Policies by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, as well as scandals surrounding failures to reproduce the findings of key studies in psychology, have generated increased calls for sharing research data. Most of these discussions have focused on quantitative, rather than qualitative, research data. This paper examines scientific, ethical, and policy issues surrounding sharing qualitative research data. We consider advantages of sharing data, including enabling verification of findings, promoting new research in an economical manner, supporting research education, and fostering public trust in science. We then examine standard procedures for archiving and sharing data, such as anonymizing data and establishing data use agreements. Finally, we engage a series of concerns with sharing qualitative research data such as the importance of relationships in interpreting data, the risk of re-identifying participants, issues surrounding consent and data ownership, and the burden of data documentation and depositing on researchers. For each concern, we identify options that enable data sharing or describe conditions under which select data might be withheld from a data repository. We conclude by suggesting that the default assumption should be that qualitative data will be shared unless concerns exist that cannot be addressed through standard data depositing practices such as anonymizing data or through data use agreements.

Community engagement is increasingly becoming an integral part of research. “Community-engaged research” (CEnR) introduces new stakeholders as well as unique challenges to the protection of participants and the integrity of the research process. We—a group of representatives of CTSA-funded institutions and others who share expertise in research ethics and CEnR—have identified gaps in the literature regarding (1) ethical issues unique to CEnR; (2) the particular instructional needs of academic investigators, community research partners, and IRB members; and (3) best practices for teaching research ethics. This paper presents what we know, as well as what we still need to learn, in order to develop quality research ethics educational materials tailored to the full range of stakeholder groups in CEnR.

Table of contentsP001 - Sepsis impairs the capillary response within hypoxic capillaries and decreases erythrocyte oxygen-dependent ATP effluxR. M. Bateman, M. D. Sharpe, J. E. Jagger, C. G. EllisP002 - Lower serum immunoglobulin G2 level does not predispose to severe flu.J. Solé-Violán, M. López-Rodríguez, E. Herrera-Ramos, J. Ruíz-Hernández, L. Borderías, J. Horcajada, N. González-Quevedo, O. Rajas, M. Briones, F. Rodríguez de Castro, C. Rodríguez GallegoP003 - Brain protective effects of intravenous immunoglobulin through inhibition of complement activation and apoptosis in a rat model of sepsisF. Esen, G. Orhun, P. Ergin Ozcan, E. Senturk, C. Ugur Yilmaz, N. Orhan, N. Arican, M. Kaya, M. Kucukerden, M. Giris, U. Akcan, S. Bilgic Gazioglu, E. TuzunP004 - Adenosine a1 receptor dysfunction is associated with leukopenia: A possible mechanism for sepsis-induced leukopeniaR. Riff, O. Naamani, A. DouvdevaniP005 - Analysis of neutrophil by hyper spectral imaging - A preliminary reportR. Takegawa, H. Yoshida, T. Hirose, N. Yamamoto, H. Hagiya, M. Ojima, Y. Akeda, O. Tasaki, K. Tomono, T. ShimazuP006 - Chemiluminescent intensity assessed by eaa predicts the incidence of postoperative infectious complications following gastrointestinal surgeryS. Ono, T. Kubo, S. Suda, T. Ueno, T. IkedaP007 - Serial change of c1 inhibitor in patients with sepsis – A prospective observational studyT. Hirose, H. Ogura, H. Takahashi, M. Ojima, J. Kang, Y. Nakamura, T. Kojima, T. ShimazuP008 - Comparison of bacteremia and sepsis on sepsis related biomarkersT. Ikeda, S. Suda, Y. Izutani, T. Ueno, S. OnoP009 - The changes of procalcitonin levels in critical patients with abdominal septic shock during blood purificationT. Taniguchi, M. OP010 - Validation of a new sensitive point of care device for rapid measurement of procalcitoninC. Dinter, J. Lotz, B. Eilers, C. Wissmann, R. LottP011 - Infection biomarkers in primary care patients with acute respiratory tract infections – Comparison of procalcitonin and C-reactive proteinM. M. Meili, P. S. SchuetzP012 - Do we need a lower procalcitonin cut off?H. Hawa, M. Sharshir, M. Aburageila, N. SalahuddinP013 - The predictive role of C-reactive protein and procalcitonin biomarkers in central nervous system infections with extensively drug resistant bacteriaV. Chantziara, S. Georgiou, A. Tsimogianni, P. Alexandropoulos, A. Vassi, F. Lagiou, M. Valta, G. Micha, E. Chinou, G. MichaloudisP014 - Changes in endotoxin activity assay and procalcitonin levels after direct hemoperfusion with polymyxin-b immobilized fiberA. Kodaira, T. Ikeda, S. Ono, T. Ueno, S. Suda, Y. Izutani, H. ImaizumiP015 - Diagnostic usefullness of combination biomarkers on ICU admissionM. V. De la Torre-Prados, A. Garcia-De la Torre, A. Enguix-Armada, A. Puerto-Morlan, V. Perez-Valero, A. Garcia-AlcantaraP016 - Platelet function analysis utilising the PFA-100 does not predict infection, bacteraemia, sepsis or outcome in critically ill patientsN. Bolton, J. Dudziak, S. Bonney, A. Tridente, P. NeeP017 - Extracellular histone H3 levels are in...

From the time of diagnosis through either survivorship or end of life, communication between healthcare providers and patients or parents can serve several core functions, including fostering healing relationships, exchanging information, responding to emotions, managing uncertainty, making decisions, and enabling patient/family self-management. We systematically reviewed all studies that focused on communication between clinicians and patients or parents in pediatric oncology, categorizing studies based on which core functions of communication they addressed. After identifying gaps in the literature, we propose a research agenda to further the field.

A decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment (WLST) is derived by a conclusion that further treatment will not enable a patient to survive or will not produce a functional outcome with acceptable quality of life that the patient and the treating team regard as beneficial. Although many hospitalized patients die under such circumstances, controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death (cDCDD) programs have been developed only in a reduced number of countries. This International Collaborative Statement aims at expanding cDCDD in the world to help countries progress towards self-sufficiency in transplantation and offer more patients the opportunity of organ donation. The Statement addresses three fundamental aspects of the cDCDD pathway. First, it describes the process of determining a prognosis that justifies the WLST, a decision that should be prior to and independent of any consideration of organ donation and in which transplant professionals must not participate. Second, the Statement establishes the permanent cessation of circulation to the brain as the standard to determine death by circulatory criteria. Death may be declared after an elapsed observation period of 5 min without circulation to the brain, which confirms that the absence of circulation to the brain is permanent. Finally, the Statement highlights the value of perfusion repair for increasing the success of cDCDD organ transplantation. cDCDD protocols may utilize either in situ or ex situ perfusion consistent with the practice of each country. Methods to accomplish the in situ normothermic reperfusion of organs must preclude the restoration of brain perfusion to not invalidate the determination of death.