[Futuregen] Minutes zoom today

Thu Jun 27 08:29:16 CEST 2019

Dear Susan, dear Afshin,Thank you very much for your inputs. I'm obviously fone to follow your suggestion to check the excluded papers. I just wonder if this will not amount to a lot of work (feasibility)? Would like to read your views on this.Afshin, I will ask Rudi (our IT) to add your Queens Uni e-mail instead. For this e-mail thread however I will still reply to the other one so as to make sure we don't loose any e-mails.Best wishes,RicardoSent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
-------- Original message --------From: Afshin Vafaei <avafaei at lakeheadu.ca> Date: 27/06/2019  02:26  (GMT+01:00) To: Susan Phillips <noasue at gmail.com> Cc: Ricardo Rodrigues <rodrigues at euro.centre.org>, Stefan Fors <Stefan.Fors at ki.se>, futuregen at euro.centre.org Subject: Re: [Futuregen] Minutes zoom today Hi all,Thank you for including me in the discussion, so happy that I am part of this high quality research. As Susan mentioned it is better to use my Queen's email 5av14 at queensu.ca; however, this current email also will be working.I am familiarizing myself with FUTUREGEN little by little but am not yet too much into it but based on my previous systematic reviews I know that using very specific decreases the sensitivity of test. We might exclude important papers that really did 'intersectionality; research but used a different term. I understand that reviewing all papers is very time consuming but I think Susan's suggestion on a quick scanning the excluded papers is a safer approach. Best,Afshin On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:19 AM Susan Phillips <noasue at gmail.com> wrote:Hi everyone,I had a different time written down for the Zoom session. I will respond to the minutes below in them:On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 at 08:45, Ricardo Rodrigues <rodrigues at euro.centre.org> wrote:Dear all,

We had a reduced zoom today with only Stefan, Eszter and Ricardo. We 
went through Stefan's and Susan's search terms and her was what we 
discussed and tentatively agreed to share with you:
i) Stefan will include sex/gender and the socio-economic-related terms 
not only in the title but also in the abstract. The same will be done 
for his search term on "health". Stefan will run this search till end of 
this week and report back.I have been thinking about what the purpose of this review is. If it is to inform/ provide background for our research then limiting the outcomes to ADLs and IADLs is problematic. Perhaps you've changed the outcome as you seem to be taking about 'health' now. 

ii) Susan and the others are kindly asked to check Stefan's search terms 
(circulated in the e-mail by him before) and add suggestions or perhaps 
spot any incongruence that would account for the very low number of hits 
he had. Please do this ASAP so it can still be reflected in the new 
search above.

iii) We interpreted the search terms sent by Susan as: she carried out 
the search described in line 38 in her document, which includes all the 
gender, race, socio-economic, etc, but not the intersectionality et al 
terms. This might account for the large number of hits. We suggest to go 
back to the search terms that include intersectionality et al (described 
in line 37 in her document). Our reasoning is that we are focusing on 
intersectionality, thus having this search on line 37 and then 
cross-checking the references in the hits should be enough not to miss 
out on anything major. Please state your views on this and if you all 
agree with this, Susan could perhaps replicate the search for "care" 
terms. Susan, it was not clear from the text you sent that the search 
had been "full text" or not; could you please clarify this? Thanks.Your interpretation of the search is correct. I have just asked the librarian to redo the same search adding intersectional. But - - here's what I wrote to him: Could you run the search adding intersectional as a keyword and see what happens to the numbers? I am thinking that we could do a scan of the papers this excludes to make sure we aren't excluding essential ones. The others say that since what we are looking for is intersectionality we should include the term. I don't agree - I think that there may be researchers who have done intersectional research but didn't name it as such and we want to find those papers. But maybe the approach above would satisfy everyone. 

iv) We suggest to continue talking over e-mail. Regarding our next zoom 
meeting, originally scheduled for 31.7, we would perhaps suggest that 
this takes place the week after (5th of August onward) so that Stefan 
could also participate (he is on holidays on the week of the 31.7).Week of Aug 5th is fine for me. Just send me the time since I seem to need constant reminders! I could do Wed. or Friday of that week.Susan

Looking forward to your reply. I will add this to the FUTUREGEN.

Best wishes,

Ricardo

_______________________________________________
Futuregen mailing list
Futuregen at euro.centre.org
https://can01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.euro.centre.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffuturegen&data=02%7C01%7Cphillip%40queensu.ca%7Cf70bb25f821643070d0708d6fa343083%7Cd61ecb3b38b142d582c4efb2838b925c%7C1%7C0%7C636971499408413603&sdata=qKwjIYHf5CkF7Nx2hQMh%2FN1gzwVJ4HeYhNW5dpyYykM%3D&reserved=0

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.euro.centre.org/pipermail/futuregen/attachments/20190627/0a5a6f90/attachment-0001.html>