Content uploaded by Imelda Kemeza
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Imelda Kemeza on Mar 28, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
DATA NOTE
University students dataset related to achievement,
classroom practices, perceptions and attitudes of multimedia-
based learning quantum physics
[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]
Pascasie Nyirahabimana 1, Evariste Minani 2, Mathias Nduwingoma2,
Imelda Kimeza3
1African Center of Excellence for Innovative Teaching and Learning Mathematics and Science (ACEITLMS), University of Rwanda
College of Education (UR-CE), Kayonza, Rwanda
2School of Education, University of Rwanda College of Education, Kayonza, PO BOX 55 Rwamagana, Rwanda
3School of Education, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, P.O BOX 1410, Mbarara, Uganda
First published: 03 Jan 2023, 12:4
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.128013.1
Latest published: 12 Feb 2024, 12:4
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.128013.2
v1
Abstract
This dataset presents data collected to assess teaching and learning of
quantum physics at the University of Rwanda - College of Education
(UR-CE), Rwanda. Data were collected between August and November
2019 as the baseline, and between January and April 2022 under a
quasi-experimental design. Three sets of data were collected. The first
set was about students' performance and conceptual understanding
collected before and after teaching intervention (lecture method or
multimedia-aided approach) using mainly Quantum Physics
Conceptual Survey (QPCS). The second set documented classroom
practices during teaching and learning using the Classroom
Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). The last set is
comprised of the data related to lecturers' and students' perceptions
before teaching and learning quantum physics and students' attitudes
after learning Quantum physics. The Quantum Physics Attitude Test
(QPAT) was mainly used to collect these data. The dataset is important
to education stakeholders because university managers can visualize
the status of teaching and learning outcomes, lecturers can reflect on
the study, and researchers can use the data to analyze various
independent variables.
Keywords
Dataset, Conceptual understanding, Rwanda, Student academic
achievement, Student attitude, Quantum mechanics, Quantum
physics, University students.
Open Peer Review
Approval Status
123
version 2
(revision)
12 Feb 2024
view view
version 1
03 Jan 2023 view view
Peter C. Samuels , Birmingham City
University, Birmingham, UK
1.
Nicolas Labrosse , University of Glasgow,
Glasgow, UK
2.
Wade Naylor , University of Glasgow,
Glasgow, UK
University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
3.
Any reports and responses or comments on the
article can be found at the end of the article.
Page 1 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
Corresponding author: Pascasie Nyirahabimana (pnyirahabimana@gmail.com)
Author roles: Nyirahabimana P: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology,
Project Administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review
& Editing; Minani E: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing; Nduwingoma M: Supervision; Kimeza I: Supervision, Writing – Review &
Editing
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Grant information: The African Center of Excellence for Innovative Teaching and Learning Mathematics and Science (ACEITLM) hosted
in the University of Rwanda-College of Education financed the data collection.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Copyright: © 2023 Nyirahabimana P et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.
How to cite this article: Nyirahabimana P, Minani E, Nduwingoma M and Kimeza I. University students dataset related to
achievement, classroom practices, perceptions and attitudes of multimedia-based learning quantum physics [version 1; peer
review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations] F1000Research 2023, 12:4 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.128013.1
First published: 03 Jan 2023, 12:4 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.128013.1
Page 2 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
Introduction
The education system in Rwanda has seen many transitions, including after the Tutsi genocide of 1994. In 2008, Rwanda
transitioned from French to English as a language of instruction at all levels of education
1
; in 2012, a policy for 12 years of
basic education was adopted,
2
and in 2013 the public higher education institutions were merged into a single University of
Rwanda.
3
Several studies have so far documented learning of physics
4–6
after a competence-based curriculum was
implemented in secondary schools in 2016.
7
Few people have chosen the direction of higher learning institutions.
8
However, few of them focused on teaching and learning practices of quantum physics at the university level. Quantum
mechanics is a discipline that is introduced by quantum physics, and quantum physics is a set of principles used to explain
the behavior of matter and energy. Thus, these two terms were used interchangeably in this manuscript and served as a
focus of data collection. This branch of physics consists of many important phenomena in nature despite the difficulty
faced by students to interpret various concepts
9–11
such as blackbody radiation, the photoelectric effect, Compton Effect,
the wave aspects of particles, De Broglie’s hypothesis, diffraction and interferences, the model of the atom, uncertainty
relations, the wave function, and Schrodinger Equations. Therefore, this served as a motivation for researchers to
investigate the teaching and learning of quantum physics at the University of Rwanda –College of Education (UR-CE).
