected by multiple variables, including species, immunosuppression, dose and treatment timing. These data are important when designing preclinical studies before commencing clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":9212,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Science","volume":" ","pages":"e100061"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/bmjos-2020-100061","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39696251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}