Using Bibliometric Data to Define and Understand Publishing Network Equity in Anesthesiology.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology departments and professional organizations increasingly recognize the need to embrace diverse membership to effectively care for patients, to educate our trainees, and to contribute to innovative research. 1 Bibliometric analysis uses citation data to determine the patterns of interrelatedness within a scientific community. Social network analysis examines these patterns to elucidate the network's functional properties. Using these methodologies, an analysis of contemporary scholarly work was undertaken to outline network structure and function, with particular focus on the equity of node and graph-level connectivity patterns. METHODS: Using the Web of Science, this study examines bibliographic data from 6 anesthesiology-specific journals between January 1, 2017, and August 26, 2022. The final data represent 4453 articles, 19,916 independent authors, and 4436 institutions. Analysis of coauthorship was performed using R libraries software. Collaboration patterns were assessed at the node and graph level to analyze patterns of coauthorship. Influential authors and institutions were identified using centrality metrics; author influence was also cataloged by the number of publications and highly cited papers. Independent assessors reviewed influential author photographs to classify race and gender. The Gini coefficient was applied to examine dispersion of influence across nodes. Pearson correlations were used to investigate the relationship between centrality metrics, number of publications, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding. RESULTS: The modularity of the author network is significantly higher than would be predicted by chance (0.886 vs random network mean 0.340, P < .01), signifying strong community formation. The Gini coefficient indicates inequity across both author and institution centrality metrics, representing moderate to high disparity in node influence. Identifying the top 30 authors by centrality metrics, number of published and highly cited papers, 79.0% were categorized as male; 68.1% of authors were classified as White (non-Latino) and 24.6% Asian. CONCLUSIONS: The highly modular network structure indicates dense author communities. Extracommunity cooperation is limited, previously demonstrated to negatively impact novel scientific work. 2 , 3 Inequitable node influence is seen at both author and institution level, notably an imbalance of information transfer and disparity in connectivity patterns. There is an association between network influence, article publication (authors), and NIH funding (institutions). Female and minority authors are inequitably represented among the most influential authors. This baseline bibliometric analysis provides an opportunity to direct future network connections to more inclusively share information and integrate diverse perspectives, properties associated with increased academic productivity. 3 , 4.

A literature review on prevalence of gender differences and intersections with other vulnerabilities to tobacco use in the United States, 2004-2014.

This report describes results from a systematic literature review examining gender differences in U.S. prevalence rates of current use of tobacco and nicotine delivery products and how they intersect with other vulnerabilities to tobacco use. We searched PubMed on gender differences in tobacco use across the years 2004-2014. For inclusion, reports had to be in English, in a peer-reviewed journal or federal government report, report prevalence rates for current use of a tobacco product in males and females, and use a U.S. nationally representative sample. Prevalence rates were generally higher in males than in females across all products. This pattern remained stable despite changes over time in overall prevalence rates. Gender differences generally were robust when intersecting with other vulnerabilities, although decreases in the magnitude of gender differences were noted among younger and older users, and among educational levels and race/ethnic groups associated with the highest or lowest prevalence rates. Overall, these results document a pervasive association of gender with vulnerability to tobacco use that acts additively with other vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities should be considered whenever formulating tobacco control and regulatory policies.

Smoking cessation interventions for U.S. adults with disabilities: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: People with disabilities disproportionately use tobacco products. However, little is known about cessation interventions tailored for people with disabilities. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of smoking cessation interventions for adults with disabilities. METHODS: Six electronic databases (Cochrane, CINAHL Plus [EBSCOhost], Embase [Ovid], Medline [Ovid], PsycINFO [Ovid], and Web of Science) were searched to identify eligible interventions for people with disabilities (e.g., vision, hearing, mobility, communication, cognition, self-care) through July 2023. Two independent coders evaluated the records and extracted data from studies that met inclusion criteria. Qualitative synthesis was conducted on the included studies in 2023. RESULTS: One randomized controlled trial and one nonrandomized study met the inclusion criteria. Both studies used mindfulness-based procedures to reduce cigarette use in adults with mild intellectual disability. The outcome was defined as self-reported cigarette use at follow-up, which ranged from 1 year to 3 years. Limited information was provided on how the interventions were tailored to meet the unique needs of people with disabilities in either study. CONCLUSION: Two interventions conducted in adults with mild intellectual disability showed promising results using mindfulness-based procedures; however, the studies did not address barriers reported by people with disabilities, nor tailor the interventions to meet the needs of the target population. Research is needed to address tobacco use disparities among people with a range of disabilities. Current cessation interventions would be enhanced by integrating disability identifiers alongside other demographic information in future studies and reporting subgroup analyses in adults with disabilities.

