Raw data were not disclosed in 95% of PubMed-indexed heart failure meta-analyses in 2021: A systematic analysis of transparency.

BACKGROUND: The rising concern of irreproducible and non-transparent studies poses a significant challenge in modern medical literature. The impact of this issue on cardiology, particularly in the subfield of heart failure, remains poorly understood. To address this knowledge gap, we assessed the quality of evidence presented in recent heart failure meta-analyses by exploring several crucial transparency indicators. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study and searched PubMed for meta - analyses themed around heart failure. We included the 100 most recent publications from 2021 and investigated the presence of several indices that are associated with transparency and reproducibility. RESULTS: The vast majority of the papers did not include their raw data (95/100, 95%) nor their analytic code (99/100, 99%). Less than half (42/100, 42%) preregistered their protocol, while only 65/100 (65%) adhered to a reporting guidelines method. Bias calculation for the respective studies included in each meta - analysis was present in 83/100 (83%) papers and publication bias was measured in approximately half (56/100, 56%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that meta-analyses in the field of heart failure present important information of transparency infrequently. Therefore, reproduction and validation of their findings seems to be practically impossible.

Producción científica de los hospitales públicos de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, 2017 / Scientific production from public hospitals of the City of Buenos Aires, 2017

El número de publicaciones en la literatura científica provenientes de una institución es indicador de su producción científica. La producción científica de los hospitales del Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires (GCBA) ha sido valorada previamente, pero sin discriminar cuánto de dicha producción correspondía a otras instituciones académicas asentadas en ellos (Universidad de Buenos Aires, UBA, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, CONICET). Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar las publicaciones incluidas en PubMed que corresponden a hospitales del GCBA, describir sus principales características, y discriminar la contribución de otras instituciones académicas (UBA y CONICET). Es un estudio transversal por búsqueda en PubMed incorporando el nombre de los 34 hospitales del GCBA, UBA y CONICET. Se identificaron 2727 publicaciones de hospitales del GCBA (4.6% de las publicaciones de Argentina); 73.9% en inglés, 78.9% referidas a humanos, 37.2% de los últimos 5 años; 6.4% con alto nivel de evidencia (ensayos clínicos y metaanálisis), 28.4% incluían niños. En comparación con el total nacional, las publicaciones del GCBA incluyen menos trabajos en inglés, más investigaciones en humanos, más ensayos clínicos y más investigación en niños. De las publicaciones correspondientes a hospitales del GCBA, el 90.4% no compartían la afiliación con el CONICET ni con la UBA. Concluyendo, los hospitales del GCBA aportaron 4.6% del total de publicaciones de Argentina en PubMed; el 90% no es compartida con UBA ni CONICET. Las publicaciones de instituciones del GCBA incluyen más ensayos clínicos e investigación en niños.

The number of publications in the scientific literature coming from an institution is an indicator of its scientific production. The scientific production of the hospitals of the Government of the City of Buenos Aires (GCBA) has been evaluated previously, but without discriminating how much of that production corresponded to other academic institutions settled there (University of Buenos Aires, UBA, National Council of Scientific Research and Techniques, CONICET). Our objective was to evaluate the publications included in PubMed that correspond to hospitals of the GCBA, describe their main characteristics, and discriminate the contribution of other academic institutions (UBA and CONICET). It is a cross-sectional study based on a PubMed search, using the name of each of the 34 GCBA hospitals, CONICET and UBA in the "affiliation" field. In total, 2727 publications from GCBA hospitals were identified (4.6% of Argentine publications); 73.9% in English, 78.9% in relation to humans, 37.2% in the last 5 years; 6.4% with high level of evidence (clinical trials and meta-analysis), and 28.4% including children. Compared to the national total, the GCBA publications include fewer works in English, more research in humans, more clinical trials and more research in children. Of the publications corresponding to hospitals of the GCBA, 90.4% did not share the affiliation with CONICET or with UBA.In conclusion, the GCBA hospitals generated 4.6% of the total Argentine publications in PubMed; and 90% of these was not shared with UBA or CONICET. Publications from GCBA institutions include more clinical trials and research in children.

Critical analysis and systematization of rat pancreatectomy terminology

ABSTRACT PURPOSE: To critically analyze and standardize the rat pancreatectomy nomenclature variants. METHODS: It was performed a review of indexed manuscripts in PUBMED from 01/01/1945 to 31/12/2015 with the combined keywords "rat pancreatectomy" and "rat pancreas resection". The following parameters was considered: A. Frequency of publications; B. Purpose of the pancreatectomy in each article; C. Bibliographic references; D. Nomenclature of techniques according to the pancreatic parenchyma resection percentage RESULTS: Among the 468, the main objectives were to surgically induce diabetes and to study the genes regulations and expressions. Five rat pancreatectomy technique references received 15 or more citations. Twenty different terminologies were identified for the pancreas resection: according to the resected parenchyma percentage (30 to 95%); to the procedure type (total, subtotal and partial); or based on the selected anatomical region (distal, longitudinal and segmental). A nomenclature systematization was gathered by cross-checking information between the main surgical techniques, the anatomic parameters descriptions and the resected parenchyma percentages. CONCLUSION: The subtotal pancreatectomy nomenclature for parenchymal resection between 80 and 95% establishes a surgical parameter that also defines the total and partial pancreatectomy limits and standardizes these surgical procedures in rats.

