Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 4.620
Filter
1.
Braz. j. oral sci ; 21: e226694, jan.-dez. 2022. ilus
Article in English | LILACS, BBO - Dentistry | ID: biblio-1393022

ABSTRACT

Scientific research and publication play an important role during the training of dentists, but one of the most outstanding barriers is the authorship conditions of the journals. Aim: The objective of the study was to determine the accessibility to student publication in dental journals in the world. Methods: A retrospective study was carried out. 208 journals indexed in Scimago Journal & Country Rank that met inclusion and exclusion criteria were included. The instructions for the authors were reviewed, an email was subsequently sent to the journal contact and articles with student affiliation were searched in the database of each journal. For the analysis of the descriptive statistical data of frequencies and percentage, the IBM SPPS Statistics Standard Edition 22 program was used. Results: 208 journals were included, 77.67% accepted the student publication without condition. The United States, United Kingdom and India were the countries with the highest number of journals with student participation. Likewise, the journals of Q4 (85.70%), Q3 (85.40%) and Basic Sciences (100%), Dental Education (100%), Endodontic (100%), Geriatrics and Gerontology (100%) and Public Dental Health (100%), mostly accepted student authorship. Conclusion: It is concluded that 167 (77.67%) of the dental journals accept the publication of dental students without condition, being more frequent in journals positioned in Q4 (85.70%). Also, journals with thematic areas on Basic Sciences, Dental Education, Endodontic, Geriatrics and Gerontology and Public Dental Health


Subject(s)
Students, Dental , Journal Article , Periodical , Research Report , Scholarly Communication
2.
Braz. j. oral sci ; 21: e226351, jan.-dez. 2022. ilus
Article in English | LILACS, BBO - Dentistry | ID: biblio-1355010

ABSTRACT

Aim: This study aimed to assess the reporting characteristics of systematic review abstracts published in the proceedings of the Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica (SBPqO) meeting. Methods: We selected abstracts published in the SBPqO meeting proceedings of 2019 and 2020, mentioning that a systematic review was conducted in the title, objective or methods sections. One researcher performed the screening and the data extraction after a pilot test training. The following data were extracted: affiliation of the primary author, dental specialization, the term "systematic review" mentioned in the title, reporting of the objective, reporting of eligibility criteria, reporting of information sources, reporting of the number of included studies and if a meta-analysis was performed. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed with data summarized as frequencies. Results: We included 235 abstracts. A total of 20 studies were from the Universidade de Uberlândia (8.5%), and the main specialization was Restorative and Esthetic Dentistry, with 47 studies (20%). Most of the studies mentioned the term "systematic review" in the title (n=219; 93.2%) and reported the objective (n=231; 98.3%). A great majority of studies did not report the eligibility criteria (n=97; 41.3%) or it was classified as unclear (n=96; 40.8%). The great majority of studies only reported the databases searched (n=103; 43.8%) or databases and date of search (n=74; 31.5%). Most of the studies reported the number of included studies (n=204; 86.8%). Conclusion: Based on this study, the reporting characteristics of systematic review abstracts published in the proceedings of the SBPqO meeting are satisfactory. However, there is room for improvement


Subject(s)
Congresses as Topic , Dental Research/statistics & numerical data , Abstracting and Indexing , Research Report , Systematic Reviews as Topic
3.
J Dent ; 125: 104282, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36084762

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of spin and completeness of reporting of systematic reviews with metanalysis (SRMAs) in restorative dentistry. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were SRMAs of randomized clinical trials of restorative dentistry on survival, success, or failure rates of treatment in humans, with no language or year restriction. SRMAs performed with non-RCTs were excluded. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Collaboration Library were searched from inception to April 2022. Outcomes were the prevalence of spin (primary outcome) and completeness of reporting (secondary outcome) in the abstract and full text. Data were reported through means and standard deviations or absolute and relative frequencies. Spin in each item was considered low when occurring in less than 25% of the papers, moderate (25 to 75%), or high (more than 75%). RESULTS: We identified 7029 studies and 49 unique manuscripts were included. There was a moderate presence of spin in the abstracts and low in full texts. In the abstracts, 65.9% did not report adverse events; while in the abstract and full text, more than 16% reported a conclusion containing recommendations for clinical practice not supported by the findings. Regarding completeness of reporting, there was poor reporting for most items in the abstract while there was an adequate report in full texts, except for register name and registration number (not reported in 32.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Abstract of SRMAs in restorative dentistry should be better reported. Spin and poor reporting were more frequent in the abstracts, which misleads readers and could lead to inadequate clinical recommendations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Spin and incomplete reporting are a threat to evidence-based practice, especially in systematic reviews. Therefore, care providers, researchers, and other stakeholders should be aware of the possibility of spin in systematic reviews and other sources to prevent misinterpretation, which could lead to inadequate decisions and treatments.