Before the implementation of the intervention, a baseline study was conducted. This baseline study aimed to determine
the prime indicators of current teaching methodologies and students’perceptions of quantum physics for quality
knowledge delivery at the University of Rwanda College Of Education.
9
For this study, attitude tests (Quantum Physics
Attitude Test, QPAT) for students and Educators were used. These research instruments were designed and validated by
university experts in science education. We piloted them on 30 physics students and two Educators from the University of
Kibungo, Rwanda. These participants were not part of this study.
Methods
Research design and method of data collection
The study was quasi-experimentally designed.
12
Before data collection was initiated, ethical clearance was applied to and
approved and provided by the Unit of Research and Innovation, University of Rwanda-College of Education. Lecturers
were briefed on required teaching approaches, and students and physics lecturers were informed of voluntary partici-
pation. The study was conducted at UR-CE in the department of Mathematics, Science, and Physical Education (MSPE)
with groups of second-year undergraduate students from Mathematics-Physics-Education (MPE), Physics-Chemistry-
Education (PCE) and Physics-Geography-Education (PGE) combinations assigned to experimental and control groups.
Teaching intervention was delivered from 28 January to 1 April 2022. Lecturers in Quantum Physics were agreed to help
the respective groups to understand the subject. Thus, while traditional lecture group or lecture class were taught using
marker and whiteboard and PowerPoint presentations, the experimental group or multimedia class was taught using
animations, PhET simulations, and YouTube videos. Animation introduced a concept while teaching with multimedia to
engage students. Before playing a simulation or a video, students were given prediction questions to help them predict
the outcomes of the experiment. Before intervention (December 2021), a pre-test was administered using an adapted
Quantum Physics Conceptual Survey (QPCS).
13
It was adapted because it was not used alone, as it lacks some elements
taught in the UR-CE Quantum Mechanics module. Researchers added some questions (see Table 1) about blackbody
radiation from textbooks and total energy, and the probability of finding a particle from the Quantum Mechanics
Conceptual Survey (QMCS).
14
This decision was advice from four university physics lecturers who validated the test’s
content.
We used a test-retest method for checking reliability and the internal consistency revealed a high Cronbach alpha
coefficient (a = 0.718) of 32 QPCS items used. The first author and her trained assistants made follow-ups by doing
classroom observations to see whether there were any challenges during the intervention. After six weeks of teaching, the
post-test was also given to all participants to examine if the multimedia intervention had some effects on students’
conceptual understanding. We used the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) developed
by Northern American researchers.
15
This protocol comprises 12 codes for instructor activities, 13 codes for student
activities, and three codes for student engagement. Before data collection, interrater reliability were obtained between
each of the two pairs of classroom observers. Student codes generated a Kappa value of 0.652, instructor codes 0.805, and
student participation codes generated 0.625. These values are considered very high in inter-observer reliability.
16
The Quantum Physics Attitude Test (QPAT) was adapted from the Evaluation Questionnaire for Computer Simulations
(EQCS)
17
and designed based on the literature review, daily teaching experiences, and students’group discussions.
The formulated 29 questions were content validated by five university experts in research, and the final QPAT comprised
24 items. The test had four sections: (i) College students’perceptions of quantum physics concepts, (ii) Use of multimedia
in teaching and learning quantum physics, (iii) Students’feelings towards learning quantum physics, and (iv) the
extent students recommend the actions to be taken in improving teaching and learning quantum physics. The test was
implemented after getting a 0.74 reliability of internal consistency. We also need to note that while achievement data were
collected before and after the intervention, classroom observation data were collected during the teaching and learning
Page 3 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
period; however, students’attitude data were collected after teaching and learning follow-up, and the staff and students’
perceptions before teaching and learning activity.
Description of dataset
This dataset comprises five Excel files and five pdf files. These pdf files are research tools used to collect data, while these
Excel files are data files. The first file is students’achievements (named: Data Related to Academic Achievement 2022).
This file has four sheets. (1) Pre-test of the Control group, (2) Post-test of the Control group, (3) Pre-test of the Treatment
group, and (4) Post-test of the Treatment group. In the sheet, the first column shows the study combination as mentioned
in the above section and the second column consists of serial number (s/n). From the third column or column-C to column-
HA, the students’answer choices for each of the 32 questions are entered. Correct answers are presented above each
question. From column-AK to column-PB, each question is marked. The same analysis as that in Ref. 18 was adopted.
The formula used was “= IF (EXACT(E18, E$15),1,0). This means we matched the answer of the first students on
row-18 and column-C with the expected answer on row-15 and column-C on the first question. The dollar sign was used
Table 1. Arrangement of achievement test items.
