Arctic and subarctic ecosystems are experiencing substantial changes in hydrology, vegetation, permafrost conditions, and carbon cycling, in response to climatic change and other anthropogenic drivers, and these changes are likely to continue over this century. The total magnitude of these changes results from multiple interactions among these drivers. Field measurements can address the overall responses to different changing drivers, but are less capable of quantifying the interactions among them. Currently, a comprehensive assessment of the drivers of ecosystem changes, and the magnitude of their direct and indirect impacts on subarctic ecosystems, is missing. The Torneträsk area, in the Swedish subarctic, has an unrivalled history of environmental observation over 100 years, and is one of the most studied sites in the Arctic. In this study, we summarize and rank the drivers of ecosystem change in the Torneträsk area, and propose research priorities identified, by expert assessment, to improve predictions of ecosystem changes. The research priorities identified include understanding impacts on ecosystems brought on by altered frequency and intensity of winter warming events, evapotranspiration rates, rainfall, duration of snow cover and lake-ice, changed soil moisture, and droughts. This case study can help us understand the ongoing ecosystem changes occurring in the Torneträsk area, and contribute to improve predictions of future ecosystem changes at a larger scale. This understanding will provide the basis for the future mitigation and adaptation plans needed in a changing climate.

CONICET\'s Translational Health Research Network is coordinating efforts to advance in translational medicine. Health researchers initiate and focus their research with the aim of improving the health and quality of life of the population. An efficient research system should address health problems relevant to the population resulting in interventions and outcomes important for patients and health professionals. Recommendations to achieve this involve large thematic areas like (a) to set research priorities; (b) to improve research methodology; (c) to make research management and regulation transparent; (d) to increase accessibility to all results; and (e) to improve research dissemination. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has been a clear demonstration of how the country\'s research system has united the most diverse disciplines to jointly provide solutions to address it. An active and transparent mechanism to identify priorities in the country and to unite funding and research efforts to provide solutions to those priorities is proposed. Translational health research means the joint work of the most diverse health research disciplines in order to jointly obtain efficient and effective interventions to improve the health and quality of life of the population.
La Red de Investigación Traslacional en Salud del CONICET está coordinando esfuerzos para avanzar en la medicina traslacional. Los investigadores en salud comienzan y dirigen sus investigaciones con el objetivo de mejorar la salud y calidad de vida de la población. Un sistema de investigación eficiente debe abordar los problemas de salud de importancia para las poblaciones y las intervenciones y resultados que los pacientes y los profesionales de la salud consideren importantes. Las recomendaciones tienen que ver con grandes grupos temáticos que son (a) explicitar la relevancia de la investigación y, por tanto, sus prioridades (b) mejorar la metodología de investigación (c) transparentar la gestión y regulación de la investigación (d) aumentar la accesibilidad a todos los resultados relevantes, y (e) mejorar la manera en que se difunde la investigación. La reciente pandemia de COVID-19 ha sido una clara demostración de cómo el sistema de investigación del país ha unido las más diversas disciplinas para, en forma conjunta, brindar soluciones para enfrentarla. La reciente experiencia consolida que haya un mecanismo activo y transparente de identificación de prioridades en el país y la unión de esfuerzos de financiamiento y de investigadores en brindar soluciones a dichas prioridades. La investigación traslacional en salud significa el trabajo mancomunado de las más diversas disciplinas de investigación en salud para, en forma conjunta, obtener intervenciones efi caces y efectivas que impacten en la mejoría de la salud y la calidad de vida de la población.

A novel approach to data extraction and synthesis was used to explore the connections between research priorities, understanding and practice improvement associated with family bereavement in the context of the potential for organ donation. Conducting the review as a qualitative longitudinal study highlighted changes over time, and extraction of citation-related data facilitated an analysis of the interaction in this field. It was found that lack of \'communication\' between researchers contributes to information being \'lost\' and then later \'rediscovered\'. It is recommended that researchers should plan early for dissemination and practice improvement to ensure that research contributes to change.

UNASSIGNED: Healthcare workers want to listen more to patients and their carers in all sorts of areas of healthcare. This can include choosing topics for medical research. We looked at how patients and carers have helped to choose topics for research about type I diabetes. We aimed to find out if, and why, researchers often rejected their choices. We looked at a project which brought together patients, carers and healthcare workers to choose topics for research about type 1 diabetes. The group first asked patients, carers and healthcare workers to suggest ideas for research questions. But the group had to follow rules about what counted as a good research question. Some people\'s ideas did not count as good research questions, and they were rejected at the start. We looked at who were most likely to have their ideas rejected at the start. We found that patients and carers were most likely to have a suggestion rejected. Then we looked at the rejected questions in detail. They were mostly about curing diabetes, preventing diabetes and understanding how diabetes works. There were also some questions about access to medicines and the quality of care. Researchers should ask patients and carers for help deciding what counts as a good research question from the start of projects like these. We should also think about what might be getting in the way of patients and carers making more of a difference in research.
UNASSIGNED: Background Patients and carers are increasingly involved in deciding on topics for medical research. However, so far, it has been difficult to gain an accurate picture of the impact of such involvement because of poor reporting and evaluation in published studies to date. This study aimed to explore how a partnership of patients, carers, healthcare professionals and organisations identified questions for future research and why patients and carers had a limited impact on this process. Methods In the first stage of the partnership process, relevant service users and providers (including patients, carers, healthcare professionals and voluntary organisations) were invited to submit suggested research questions about the treatment of type 1 diabetes, via a national online and paper survey. The partnership followed formal protocols that defined a researchable question. This meant that many respondents\' suggested research questions were rejected at the start of the process. We analysed survey submissions to find out which groups of respondents were most likely to have their suggestions rejected and what these suggestions were about. Results Five hundred eighty-three respondents submitted 1143 suggested research questions, of which 249 (21.8 %) were rejected at the first stage. Respondents with lived experience of this long-term condition (patients and carers) were more likely than those without lived experience to submit a research question that would be rejected (35.6 vs. 16.5 %; p < 0.0005). Among the rejected questions submitted by patients and carers, there were several key themes: questions about cure, cause and prevention, understanding the disease, healthcare policy and economics. Conclusions In this case study, early decisions about what constituted a researchable question restricted patients\' and carers\' contributions to priority setting. When discussions about a project\'s remit take place before service users are involved, researchers risk distorting the potential impact of involvement. Impact assessments should consider not only the differences patients and carers make to research but also the differences they could have made in the absence of systemic barriers. We recommend that initiatives aimed at involving patients and carers in identifying research questions involve them as early as possible, including in decisions about how and why suggested research questions are selected or rejected.