Left- vs right-sided migraine: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a historically unilateral head pain condition, the cause of which is not currently known. A growing body of literature suggests individuals who experience migraine with left-sided headache ("left-sided migraine") may be distinguished from those who experience migraine with right-sided headache ("right-sided migraine"). OBJECTIVE: In this scoping review, we explore migraine unilaterality by summarizing what is currently known about left- and right-sided migraine. METHODS: Two senior medical librarians worked with the lead authors to construct and refine a set of search terms to identify studies of subjects with left- or right-sided migraine published between 1988, which is the year of publication of the first edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD), and December 8, 2021 (the date the searches were conducted). The following databases were searched: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Abstracts were loaded into Covidence review software, deduplicated, then screened by two authors to determine study eligibility. Eligible studies were those involving subjects diagnosed with migraine (according to ICHD criteria) in which the authors either: a) compared left- to right-sided migraine; or b) described (with analysis) a characteristic that differentiated the two. Data were extracted by the lead author, including ICHD version, the definition of unilateral migraine used by the authors, sample size, whether the findings were collected during or between attacks, and their key findings. The key findings were grouped into the following themes: handedness, symptoms, psychiatric assessments, cognitive testing, autonomic function, and imaging. RESULTS: After deduplication, the search yielded 5428 abstracts for screening. Of these, 179 met eligibility criteria and underwent full text review. 26 articles were included in the final analysis. All of the studies were observational. One study was performed during attack, nineteen between attacks, and six both during and between attacks. Left- and right-sided migraine were found to differ across multiple domains. In several cases, reciprocal findings were reported in left- and right-migraine. For example, both left- and right-sided migraine were associated with ipsilateral handedness, tinnitus, onset of first Parkinson's symptoms, changes in blood flow across the face, white matter hyperintensities on MRI, activation of the dorsal pons, hippocampal sclerosis, and thalamic NAA/Cho and NAA/Cr concentrations. In other cases, however, the findings were specific to one migraine laterality. For example, left-sided migraine was associated with worse quality of life, anxiety, bipolar disorder, PTSD, lower sympathetic activity, and higher parasympathetic activity. Whereas right-sided migraine was associated with poorer performance on multiple cognitive tests, a greater degree of anisocoria, changes in skin temperature, higher diastolic blood pressure, changes in blood flow through the middle cerebral and basilar arteries, and changes on EEG. CONCLUSION: Left- and right-sided migraine differed across a wide range of domains, raising the possibility that the pathophysiology of left- and right-migraine may not be identical.

Smoking cessation interventions for US adults with disabilities: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: People with disabilities have a higher prevalence of cigarette smoking than people without disabilities. However, little information exists on smoking cessation interventions tailored to address the unique needs of people with disabilities. This paper describes a systematic review protocol to identify and evaluate tobacco smoking cessation interventions designed to improve outcomes for people with disabilities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of the literature using the procedures outlined by Cochrane. We will search four electronic databases (CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), Embase (Ovid), Medline (Ovid) and PsycINFO (Ovid)) with no date restriction to identify tobacco cessation interventions tailored to meet the needs of people with disabilities. We will extract data and assess risk of bias using the RoB2 and ROBINS-I for included studies using Covidence systematic review software. Quantitative and qualitative syntheses will summarise key study characteristics and outcomes with text, tables and forest plots; a meta-analysis will be conducted, if appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as there are no primary data associated with the study. Data will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed articles and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022337434.

Delay discounting and narcissism: A meta-analysis with implications for narcissistic personality disorder.

Several psychiatric conditions (e.g., substance use, mood, and personality disorders) are characterized, in part, by greater delay discounting (DD)-a decision-making bias in the direction of preferring smaller, more immediate over larger, delayed rewards. Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is highly comorbid with substance use, mood, and other personality disorders, suggesting that DD may be a process underpinning risk for NPD as well. This meta-analysis examined associations between DD and theoretically distinct, clinically relevant dimensions of narcissism (i.e., grandiosity, entitlement, and vulnerability). Literature searches were conducted and articles were included if they were written in English, published in a peer-reviewed journal, contained measures of DD and narcissism and reported their association, and used an adult sample. Narcissism measures had to be systematically categorized according to clinically relevant dimensions (Grijalva et al., 2015; Wright & Edershile, 2018). Seven studies met inclusion criteria (N = 2,705). DD was positively associated with narcissism (r = .21; 95% confidence interval [.10, .32]), with this association being largely attributable to measures of trait grandiosity that were used in each study (r = .24; 95% confidence interval [.11, .37]). No studies included diagnostic NPD assessments. These findings provide empirical evidence that DD is related to trait narcissism and perhaps risk for NPD (e.g., grandiosity listed in Criterion B of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, alternative model of personality disorders). Considering the positive evidence from this review, and the dearth of research examining DD in individuals with NPD, investigators studying NPD may consider incorporating DD measures in future studies to potentially inform clinical theory and novel adjunctive treatment options. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).