Total number Numbering in the test Correct answers Sources
1Q1 C Questions from textbooks
2Q2 A
3Q3 B
4Q4 B
5Q1 A Questions from QPCS
6Q2 B
7Q3 D
8Q4 D
9Q5 D
10 Q6 A
11 Q7 A
12 Q8 B
13 Q9 A
14 Q10 C
15 Q11 C
16 Q12 A
17 Q13 B
18 Q14 C
19 Q15 C
20 Q16 B
21 Q17 C
22 Q18 A
23 Q19 A
24 Q20 D
25 Q21 D
26 Q22 A
27 Q23 D
28 Q24 B
29 Q1 B Questions from QMCS
30 Q2 B
31 Q3 C
32 Q4 D
Page 4 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
to avoid the formula to shift the rows down. If the answers matched, the software assigned one mark, and a zero otherwise.
We summed these scores up in column-BR and computed their respective percentage in column-BS. A total of
385 undergraduate students participated in the pre-and post-tests.
Below the data, the number of students who chose a certain answer was computed (see row-198 and column-C) using the
“COUNTIF”function. After this, a percentage was computed. Likewise, the sum and corresponding percentage were
calculated under the assigned marks (see row-199 and column-AK).
The second data file (named “Data related to baseline study_Post teaching and learning Quantum Physics_2022”)
presents the students’and educators’perceptions of teaching methodologies used while teaching quantum physics. It
contains two sheets with quantitative and qualitative data collected from students who have previously learned quantum
physics and educators who taught this course in past years. Thus, this was used for the baseline study, where we
investigated the impact of current teaching methodologies and teaching staff and students’perceptions of quantum
physics for a quality knowledge delivery system.
9
The third and four files are related to classroom observation data. One comprises data for the control group (named: Data
related to Classroom Observation 2022_Control group), while the other comprises data for the experimental group (Data
related to Classroom Observation 2022_Experimental group). These files have four sheets each. The first sheet contains
raw data, the second sheet presents the meaning of codes used in the first sheet, the third sheet present analyzed data by
activity, and the fourth sheet present analyzed data by time interval. Data were entered in a way that when an activity was
observed, a mark of “1”was entered and when an activity was not observed, an empty space is left. The intervention was
carried out for 80 minutes per week for weeks. For this reason, the first column (or column A) consists of two-minute time
intervals of observed activities, and column AF shows the week (weeks 1-6). Rows 14 and 15 show the codes or observed
activities, while the sum and total of observed activities are computed at the end of the table of activities. These sums are
used to plot the activities graph (see sheet 3) as they do not consider time intervals. Thus, the proposition of each activity is
calculated based on all activities. That is why all activities’occurrence add up to 100. On the other hand, when
considering activities and the sometimes time interval, the computed proportions of activities do not add up to 100.
They can go beyond (see sheet 4). This was computed referring to the total intervals calculated in column AE. A
Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS) tools was used to collect and analyse data.
15
The fourth file data file (named “Data Related to Students Attitude_Post assessement 2022”) presents the students’
perceptions on multimedia usage in teaching and learning quantum physics attitude. It contains five sheets. The first sheet
explains the codes or assigned numbers used in the second and fourth sheets. The second sheet (Experimental group
_QPAT) and the third sheet (Experimental_G_QPAT-Open Q) contain quantitative and qualitative data, respectively.
Likewise, the fourth sheet (Control group_QPAT) and the fifth sheet (Control_G_QPAT_Open Q) contain quantitative
and qualitative data, respectively. This was done to ease the visualization of data since the attitude test contained both
closed and open questions. Thus, quantitative data from closed-question items were put in a separate sheet, and qualitative
data from open-ended question items were put in their separate sheets. 385 undergraduate students who have completed
the learning of quantum physics using either lecture or multimedia application methods participated in the survey. The
reason why fewer students attended the attitude test than those who attended the achievement test may be that the
achievement test was performed on paper while the attitude test was performed online. The questions under the “Student
feelings towards learning Quantum physics”were answered using five scales. Strongly agree (5), Agree (4), Neutral (3),
Disagree (2), and Strongly disagree (1). Therefore to analyze such data, a COUNTIF function was again employed as in
the achievement test.
Data availability
Underlying data
The data are available to use from the Mendeley repository. Readers are able to view the raw data, replicate the study, and
re-analyze and/or reuse the data (with appropriate attribution).
