| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Traditionally documenting in science has meant writing down any work carried out in either research or day-to-day settings on paper, if any, and keeping output from a variable number of software packages. However in today’s scientific climate, documenting in science could (and should) include all aspects of the study that is from developing an idea, break down of tasks, project management, protocol and interactive recorded observations (such as spectroscopy, flowcytometry, and patient records) , audit trails, dashboards, collaboration inputs and ultimately to write up of reports and papers. An integrated formal documenting approach in science would be significant towards continuity of research, problem solving and resource management, handling legal rights disputes and fighting against plagiarism. In this study, it was intended to assess the perception and usage of users towards a cloud-based research platform with above functionalities, within a multi-disciplinary, multi-center setting during a pilot study over a 12 months period. The cloud-based research platform employed, has been designed and developed over several years without any reverse engineering, based on open source technologies and fully accessible via web browsers. Users came from diverse background, including pharmacy, pharmacology, molecular biology, biomaterials, tissue engineering, public health services and health policy. Therefore the chosen teams were involved in laboratory and non-laboratory based clinical and field studies environments. Following the initial selection of senior scientists (n=19), who appreciated the importance of formal documentation of their work, were interviewed and agreed to encourage their team members to take part in the pilot study. An online survey was carried to learn about their view of what core functions of such system might be. Later, citing increased ratio of foreign currencies to the Rial and of course the impact of COVID19 pandemic in everyday life, number of actual teams taking part in the pilot were reduced (n=4). During the year pilot, other teams (n=3) discontinued their efforts and recorded their views and ideas in a feedback online survey. Remaining one team (with a growing number of user base, n>30) completed the pilot and has continued since using the platform. One of interesting results of the study, admittedly not statistically significant, was that the last remaining team is not even involved in laboratory based research, but screening for mental health in children. It is hereby acknowledged that part of the study was financially supported by the National Institute of Medical Research of Iran, grant number: 978379. |
