Guidelines for Editing Biomedical Journals: Recommended by Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

BACKGROUND: Enormous number of medical journals published around the globe requires standardization of editing practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to enlist main principles of editing biomedical scientific journals adopted at annual meeting of Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia & Herzegovina (AMSB&H). METHODS: The evidence for writing this Guideline was systematically searched for during September 2020 in the PUBMED and GOOGLE SCHOLAR databases. The inclusion criteria were: original studies, systematic reviews, invited expert opinions, guidelines and editorials. The exclusion criteria were narrative reviews and uninvited opinion articles. The retrieved evidence was analyzed by members of the AMSB&H, then discussed at 2020 annual meeting of the AMSB&H and adopted by nominal group technique. RESULTS: In total 14 recommendations were made, based on A to C class of evidence. The editors should educate potential authors and instruct them how to structure their manuscript, how to write every segment of the manuscript, and take care about correct use of statistical tests. Plagiarism detection softwares should be used regularly, and statistical and technical editing should be rigorous and thorough. International standards of reporting specific types of studies should be followed, and principles of ethical and responsible behavior of editors, reviewers and authors should be published on the journal's web site. The editors should insist on registration of clinical studies before submission, and check whether non-essential personal information is removed from the articles; when essential personal information has to be included, an article should not be published without signed informed consent by the patient to whom these information relate. CONCLUSIONS: Principles of editing biomedical scientific journals recommended in this guideline should serve as one of the means of improving medical journals' quality.

Balkan Clinical Research Registry: Established by Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

BACKGROUND: From 2013 the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki explicitly requires pre-registration of a study involving human subjects. The registration gives a chance for improvement of design and avoidance of bias. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article was to describe process of bearing decision to create regional registry of clinical studies for Balkan countries. METHODS: After finding relevant studies about research registries and designing the concept and structure of future regional registry an article was published in IJBH journal. The article was than used as basis for discussion at 2020 meeting of Academy of Medical Sciences of Bosnia and Herzegovina (AMSBH), and final decision was made by the Academy to create the research registry. RESULTS: Regional registry of clinical studies will be under the auspices of AMSBH and web-based, with the option of online registration of new studies. The data required to be entered in the moment of registration relate to key elements of research plan: topic, variables, sample, type of the study and the study population. After applying for registration of a clinical study, the authors will soon receive the review made by the AMSBH expert committee. The application could be accepted, rejected or returned for major or minor revision. After an application is accepted, it will be deposited in the searchable database and given the registration number. CONCLUSION: The AMSBH's decision to create the regional registry of clinical studies will satisfy needs of researchers from Balkan countries in the first place, who share cultural and lingual similarities. It will also help with increasing standards of clinical research in the region.

Metabolic control and body mass index in patients with type 1 diabetes on different insulin regimens.

INTRODUCTION: Without sufficient insulin treatment, acceptable level of glycoregulation, avoidance of dislipoproteinaemia and maintenance of body mass is difficult to achieve in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM). On the other hand sometimes it is difficult to prevent weight gain, endogenous hyperlipidemia and iatrogenic insulin resistance. AIM: To compare metabolic control indicators in patients with type 1 DM in patients treated conventionally to those on intensified insulin regimen. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sample of 52 persons with type 1 DM, without late complications and long duration of the disease, was selected. Among them 19 (36.5%) persons were treated with insulin in 4 or 5 doses, and 33 (63.5%) conventionally, in 2 doses. All the participants had biochemical indicators of metabolic control determined (glycosylated Hb , fasting and postprandial glycaemia, total cholesterol, triglycerides as well as lipoprotein fractions, HDLC and LDLC), body height (BH) and weight (BW) measured, body mass index calculated (BMI) and blood pressure measured (BP). RESULTS: In the group treated conventionally we found significantly higher mean values of BMI as compared to those on intensified insulin treatment (23.2 +/- 2.0 kg/m2, and 21.2 +/- 1.2 kg/m2 respectively, p%<0.01) and proportion of those with overweight was as well significantly higher (27.3% versus 0%, p =0.012). We noted higher mean values of systolic (134.2 +/- 17.6 mmHg, versus 123.4 +/- 12.7. p<0.05) and diastolic (83.2 +/- 10.1, versus 74.0 +/- 9.7, p<0.01) BP. Biohemical indicators of glycoregulation were significantly worse with, at the same time, higher total dose of applied insulin ( 55.9 +/- 8.5 IU, versus 46.3 +/- 10.0 IU, p<0.01), and insulin units per kg of body weight (0.84 +/- 0.11 IU/kg versus 0.77 +/- 0.15 IU/kg, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Results indicate that intensified insulin treatment is more favourable variant of treatment, by which the certain level of insulin resistance, which might be present in patients treated with two higher insulin doses, is probably reduced. Therefore it improves metabolic outputs, blood pressure values and body mass index but also may have beneficial impact to economic aspect of insulin treatment as well.