RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Most surgical journals are published in English, representing a challenge for researchers from non-Anglophone countries. We describe the implementation, workflow, outcomes, and lessons learned from the WORLD NEUROSURGERY Global Champions Program (GCP), a novel journal-specific English language editing program for articles rejected because of poor English grammar or usage. METHODS: The GCP was advertised via the journal website and social media. Applicants were selected to be a reviewer for the GCP if they demonstrated English proficiency on writing samples supplied in their application. The demographics of GCP members and characteristics and outcomes of articles edited by the GCP during its first year were reviewed. Surveys of GCP members and authors who used the service were conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-one individuals became part of the GCP, representing 8 countries and 16 languages apart from English. A total of 380 manuscripts were peer reviewed by the editor-in-chief, who determined these manuscripts to have potentially worthwhile content but needed to be rejected due to poor language. The authors of these manuscripts were informed of the existence of this language assistance program. Forty-nine articles (12.9%) were edited by the GCP in 41.6 ± 22.8 days. Of 40 articles resubmitted to WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 24 (60.0%) were accepted. GCP members and authors understood the purpose and workflow of the program and recognized improvements in article quality and the probability of acceptance through their participation. CONCLUSIONS: The WORLD NEUROSURGERY Global Champions Program mitigated a critical barrier to publication in an English language journal for authors from non-Anglophone countries. This program promotes research equity by providing a free, largely medical student and trainee operated, English language editing service. This model or a similar service can be replicated by other journals.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High-grade glioma has a poor overall survival with profoundly negative effects on the patient's quality of life and their caregivers. In this study, we investigate the factors associated with receiving palliative care in patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (GBM) and the association of receiving or not receiving palliative care with overall survival. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was analyzed for patterns of care in patients ≥18 years old who were diagnosed with histologically confirmed grade IV GBM between 2004 and 2017. All statistical analyses were conducted based on univariate and multivariate regression models. RESULTS: A total of 85,380 patients with the diagnosis of GBM were identified. Of the study population, 2803 patients (3.28%) received palliative therapy. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, age ≥70 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.58; P < 0.001), Medicare (OR, 1.348; CI, 1.13-1.61; P = 0.001), tumor size ≥5 cm (OR, 1.15; CI, 1.01-1.31; P = 0.036), tumor multifocality (OR, 1.69; CI, 1.47-1.96; P < 0.001), lobe overlapping tumor (OR, 2.09; CI, 1.13-3.86; P = 0.018), Charlson-Deyo score >0, receiving treatment at a nonacademic/research program, and medium volume of cancers managed at the treatment facility (OR, 1.19; CI, 1.02-1.38; P = 0.026) were independent risk factors associated with an increased chance of receiving palliative care. In contrast, a household income of ≥$40,227 and high volume of cancer managed at the treatment facility (OR, 0.75; CI, 0.58-0.96; P = 0.02) were independent risk factors associated with decreased palliative care. Patients who received no palliative care had a 2-year overall survival longer than those who received palliative care (22% vs. 8.8%; P < 0.001). In patients receiving palliative care, those who received recommended treatment had a 2-year overall survival longer than those who declined part or whole recommended treatment (9.1% vs. 3.8%; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-grade glioma, receiving palliative care is associated with decreased survival. When receiving palliative care, recommended treatment increases the number of patients who survive more than 2 years approximately 3-fold compared with those declining part or whole treatment.