Mapping the landscape of medical research in the Arab world countries: A comprehensive bibliometric analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the productivity, performance, and impact of medical research in the Arab world countries. METHODS: We carried out a bibliometric analysis using Clarivate Analytics databases from January 2017 to March 2023. We reported research productivity, national and international research collaboration patterns, impact of Arab medical research output compared to the global average, top medical journals publishing Arab-affiliated research, and performance of the most productive Arab institutions. RESULTS: The Arab world contributed 2.72% to global medical research publication, with a citation impact of 11.98 compared to the global impact of 12.02. Qatar, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia led medical research publications per million population among Arab countries, ranking 26th, 36th, and 37th globally. Medical research publications increased by 87% annually from 2017-2022, with 70% of research originating from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. National collaborations accounted for 15% of Arab world publications, while international collaborations represented 66%. The median impact factor across the top 20 medical journals with Arab-affiliated authors was 5.14, with 50% being quartile one journals. The top 10 Arab-origin medical journals had a median impact factor of 3.13. Approximately 80% of the top 20 Arab institutions were academic, with a median publication count of 3,162.5 and a median citation impact of 14.5. CONCLUSION: The study provides insights into the state of medical research in the Arab countries, indicating room for improvement in the region's medical research.

Research hotspots of polycystic ovary syndrome and hyperandrogenism from 2008 to 2022: bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) is the most frequent endocrine disorder in female adults, and hyperandrogenism (HA) is the typical endocrine feature of PCOS. This study aims to investigate the trends and hotspots in the study of PCOS and HA. METHODS: Literature on Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) from 2008 to 2022 was retrieved, and bibliometric analysis was conducted using VOSviewer and CiteSpace software. RESULTS: A total of 2,404 papers were published in 575 journals by 10,121 authors from 2,434 institutions in 86 countries. The number of publications in this field is generally on the rise yearly. The US, China and Italy contributed almost half of the publications. Monash University had the highest number of publications, while the University of Adelaide had the highest average citations and the Karolinska Institute had the strongest cooperation with other institutions. Lergo RS contributed the most to the field of PCOS and HA. The research on PCOS and HA mainly focused on complications, adipose tissue, inflammation, granulosa cells, gene and receptor expression. CONCLUSION: Different countries, institutions, and authors should facilitate cooperation and exchanges. This study will be helpful for better understanding the frontiers and hotspots in the areas of PCOS and HA.

Potential Errors in Health Disparities Research Resulting from Lack of Unique Patient Identifiers: Analysis of Diabetes-related Preventable Hospitalizations.

All-payer, population-level hospital discharge data have been used to identify health disparities across racial/ethnic and other demographic groups. However, researchers are often unable to identify unique patients in the data sets if a unique patient identifier is not provided. The lack of the unique patient identifier can result in biased estimates of research outcomes using discharge data. This could then mislead the researchers, public, or policy-makers who utilize such biased results. This study examined estimation bias of health disparities due to rehospitalizations considering diabetes-related preventable hospitalizations using 6 years of state-level data from Hawai'i Health Information Corporation. Different analyses methods showed different probabilities of having multiple visits by age, race/ethnicity and payer subgroups. Charge analysis results also showed that ignoring the multiple visits could result in significance error. For a patient with multiple hospitalizations, rehospitalizations are often dependent upon the discharge status of previous visits, and the independence assumption of the multiple visits may not be appropriate. Ignoring the multiple visits in population-level analyses could result in severe health disparities significance errors. In this hospitalization charge analysis, the Chinese group was not significantly different than the White group (relative risk ratio - RR: [95% CI]: 0.93 [0.80, 1.08]), while the difference was signficant (RR [95% CI]: 0.86 [0.77,0.96]) when the multiple visits were ignored.

Decomposition of variation of mixed variables by a latent mixed Gaussian copula model.

