RESUMEN
Predatory journals and conferences are an emerging problem in scientific literature as they have financial motives, without guaranteeing scientific quality and exposure. The main objective of the ASGLOS project is to investigate the predatory e-email characteristics, management, and possible consequences and to analyse the extent of the current problem at each academic level. To collect the personal experiences of physicians' mailboxes on predatory publishing, a Google Form® survey was designed and disseminated from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of 978 responses were analysed from 58 countries around the world. A total of 64.8% of participants indicated the need for 3 or fewer emails to acquire a criticality view in distinguishing a real invitation from a spam, while 11.5% still have doubt regardless of how many emails they get. The AGLOS Study clearly highlights the problem of academic e-mail spam by predatory journals and conferences. Our findings signify the importance of providing academic career-oriented advice and organising training sessions to increase awareness of predatory publishing for those conducting scientific research.
RESUMEN
Background Predatory journals are an emerging problem in scientific literature, as they have financial motives without guaranteeing scientific quality. Therefore, the scientific community needs to establish how this issue can be solved in the long term. Objective The study aims to provide information that can be used to take action against predatory journals and to guide future change. Methods A Google Forms (Google LLC, Mountain View, California, United States) survey was designed and disseminated between September 2021 and April 2022. Reflexive thematic analysis was used as a qualitative analysis technique in this study, with the assistance of the NVivo software (Lumivero LLC, Denver, Colorado, United States) to manage and support the analysis process. Results A total of 978 responses from 58 countries worldwide, achieving a response rate of 19.9%, were analyzed. Five key themes emerged regarding participants' suggestions on techniques to cope with the detrimental impact of predatory journals: "Checking," "Increasing education and awareness," "Responsibility," "Use of technology," and "Obstacles to the solution." Conclusion The outcomes of this study will help us focus and channel efforts in the future to combat predatory journals and aid us in understanding what needs to be done. We hope that this study will influence management strategies and encourage more education and awareness on a global scale.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Evidence for necrotising otitis externa (NOE) diagnosis and management is limited, and outcome reporting is heterogeneous. International best practice guidelines were used to develop consensus diagnostic criteria and a core outcome set (COS). METHODS: The study was pre-registered on the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database. Systematic literature review identified candidate items. Patient-centred items were identified via a qualitative study. Items and their definitions were refined by multidisciplinary stakeholders in a two-round Delphi exercise and subsequent consensus meeting. RESULTS: The final COS incorporates 36 items within 12 themes: Signs and symptoms; Pain; Advanced Disease Indicators; Complications; Survival; Antibiotic regimes and side effects; Patient comorbidities; Non-antibiotic treatments; Patient compliance; Duration and cessation of treatment; Relapse and readmission; Multidisciplinary team management.Consensus diagnostic criteria include 12 items within 6 themes: Signs and symptoms (oedema, otorrhoea, granulation); Pain (otalgia, nocturnal otalgia); Investigations (microbiology [does not have to be positive], histology [malignancy excluded], positive CT and MRI); Persistent symptoms despite local and/or systemic treatment for at least two weeks; At least one risk factor for impaired immune response; Indicators of advanced disease (not obligatory but mut be reported when present at diagnosis). Stakeholders were unanimous that there is no role for secondary, graded, or optional diagnostic items. The consensus meeting identified themes for future research. CONCLUSION: The adoption of consensus-defined diagnostic criteria and COS facilitates standardised research reporting and robust data synthesis. Inclusion of patient and professional perspectives ensures best practice stakeholder engagement.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Obesity is a chronic disease, which has significant health consequences and is a staggering burden to health care systems. Obesity can have harmful effects on the cardiovascular system, including heart failure, hypertension, coronary heart disease, and atrial fibrillation (AF). One of the possible substrates might be epicardial adipose tissue (EAT), which can be the link between AF and obesity. EAT is a fat deposit located between the myocardium and the visceral pericardium. Numerous studies have demonstrated that EAT plays a pivotal role in this relationship regarding atrial fibrillation. AREAS COVERED: This review will focus on the role of obesity and the occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) and examine the connection between these and epicardial adipose tissue (EAT). The first part of this review will explain the pathophysiology of EAT and its association with the occurrence of AF. Secondly, we will review bariatric and metabolic surgery and its effects on EAT and AF. EXPERT COMMENTARY: In this review, the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment methods of AF are explained. Secondly, the effects on EAT were elucidated. Due to the complex pathophysiological link between EAT, AF, and obesity, it is still uncertain which treatment strategy is superior.