Mendeley Data: Dataset from the University of Rwanda College of Education during Learning Quantum Physics. https://
data.mendeley.com/datasets/gm49fmx86t/5.
19
This dataset contains the following underlying data:
•Data file 1. (Data Related to Academic Achievement 2022)
•Data file 2. (Data related to baseline study_Postteaching and learning Quantum Physics_2022)
Page 5 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
•Data file 3. (Data related to Classroom Observation 2022_Control group)
•Data file 4. (Data related to Classroom Observation 2022_Experimental group)
•Data file 5. (Data Related to Students Attitude_Post assessment 2022)
Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero “No rights reserved”data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public
domain dedication).
Extended data
Mendeley Data: Dataset from the University of Rwanda College of Education during Learning Quantum Physics. https://
data.mendeley.com/datasets/gm49fmx86t/5.
19
There are five other files connected to these data. The achievement and attitudes tests were used to collect students’data.
The first one is named “Final Quantum Physics Conceptual Survey (QPCS)_adapted&used,”while another is named
“Quantum Physics Attitude Test (QPAT)_data collection Tools_2022.”The file of a questionnaire administered to
lecturers and students as a baseline survey is named “Data related to baseline study on Quantum Physics teaching and
learning_2022.”The last files are the “Participants sheet and consent form”and “Researh ethical Clearance approval.”
Acknowledgments
We have the pleasure of thanking all people that participated in this study: Students who willingly showed interest in
being observed and sitting for tests; Lecturers who supported in delivering lessons and were willing showed interest in
being interviewed; Research assistants who helped in gathering data.
References
1. Nsengimana T, Ozawa H, Chikamori K: The implementation of the
new lower secondary science curriculum in three schools in
Rwanda. African J. Res. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2014; 18(1): 75–86.
Publisher Full Text
2. Ministry of Education [MINEDUC]: Republic of Rwanda Ministry of
Education Education Sector Strategic Plan 2018/19 to 2023/24.
2018.
Reference Source
3. Ndihokubwayo K, Byusa E, Yutaka I: Redistributing Public
Institutions to Rural Areas: A Case of the University of Rwanda
College of Education, Rukara. African J. Gov. Dev. 2019; vol. 8(no. 1):
pp. 24–35.
Reference Source
4. Ndihokubwayo K, Uwamahoro J, Ndayambaje I: Usability of
Electronic Instructional Tools in the Physics Classroom. EURASIA
J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2020; 16(11): 1–10.
Publisher Full Text
5. Ndihokubwayo K, Ndayambaje I, Uwamahoro J: Analysis of Lesson
Plans from Rwandan Physics Teachers. Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ.
Res. 2020; 19(12): 1–29.
Publisher Full Text
6. Nyirahagenimana J, Uwamahoro J, Ndihokubwayo K: Assessment
of Physics Lesson Planning and Teaching based on the 5Es
Instruction Model in Rwanda Secondary Schools. Contemp. Math.
Sci. Educ. 2022; 3(1): 1–10.
Publisher Full Text
7. REB: Comptence-Based Curriculum. Curriculum Framework Pre-
Primary to Upper Secondary. 2015.
Reference Source
8. Mukagihana J, Nsanganwimana F, Aurah CM: Effect of resource-
based instructions on pre-service biology teachers’motivation
toward learning biology. LUMAT Int. J. Math, Sci. Technol. Educ. 2021;
9(8): 262–277.
Publisher Full Text
9. Nyirahabimana P, Minani E, Nduwingoma M, et al.: Prime
indicators of current teaching methodologies and students’
perceptions in Quantum physics. Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ. 2022; 11(3):
1134–1142.
Publisher Full Text
10. Akarsu B: Einstein’s Redundant Triumph ‘Quantum Physics’:
An extensive Study of Teaching/Learning Quantum Mechanics
in College. Latin-American J. Phys. Educ. 2010; 4(2): 273–285.
Reference Source
11. Ryan QX, Wilcox BR, Pollock SJ: Student difficulties with boundary
conditions in the context of electromagnetic waves. Phys. Rev.
Phys. Educ. Res. 2018; 14(2): 20126.
Publisher Full Text
12. Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE, Hyun HH: How to Design Research in Education
and Evaluate. 2012.
13. Wuttiprom S, Sharma MD, Johnston ID, et al.: Development and use
of a conceptual survey in introductory quantum physics.
Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2009; 31(5): 631–654.
Publisher Full Text
14. McKagan SB, Perkins KK, Wieman CE: Design and validation of the
quantum mechanics conceptual survey. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. -
Phys. Educ. Res. 2010; 6(2): 1–17.
