Megan L. Ranney

Bio: Megan L. Ranney is an academic researcher from Brown University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Poison control & Injury prevention. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 155 publications receiving 3768 citations. Previous affiliations of Megan L. Ranney include University of California, Davis & Butler Hospital.

Critical Supply Shortages - The Need for Ventilators and Personal Protective Equipment during the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Abstract: Critical Supply Shortages U.S. hospitals are already reporting shortages of key equipment needed to care for critically ill patients with Covid-19, including ventilators and personal protective equ...

Twitter as a tool for communication and knowledge exchange in academic medicine: A guide for skeptics and novices

Abstract: Twitter is a tool for physicians to increase engagement of learners and the public, share scientific information, crowdsource new ideas, conduct, discuss and challenge emerging research, pursue professional development and continuing medical education, expand networks around specialized topics and provide moral support to colleagues. However, new users or skeptics may well be wary of its potential pitfalls. The aims of this commentary are to discuss the potential advantages of the Twitter platform for dialogue among physicians, to explore the barriers to accurate and high-quality healthcare discourse and, finally, to recommend potential safeguards physicians may employ against these threats in order to participate productively.

Interview‐based Qualitative Research in Emergency Care Part II: Data Collection, Analysis and Results Reporting

Abstract: Qualitative methods are increasingly being used in emergency care research. Rigorous qualitative methods can play a critical role in advancing the emergency care research agenda by allowing investigators to generate hypotheses, gain an in-depth understanding of health problems or specific populations, create expert consensus, and develop new intervention and dissemination strategies. In Part I of this two-article series, we provided an introduction to general principles of applied qualitative health research and examples of its common use in emergency care research, describing study designs and data collection methods most relevant to our field (observation, individual interviews, and focus groups). Here in Part II of this series, we outline the specific steps necessary to conduct a valid and reliable qualitative research project, with a focus on interview-based studies. These elements include building the research team, preparing data collection guides, defining and obtaining an adequate sample, collecting and organizing qualitative data, and coding and analyzing the data. We also discuss potential ethical considerations unique to qualitative research as it relates to emergency care research.

Clinician Attitudes, Screening Practices, and Interventions to Reduce Firearm-Related Injury

Abstract: Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992-2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients-even high-risk patients-about firearm safety. Health-care-based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed.

Thinking fast and slow.

Abstract: In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.