Searching for randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on exercise. A descriptive study / Busca de ensaios clínicos randomizados e revisões sistemáticas sobre exercício físico. Um estudo descritivo

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The current paradigm of science is to accumulate as much research data as possible, with less thought given to navigation or synthesis of the resulting mass, which hampers locating and using the research. The aim here was to describe the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) focusing on exercise, and their journal sources, that have been indexed in PubMed over time. DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study conducted at Bond University, Australia. METHOD: To find RCTs, a search was conducted in PubMed Clinical Queries, using the category "Therapy" and the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) term "Exercise". To find SRs, a search was conducted in PubMed Clinical Queries, using the category "Therapy", the MeSH term "Exercise" and various methodological filters. RESULTS: Up until 2011, 9,354 RCTs about exercise were published in 1,250 journals and 1,262 SRs in 513 journals. Journals in the area of Sports Science published the greatest number of RCTs and journals categorized as belonging to "Other health professions" area (for example nursing or psychology) published the greatest number of SRs. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was the principal source for SRs, with 9.8% of the total, while the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research and Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise published 4.4% and 5.0% of the RCTs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid growth and resulting scatter of RCTs and SRs on exercise presents challenges for locating and using this research. Solutions for this issue need to be considered. .

CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: O paradigma atual da ciência é acumular o máximo de dados de pesquisa possível, com menos atenção dada a navegação ou a síntese do volume resultante, o que dificulta a localização e utilização das pesquisas. O objetivo foi descrever o número de ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECRs) e revisões sistemáticas (RSs) focados em exercício físico publicados em periódicos, que foram indexados no PubMed ao longo do tempo. TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Estudo descritivo conduzido na Bond University, Austrália. MÉTODO: Para encontrar ECRs, foi realizada uma busca no PubMed Clinical Queries, usando a categoria "Terapia" e o termo de Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) "Exercício". Para encontrar RSs, foi realizada uma busca no PubMed Clinical Queries, usando a categoria "Therapy" e o termo MeSH "Exercício" e vários filtros. RESULTADOS: Até 2011, 9.354 ECRs sobre exercício foram publicados em 1.250 periódicos e 1.262 RSs em 513 periódicos. Periódicos na área de Ciências do Esporte publicaram o maior número de ECRs e revistas classificadas como pertencentes à area "Outras profissões de saúde" (por exemplo, enfermagem ou psicologia) publicaram o maior número de RSs. A Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews foi a principal fonte para RSs, com 9,8% do total, enquanto o Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research e o Medicine & Science Sports & Exercise publicaram 4,4% e 5,0% dos ECRs, respectivamente. CONCLUSÃO: O rápido crescimento e consequente dispersão dos ECRs e RSs sobre exercício físico apresentam desafios para localizar e usar pesquisas. Precisa-se de reflexões sobre a resolução do assunto. .

Análisis de las publicaciones biomédicas chilenas indizadas en PubMed, en los años 2008 y 2009 / An analysis of Chilean biomedical publications in PubMed in the years 2008-2009

Background: During the years 2008 and 2009, 1,191 biomedical articles authored by Chilean investigators working in Chile were indexed in PubMed. Aims: To evaluate the potential visibility of those articles, according to scientometric indexes of the journals where they were published. Methods: Those journals where the articles had been published were identified and each journal’s Impact Factor (JIF), 5-year JIF, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), SCImago Quartiles (Q) for 2010 and the Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) for 2008-2009 were identified. Results: Three hundred and twelve articles (26,2%) were dedicated to experimental studies in animals, tissues or cells and they were classified as “Biomedicine”, while 879 (73,8%) were classified as “Clinical Medicine”; in both areas the main type of articles were original reports (90% and 73.6%, respectively). Revista Médica de Chile and Revista Chilena de Infectología concentrated the greater number of publications. Articles classified in Biomedicine were published more frequently in English and in journals with higher scientometric indexes than those classified in Clinical Medicine. Conclusions: Biomedical articles dealing with clinical topics, particularly case reports, were published mostly in national journals or in foreign journals with low scientometric indexes. It can be partly attributable to the authors’ interest in reaching local readers. The evaluation of research productivity should combine several scientometric indexes, selected according to the field of research, the institution's and investigators’ interests, with a qualitative and multifactorial assessment.