Publisher Full Text
15. Smith MK, Jones FHM, Gilbert SL, et al.: The Classroom Observation
Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS): A New Instrument
to Characterize University STEM Classroom Practices. CBE—Life
Sci. Educ. 2013; 12(4): 618–627.
PubMed Abstract|Publisher Full Text |Free Full Text
16. Nyirahabimana P, Minani E, Nduwingoma M, et al.: Instructors and
Students’Practices and Behaviours during a Quantum Physics
class at the University of Rwanda: Exploring the Usage of
Multimedia. Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ. Res. 2022; 21(9): 309–326.
Publisher Full Text
17. Chou CH: The effectiveness of using multimedia computer simulations
coupled with social constructivist pedagogy in a college introductory
physics classroom. Teachers College, Columbia University; 1998.
18. Ndihokubwayo K, Ralph M, Ndayambaje I, et al.: Dataset for
measuring the conceptual understanding of optics in Rwanda.
F1000Res. 2022; 10(May): 613–679.
PubMed Abstract|Publisher Full Text |Free Full Text
19. Nyirahabimana P, Minani E, Nduwingoma M, et al.: Dataset from
the University of Rwanda College of Education during teaching
and Learning Quantum Physics. Mendeley Data. 2022; V5.
Publisher Full Text
Page 6 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
Open Peer Review
Current Peer Review Status:
Version 1
Reviewer Report08 November 2023
https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.140564.r214701
© 2023 Labrosse N. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
Nicolas Labrosse
University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
This data note provides information necessary to review and analyse the data collected by the
authors. The method of data collection is well described.
A few more details on the teaching interventions and their pedagogical motivations would be
really interesting to have. However this may be beyond the scope of this data note.
It would be interesting to see what possible investigations the authors envisage to carry out with
the data collected.
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Physics Education Research; Scholarship of Learning and Teaching
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of
expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
Page 7 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
Author Response 08 Feb 2024
Pascasie Nyirahabimana
Thank you so much . I agree with your comment. For more details, please check all
publications related to these data on the following link: https://bit.ly/3TTAFdN
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Report18 January 2023
https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.140564.r158997
© 2023 Samuels P. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
Peter C. Samuels
Business School, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK
The datasets are definitely useful, and much effort has gone into organising them. The rationale is
clear in the introduction. The method is also clearly presented. The description of the datasets is
clear and helpful.
However, there are a few issues I would recommend improving:
The 1994 Rwandan genocide is not known outside of Rwanda as the Tutsi Genocide. This
name might cause confusion to an international audience.
1.
The test-retest method for checking the reliability of the QPCS may need additional thought.
Cronbach's alpha values tend to be high for scales involving larger numbers of items. The
sample size is not stated. A citation should be given to justify this analysis.
2.
A sample size should also be provided for the interrater reliability of COPUS.
3.
Some of the data sets (such as Data related to baseline study _Post teaching and learning
Quantum Physics_2022.xlsx) include very long question fields (such as Q3) and multiple
answer fields. These will be difficult to analyse in the current format. Shorter names and a
coding system could be used to make them more accessible.
4.
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Page 8 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Partly
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Applied statistics (scale reliability analysis), Excel, science education
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of
expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have
significant reservations, as outlined above.
Author Response 08 Feb 2024
Pascasie Nyirahabimana
Thank you so much for your constructive feedback. The response on some issues raised are
here below:
1.The 1994 Rwandan genocide is known outside of Rwanda as the 1994 Genocide Against
the Tutsi and the reference was provided. (See reference 1 in the revised version).
2. The sample size was stated in revised version ( 30 physics students) and the appropriate
citation was added: reference 20
3. A sample size was also provided and the citation was added (Reference 16)
4. The question three stated in the comment 4 was well analyzed as shown by reference 18
and 20
All comments proposed were addressed in revised version of this manuscript
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Comments on this article
Version 1
Author Response 08 Feb 2024
Pascasie Nyirahabimana
All reviewers' comments were addressed by the authors of this articles and the revised version was
submitted. Thanks a lot Peter C. Samuels and Nicolas Labrosse for your constructive feedback that
help us to improve this article.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Page 9 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
The benefits of publishing with F1000Research:
Your article is published within days, with no editorial bias•
You can publish traditional articles, null/negative results, case reports, data notes and more•
The peer review process is transparent and collaborative•
Your article is indexed in PubMed after passing peer review•
Dedicated customer support at every stage•
For pre-submission enquiries, contact research@f1000.com
Page 10 of 10
F1000Research 2023, 12:4 Last updated: 13 NOV 2024
