http://edoc.rki.de/176904/44 2026-09-03T06:15:52Z 2026-09-03T06:15:52Z Colin, Chapman A. Bicca-Marques, Júlio César Galvignac-Spencer, Sébastien Fan, Pengfei Fasching, Peter J. Gogarten, Jan Guo, Songtao Hemingway, Claire A. Leendertz, Fabian Li, Baoguo Matsuda, Ikki Hou, Rong Serio-Silva, Juan Carlos Stenseth, Nils Chr. http://edoc.rki.de/176904/13888 2026-09-02T14:57:23Z 2019-12-04T00:00:00Z

Games academics play and their consequences: how authorship, h-index and journal impact factors are shaping the future of academia Colin, Chapman A.; Bicca-Marques, Júlio César; Galvignac-Spencer, Sébastien; Fan, Pengfei; Fasching, Peter J.; Gogarten, Jan; Guo, Songtao; Hemingway, Claire A.; Leendertz, Fabian; Li, Baoguo; Matsuda, Ikki; Hou, Rong; Serio-Silva, Juan Carlos; Stenseth, Nils Chr. Research is a highly competitive profession where evaluation plays a central role; journals are ranked and individuals are evaluated based on their publication number, the number of times they are cited and their h-index. Yet such evaluations are often done in inappropriate ways that are damaging to individual careers, particularly for young scholars, and to the profession. Furthermore, as with all indices, people can play games to better their scores. This has resulted in the incentive structure of science increasingly mimicking economic principles, but rather than a monetary gain, the incentive is a higher score. To ensure a diversity of cultural perspectives and individual experiences, we gathered a team of academics in the fields of ecology and evolution from around the world and at different career stages. We first examine how authorship, h-index of individuals and journal impact factors are being used and abused. Second, we speculate on the consequences of the continued use of these metrics with the hope of sparking discussions that will help our fields move in a positive direction. We would like to see changes in the incentive systems, rewarding quality research and guaranteeing transparency. Senior faculty should establish the ethical standards, mentoring practices and institutional evaluation criteria to create the needed changes.

2019-12-04T00:00:00Z Diedrichs, Claudia Neuhauser, Hannelore http://edoc.rki.de/176904/13887 2026-09-02T14:27:24Z 2019-01-01T00:00:00Z

The frequency and determinants of blood pressure measurement by a health professional in Germany Diedrichs, Claudia; Neuhauser, Hannelore Strong evidence exists for the benefits of screening for hypertension to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and death. The aim of this study was to analyze the frequency and determinants of blood pressure (BP) measurement by a health professional in the general population and in individuals without hypertension in Germany. Data from 17,431 participants 15+ years from the cross-sectional GEDA2014/2015-EHIS survey were used to calculate the percentage of the population who had no BP measurement within the last year and the last 3 years. In multivariate models, the determinants of no BP measurement were analyzed. The frequency of BP measurement was compared between 30 European countries. In Germany, 27.5% of men and 16.6% of women had no BP measurement by a health professional within the last year and 10.9%, respectively 5.4% not within the last 3 years. In individuals without known hypertension, 34.1% of men and 23.6% of women aged 15 to 19 years had no BP measurement in the last 3 years compared to 5.2% of men and 4.8% of women 70+ years. Independent predictors of not receiving a BP measurement in the last 3 years besides age were male sex, good self-rated health, low health awareness, and no medical consultations but not educational level. Germany has low proportions of no BP measurement compared to other European countries. Hypertension screening needs improvement in all age groups, especially in the young who have the lowest screening proportions but also in the elderly who have the highest hypertension risk.

2019-01-01T00:00:00Z Dittmann, Kathleen Schmidt, Thomas Müller, Gerald Cuny, Christiane Holtfreter, Silva Troitzsch, Daniel Pfaff, Peter Hübner, Nils-Olaf http://edoc.rki.de/176904/13886 2026-09-02T14:27:23Z 2019-11-20T00:00:00Z

Correction to: Susceptibility of livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) to chlorhexidine digluconate, octenidine dihydrochloride, polyhexanide, PVP-iodine and triclosan in comparison to hospital-acquired MRSA (HA-MRSA) and community-aquired MRSA (CA-MRSA): a standardized comparison Dittmann, Kathleen; Schmidt, Thomas; Müller, Gerald; Cuny, Christiane; Holtfreter, Silva; Troitzsch, Daniel; Pfaff, Peter; Hübner, Nils-Olaf

2019-11-20T00:00:00Z Döllinger, Jörg Schneider, Andy Höller, Marcel Lasch, Peter http://edoc.rki.de/176904/13885 2026-09-02T13:27:26Z 2019-11-21T00:00:00Z

Sample Preparation by Easy Extraction and Digestion (SPEED) - A Universal, Rapid, and Detergent-free Protocol for Proteomics Based on Acid Extraction*Sample Preparation by Easy Extraction and Digestion Döllinger, Jörg; Schneider, Andy; Höller, Marcel; Lasch, Peter The main challenge of bottom-up proteomic sample preparation is to extract proteomes in a manner that enables efficient protein digestion for subsequent mass spectrometric analysis. Today's sample preparation strategies are commonly conceptualized around the removal of detergents, which are essential for extraction but strongly interfere with digestion and LC-MS. These multi-step preparations contribute to a lack of reproducibility as they are prone to losses, biases and contaminations, while being time-consuming and labor-intensive. We report a detergent-free method, named Sample Preparation by Easy Extraction and Digestion (SPEED), which consists of three mandatory steps, acidification, neutralization and digestion. SPEED is a universal method for peptide generation from various sources and is easily applicable even for lysis-resistant sample types as pure trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) is used for highly efficient protein extraction by complete sample dissolution. The protocol is highly reproducible, virtually loss-less, enables very rapid sample processing and is superior to the detergent/chaotropic agent-based methods FASP, ISD-Urea and SP3 for quantitative proteomics. SPEED holds the potential to dramatically simplify and standardize sample preparation while improving the depth of proteome coverage especially for challenging samples

2019-11-21T00:00:00Z