Perspectives in Biology and Medicine最新文献

Aging and death need to be seen as a single reality, aging-and-death. Separating them largely voids the lessons to be learned from aging, and the benefits of seeing life as a whole and learning a new sense of beauty, meaning, hope, and love. All the distinctive experiences central to our sense of ourselves as human beings are tied to recognition of our mortality. Living a full life means accepting and embracing death as not only inevitable, but necessary and desirable.

A wide range of research uses patterns of genetic variation to infer genetic similarity between individuals, typically referred to as genetic ancestry. This research includes inference of human demographic history, understanding the genetic architecture of traits, and predicting disease risk. Researchers are not just structuring an intellectual inquiry when using genetic ancestry, they are also creating analytical frameworks with broader societal ramifications. This essay presents an ethics framework in the spirit of virtue ethics for these researchers: rather than focus on rule following, the framework is designed to build researchers' capacities to react to the ethical dimensions of their work. The authors identify one overarching principle of intellectual freedom and responsibility, noting that freedom in all its guises comes with responsibility, and they identify and define four principles that collectively uphold researchers' intellectual responsibility: truthfulness, justice and fairness, anti-racism, and public beneficence. Researchers should bring their practices into alignment with these principles, and to aid this, the authors name three common ways research practices infringe these principles, suggest a step-by-step process for aligning research choices with the principles, provide rules of thumb for achieving alignment, and give a worked case. The essay concludes by identifying support needed by researchers to act in accord with the proposed framework.

Alisse Waterston and Charlotte Corden's Light in Dark Times (2020) began as an address by the president of the American Anthropological Association and was transformed into "a work of art and anthropology" by a member of the audience. The result was a coauthored book-length graphic essay that is expansive in subject matter, and in the representation of ideas, scholars, and questions about what it means to be human and how we will pass the time that is given us on earth. Light and dark are central to the visual representations that serve as the background to a story about what is necessary to become a person who is honest. This critical assessment reflects on the content and form of that story, which predated the COVID pandemic, widespread political unrest, and assaults on truth, evidence, language, categories, education, and "others" in the US and elsewhere. The format is both challenging to read and interesting to think with. As teaching and learning increasingly become animated and visualized, Light in Dark Times is a worthy introduction to these ways of apprehending the vexing questions and conundrums presently in such abundant supply.

Biomedical research in the United States has contributed enormously to science and human health and is conducted in several thousand institutions that vary widely in their histories, missions, operations, size, and cultures. Though these institutional differences have important consequences for the research they conduct, the organizational taxonomy of US biomedical research has received scant systematic attention. Consequently, many observers and even participants are surprisingly unaware of important distinguishing attributes of these diverse institutions. This essay provides a high-level taxonomy of the institutional ecosystem of US biomedical research; illustrates key features of the ecosystem through portraits of eight institutions of varying age, size, culture, and missions, each representing a much larger class exhibiting additional diversity; and suggests topics for future research into the research output of institutional types that will be required to develop novel approaches to improving the function of the ecosystem.

This illustrated essay describes the graphic diagnosis memoir as a form of illness narrative that uses a different way of telling stories than standard prose. A cartoon is broken into sequenced segments that ask the reader to jump across the gaps between the panels at the same time as they bridge the images and text assembled in each panel. To be successful in presenting a graphic story, the artist must be able to express an idea, but also must be able to project, or imagine, how readers will be able link ideas, images, and words. The cartoon diagnosis story makes the diagnosis relevant and visible. It does so by recognizing what reader and artist share, then adding, between the spaces, what separates them.

Suicide is a worldwide public health issue, and suicide ideation and behavior among adolescents, females in particular, have been increasing. Focusing on the risk factors that are unique to adolescents and adolescent females can help tailor and inform prevention strategies. There are unique biological, psychological, social, and societal factors that contribute to suicide ideation and behavior among adolescent females. Some of these include hormonal fluctuations and sensitivity, developing brain systems, impacts of social media, maladaptive coping, and peer influence. These changes do not occur in a vacuum and have recently been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been associated with increased social isolation and decreased mental health. By identifying how these factors coalesce and interact to drive suicide ideation and behavior, we can derive potential solutions to this problem. Given the variability in individuals, families, and communities, and the interacting and reinforcing nature of these risk factors, a multi-pronged approach that incorporates multiple interventions and involves families, schools, and communities is needed.

The advancement of science requires the publication of research results so other scientists may examine, confirm, and build upon them, and the publishing ecosystem that mediates this process has undergone dramatic change over recent decades. This article takes a broad view of the biomedical research publishing system from its origins in the 17th century to the present day. It begins with a story from the author's lab that illustrates a scientist's complex interactions with the publishing system and then reviews the history, growth, and evolution of scientific publishing, including several recent disruptive developments: the digital transformation, the open access (OA) movement, the creation of "predatory journals," and the emergence of preprint archives. Each has influenced scientific peer review and editorial decision-making, two processes critical to the conduct of medical and scientific research and culture. After briefly discussing concerns about the impact of politics on editorial decision-making, the article closes with thoughts on the future evolution of this publishing ecosystem, which will impact the biomedical research ecosystem that depends upon it. Beyond accelerated speed and improved access to publications, the community should prioritize research aimed at further enhancing the quality and impact of published research, the core goal of the scientific enterprise.