Many biomedical studies collect data of mixed types of variables from multiple groups of subjects. Some of these studies aim to find the group-specific and the common variation among all these variables. Even though similar problems have been studied by some previous works, their methods mainly rely on the Pearson correlation, which cannot handle mixed data. To address this issue, we propose a latent mixed Gaussian copula (LMGC) model that can quantify the correlations among binary, ordinal, continuous, and truncated variables in a unified framework. We also provide a tool to decompose the variation into the group-specific and the common variation over multiple groups via solving a regularized M-estimation problem. We conduct extensive simulation studies to show the advantage of our proposed method over the Pearson correlation-based methods. We also demonstrate that by jointly solving the M-estimation problem over multiple groups, our method is better than decomposing the variation group by group. We also apply our method to a Chlamydia trachomatis genital tract infection study to demonstrate how it can be used to discover informative biomarkers that differentiate patients.

Bibliometric analyses of publications in the field of restless legs syndrome.

PURPOSE: Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) is a chronic neurological disorder and the incidence of RLS is a more common disease than known is accepted. This study was performed to identify and analyze the characteristics of RLS-related articles published from 2001 to 2020 using bibliometric analyses. METHODS: RLS-related articles published from 2001 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database with predefined search terms. VOSviewer software was used to visualize various bibliographic coupling networks on data. The top 10 lists (about organizations, papers, journals, most commonly cited articles, authors, countries, and keywords) extracted from 2001 to 2020 were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2311 articles were included and the total number of publications from 2001 to 2020 was increased by 5.02-fold. The highest number of RLS publications (n = 171) since 2001 was observed in 2020. The United States is contributed the highest number of RLS-related publications (34.53%). The top productive journal was Sleep Medicine and the most prominent organization was Johns Hopkins University. In the list of top 10 authors, Allen RP was the first author. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first bibliometric analysis that provides a general perspective on the RLS from 2001 to 2020 and may be useful as a guide for further research in this field.

Is it possible to measure good science?

Metrics play a vital part in the valuation and funding of research for scientists worldwide. We review the challenges that metrics pose in providing a fair and equitable system for research funding. We highlight the attempts with declarations, including the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (SF-DORA), to improve the research environment and specific impacts that metric choice can have on the evaluation and progression of Early Career Lecturers (ECLs). While there is much evidence that metrics will never be entirely satisfactory, we conclude there are opportunities that would benefit ECLs and reason for optimism for researchers.

A look at vulnerability in the older population in health sciences studies: a systematic review / O olhar sobre a vulnerabilidade na população idosa nos estudos das ciências da saúde: uma revisão sistemática

The objective of this study was to systematically investigate and review studies on the concept of vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. Articles were selected, filtered, and analyzed following the steps recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers using templates developed by the authors. Data extracted included specific details about population, interest, and context. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they: 1) were cross-sectional or prospective, 2) involved community-dwellers aged ≥ 60 years, 3) were published in the last 10 years, and 4) had as a concept vulnerability associated with the health of the older population. A total of 833 studies were identified and screened, 26 of which were included. Most included studies addressed vulnerability in older adults as an individual aspect, whether biological or psychological. The remaining studies reported vulnerability as affecting socio-environmental, health care system, and multifactorial aspects. Therefore, the concept of "vulnerability in older people" was not properly defined in the biomedical scientific community. When we return to the guiding question of this review, we can conclude that the conditions of vulnerability of older people are being treated broadly and diversely, producing different methodological strategies. The systematic review was conducted in the United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) databases between August and December 2020 and updated in September 2022, with registration number CRD42022361649

O objetivo da pesquisa é investigar e revisar sistematicamente estudos sobre o conceito de vulnerabilidade associado à saúde da população idosa. Os trabalhos foram selecionados, filtrados e analisados seguindo as etapas recomendadas pela The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. A triagem e a extração de dados foram realizadas por dois revisores independentes usando modelos desenvolvidos pelos autores. A extração de dados incluiu detalhes específicos da população; interesse; contexto. Consideraram-se artigos que: 1) fossem estudos transversais ou prospectivos, 2) envolvessem idosos da comunidade (≥ 60 anos), 3) fossem dos últimos dez anos; tivessem como conceito a vulnerabilidade associada à saúde da população idosa. O total de 833 estudos foi identificado e triado, e 26 deles foram incluídos. A maioria dos estudos incluídos verificou a vulnerabilidade do idoso no aspecto individual, seja biológico, seja psicológico. Em contrapartida, o restante dos estudos acredita que a vulnerabilidade atinja o aspecto socioambiental, sistema de saúde e multifatorial. Sendo assim, conceito de "vulnerabilidade do idoso" não está devidamente definido na comunidade científica biomédica. Neste caso, retornando à questão norteadora desta revisão, conclui-se que as condições de vulnerabilidade do idoso estão sendo tratadas de maneira ampla e diversa, produzindo diferentes estratégias metodológicas. A revisão sistemática foi realizada nas bases de dados United States National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (Lilacs) e Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), entre agosto e dezembro de 2020, com atualização em setembro de 2022, sob código CRD42022361649

