CCN Resources & Support for Faculty Research
What is Covidence
Covidence is a web-based tool that will help you through the process of screening your references, data extraction, and keeping track of you work. It is particularly useful for researchers conducting a systematic review, meta-analysis or clinical guideline.
In Covidence you can:
Import references – Covidence works seamlessly with your favorite reference managers like EndNote, Zotero, Refworks, Mendeley or any tool that support RIS, CSV or PubMed XML formats. Covidence can automatically remove duplicates for you.
Screen title & abstract – Breeze through screening with keyword highlighting & a lightning quick interface. Covidence keeps full records of who voted and supports single or dual screeners.
Bulk PDF import – Transfer PDFs stored in your reference manager to Covidence in a few clicks.
Screen full text – Decide quickly on studies in full text. Capture reasons for exclusion and any notes so you can resolve any disagreements quickly, with a click of a button.
Create forms – Be in control and stay focused on your PICO question. Customizable extraction forms means you only spend time extracting what you need.
Customize risk of bias – Automatically populate your risk of bias tables by highlighting and commenting on text directly in your PDF.
Conduct data extraction – Extract data efficiently with a side-by-side view of your customized form and PDF. Then, when you are done, easily compare your form with other reviewers.
Export – Covidence exports to all the common formats so you can continue your review in your preferred software.
Collaborate – You can invite other reviewers (including external colleagues) to work with you on the project.
How do I let the Office of Scholarly Affairs know about my proposal?
Under Proposal Development on the Research tab of CCN’s website, there is a link to let our office know when you are looking to submit a proposal. This can be used to request services from OSA as well. https://nursing.ua.edu/research/proposal-development/
What should I do when I hear the status of my proposal?
Under Proposal Development on the Research tab of CCN’s website, there is a link to notify OSA when the status of your submission changes. https://nursing.ua.edu/research/proposal-development/
When is the proposal due to Lauren Calhoun to be entered in Cayuse?
The proposal is due, in order to be completely approved in Cayuse, 5 business days prior to the sponsor deadline. However, that information is due to Lauren Calhoun 9 business days prior to the sponsor deadline so there is time for her to enter information for faculty and then time for all the various investigators, department chairs, and deans to review and certify.
How do I create an IPF in Cayuse to be compliant with University review?
Lauren Calhoun will create the IPF for you. Just complete the survey under Proposal Development on the Research tab of CCN’s website to provide the information needed. Then, look for the email you will receive from Cayuse so you may certify the IPF. https://nursing.ua.edu/research/proposal-development/
Is Proposal Discussion & Review Group (PDG) required?
Yes, PDG review is required for all internal and external proposal submitted through CCN. If you are on a proposal submitted outside the College, you can still go through PDG if you would like. However, if your effort on a proposal submitted outside the College is 10% or greater, PDG review is required.
How do I create a budget?
OSA provides budget resources and consultations. Contact Lauren Calhoun to set up an appointment. Budget resources are available at https://alabama.app.box.com/s/yfgmxuz6s75m43e45illb6zr0a8jshs0/folder/127202119568.
How do I request statistical help?
Reach out to us early! We want to help you! Please fill out the survey below.
How do I request Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) help?
GRAs are available to help faculty with various research needs. https://universityofalabama.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8v72ZENspOZrNVH
Where should I look for funding opportunities?
OSA lists several funding sources on the website at https://nursing.ua.edu/research/find-funding-2/. Lauren Calhoun also sends a weekly Funding Opportunity Digest. Contact Lauren Calhoun if you do not receive this funding opportunity email.
Please find below a current database of Nursing Journals which accept manuscripts for publication.
Please find below an online database of journal impact factors.
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association 7th ed. Washington D.C.: Author.
[or go to: http://www.apastyle.org/]
The EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network is an international initiative that seeks to improve the reliability and value of published health research literature by promoting transparent and accurate reporting and wider use of robust reporting guidelines.
Useful articles and guides on manuscript preparation
Articles and guides on manuscript preparation, including sections, content, templates, and format
CONSORT 2010 Statement
Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials
Office of Scholarly Affairs Library
In our office we have a several writing guides available for our faculty to borrow in order to help them with the task of writing a successful article. Please contact our office if you would like to borrow one of the following guides:
“Writing Remedies – Practical Exercises for Technical Writing” by Edmond H. Weiss
“The Writer’s Workbook – Health Professionals Guide to Getting Published” by Shirley H. Fondiller
“From Proposal to Publication – An Informal Guide to Writing about Nursing Research” by Elizabeth M. Tornquist
“Writing Strategies – Reaching Diverse Audiences” by Laurel Richardson
“The Elements of Style” 4th Edition by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals
Ethical Considerations in the Conduct and Reporting of Research: Authorship and Contributorship (http://icmje.org/)
An “author” is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study, and biomedical authorship continues to have important academic, social, and financial implications (1). In the past, readers were rarely provided with information about contributions to studies from persons listed as authors and in Acknowledgments (2). Some journals now request and publish information about the contributions of each person named as having participated in a submitted study, at least for original research. Editors are strongly encouraged to develop and implement a contributorship policy, as well as a policy on identifying who is responsible for the integrity of the work as a whole.
While contributorship and guarantorship policies obviously remove much of the ambiguity surrounding contributions, they leave unresolved the question of the quantity and quality of contribution that qualify for authorship. The ICJME has recommended the following criteria for authorship; these criteria are still appropriate for journals that distinguish authors from other contributors.
Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.
When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript (3). These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship/contributorship defined above and editors will ask these individuals to complete journal-specific author and conflict-of-interest disclosure forms. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation and identify all individual authors as well as the group name. Journals generally list other members of the group in the Acknowledgments. The NLM indexes the group name and the names of individuals the group has identified as being directly responsible for the manuscript; it also lists the names of collaborators if they are listed in Acknowledgments.
Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.
All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.
Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.
Some journals now also request that one or more authors, referred to as “guarantors,” be identified as the persons who take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article, and publish that information.
Increasingly, authorship of multicenter trials is attributed to a group. All members of the group who are named as authors should fully meet the above criteria for authorship/contributorship.
The group should jointly make decisions about contributors/authors before submitting the manuscript for publication. The corresponding author/guarantor should be prepared to explain the presence and order of these individuals. It is not the role of editors to make authorship/contributorship decisions or to arbitrate conflicts related to authorship
Contributors Listed in Acknowledgments:
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. Editors should ask corresponding authors to declare whether they had assistance with study design, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. If such assistance was available, the authors should disclose the identity of the individuals who provided this assistance and the entity that supported it in the published article. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged.
Groups of persons who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under such headings as “clinical investigators” or “participating investigators,” and their function or contribution should be described—for example, “served as scientific advisors,” “critically reviewed the study proposal,” “collected data,” or “provided and cared for study patients.” Because readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions, these persons must give written permission to be acknowledged.