Addressing Gaps in Research to Reduce Disparities and Advance Health Equity: The USPSTF Incorporation of the NASEM Taxonomy on Closing Evidence Gaps in Clinical Prevention.

This Viewpoint reviews the evidence gaps reported to Congress by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in 2021 on improving health inequities in prevention and uses the 3 taxonomies provided by National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to classify these gaps.

Disaggregation of Race and Ethnicity Group Data: Research-to-Practice Issues in Clinical Environments.

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of accurately categorizing and collecting race and ethnicity data, matching self-identity with race and ethnicity labels, in an effort to quantify the extent of health disparities.

Sesgos en investigación quirúrgica / Biases in surgical research

Resumen Los resultados de diversos hallazgos de investigación han sido objeto de crítica, en especial en los últimos años, debido a presencia de errores sistemáticos (sesgos), los que ponen en duda la validez interna de los resultados obtenidos. Estos sesgos pueden ocurrir en cualquier etapa del curso de una investigación, es decir, desde la planificación del estudio hasta la presentación y publicación de sus resultados. Los sesgos se han clasificado de diferentes formas, intentado agruparlos bajo dimensiones conceptuales, objeto de organizar de mejor forma la información existente, que además es considerable. Los sesgos pueden ocurrir por diversos motivos, pero en general, los más frecuentes son aquellos originados por el observador (él o los que miden), por lo que es observado (sujeto en estudio); y aquello con lo que se observa (instrumento de medición). Por otra parte, varios de los múltiples sesgos existentes, se pueden agrupar en: sesgos de selección, de medición o información, y de confusión. El objetivo de este manuscrito fue comentar la importancia de los sesgos más comunes en la investigación quirúrgica, y su relación con algunos diseños de investigación; así como, conocer las estrategias existentes para minimizar su ocurrencia.

The results of many research findings have come under scrutiny in recent years due to the introduction of systematic errors (biases), which can occur at any stage during an investigation, from planning to presentation of results and their presentation and further publication. Biases have been classified in different ways, trying to group them under conceptual dimensions to better organize the existing information, which is considerable. Biases can occur for various reasons, but in general, the most frequent are those originated by the observer, what is observed; and what is observed with. I.e., the subject that is measured, who measures it and with what it measures it. On the other hand, several of the multiple biases can be grouped into selection, measurement or information, and confounding biases. The aim of this manuscript was to comment on the importance of the most common biases in surgical research, and their relationship with some research designs; as well as know the existing strategies to reduce its occurrence.

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Most studies examining complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) stakeholder engagement with evidence-based practice have relied on quantitative research methods, which often fail to capture the nuances of this phenomena. Using qualitative methods, this study aimed to explore the experiences of CAM stakeholders regarding the barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research. METHODS: This research was guided by a qualitative descriptive framework. CAM practitioners and researchers of multiple CAM disciplines from across Australia and New Zealand were invited to share their personal perspectives of the study phenomena. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Rigour strategies were applied to ensure the credibility of results. The transcript was analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: CAM stakeholders identified an array of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research within their disciplines. The barriers and enablers that emerged were found to be inter-connected with two similar constructs: capacity and culture. Captured within the construct of capacity were five themes-lack of resources, inadequate governance/leadership, lack of competency, bias directed from outside and within CAM, and lack of time for research. Within the construct of culture were two themes-intrinsic perceptions in CAM, and lack of communication within and outside CAM. CONCLUSIONS: Promoting evidence-based practice and engaging with research in CAM continues to face challenges. This study, for the first time, has highlighted the multitude of interlinked barriers that confront CAM stakeholders when engaging with research. These findings highlight the need for a concerted and targeted approach to tackle these challenges.