Subject(s)
Dentistry , Research Report , Bibliometrics , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic
4.
JCO Clin Cancer Inform ; 6: e2200066, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36084275

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a custom programmatic workflow manager reduces reporting turnaround times (TATs) from a body oncologic imaging workflow at a tertiary cancer center. METHODS: A custom software program was developed and implemented in the programming language R. Other aspects of the workflow were left unchanged. TATs were measured over a 12-month period (June-May). The same prior 12-month period served as a historical control. Median TATs of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) examinations were compared with a Wilcoxon test. A chi-square test was used to compare the numbers of examinations reported within 24 hours and after 72 hours as well as the proportions of examinations assigned according to individual radiologist preferences. RESULTS: For all MRI and CT examinations (124,507 in 2019/2020 and 138,601 in 2020/2021), the median TAT decreased from 4 (interquartile range: 1-22 hours) to 3 hours (1-17 hours). Reports completed within 24 hours increased from 78% (124,127) to 89% (138,601). For MRI, TAT decreased from 22 (5-49 hours) to 8 hours (2-21 hours), and reports completed within 24 hours increased from 55% (14,211) to 80% (23,744). For CT, TAT decreased from 3 (1-19 hours) to 2 hours (1-13 hours), and reports completed within 24 hours increased from 84% (82,342) to 92% (99,922). Delayed reports (with a TAT > 72 hours) decreased from 17.0% (4,176) to 2.2% (649) for MRI and from 2.5% (2,500) to 0.7% (745) for CT. All differences were statistically significant (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The custom workflow management software program significantly decreased MRI and CT report TATs.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Medical Oncology , Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Research Report , Workflow
5.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1734, 2022 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36096783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Following the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019, adequate public information was of outmost importance. The public used the Web extensively to read information about the pandemic, which placed significant responsibility in, for many, an unfamiliar situation as the disease spread across the globe. The aim of this review was to synthesize the quality of web-based information concerning the coronavirus disease 2019 published during the first year of the pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A rapid systematic review was undertaken by searching five electronic databases (CINAHL, Communication & Mass Media Complete, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus). Empirical infodemiology reports assessing quality of information were included (n = 22). Methodological quality and risk of bias was appraised with tools modified from previous research, while quality assessment scores were synthesized with descriptive statistics. Topics illustrating comprehensiveness were categorized with content analysis. RESULTS: The included reports assessed text-based content (n = 13) and videos (n = 9). Most were rated good overall methodological quality (n = 17). In total, the reports evaluated 2,654 websites or videos and utilized 46 assessors. The majority of the reports concluded that websites and videos had poor quality (n = 20). Collectively, readability levels exceeded the recommended sixth grade level. There were large variations in ranges of the reported mean or median quality scores, with 13 of 15 total sample scores being classified as poor or moderate quality. Four studies reported that ≥ 28% of websites contained inaccurate statements. There were large variations in prevalence for the six categories illustrating comprehensiveness. CONCLUSION: The results highlight quality deficits of web-based information about COVID-19 published during the first year of the pandemic, suggesting a high probability that this hindered the general population from being adequately informed when faced with the new and unfamiliar situation. Future research should address the highlighted quality deficits, identify methods that aid citizens in their information retrieval, and identify interventions that aim to improve the quality of information in the online landscape.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Infodemiology , Internet , Research Report
6.
BMC Med ; 20(1): 363, 2022 Sep 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36154932

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential to support clinical decision-making. We aimed (1) to assess and compare the reporting characteristics of RCTs between preprints and peer-reviewed publications and (2) to assess whether reporting improves after the peer review process for all preprints subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and L·OVE COVID-19 platform to identify all reports of RCTs assessing pharmacological treatments of COVID-19, up to May 2021. We extracted indicators of transparency (e.g., trial registration, data sharing intentions) and assessed the completeness of reporting (i.e., some important CONSORT items, conflict of interest, ethical approval) using a standardized data extraction form. We also identified paired reports published in preprint and peer-reviewed publications. RESULTS: We identified 251 trial reports: 121 (48%) were first published in peer-reviewed journals, and 130 (52%) were first published as preprints. Transparency was poor. About half of trials were prospectively registered (n = 140, 56%); 38% (n = 95) made their full protocols available, and 29% (n = 72) provided access to their statistical analysis plan report. A data sharing statement was reported in 68% (n = 170) of the reports of which 91% stated their willingness to share. Completeness of reporting was low: only 32% (n = 81) of trials completely defined the pre-specified primary outcome measures; 57% (n = 143) reported the process of allocation concealment. Overall, 51% (n = 127) adequately reported the results for the primary outcomes while only 14% (n = 36) of trials adequately described harms. Primary outcome(s) reported in trial registries and published reports were inconsistent in 49% (n = 104) of trials; of them, only 15% (n = 16) disclosed outcome switching in the report. There were no major differences between preprints and peer-reviewed publications. Of the 130 RCTs published as preprints, 78 were subsequently published in a peer-reviewed journal. There was no major improvement after the journal peer review process for most items. CONCLUSIONS: Transparency, completeness, and consistency of reporting of COVID-19 clinical trials were insufficient both in preprints and peer-reviewed publications. A comparison of paired reports published in preprint and peer-reviewed publication did not indicate major improvement.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Information Dissemination , Peer Review , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Report
7.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0274744, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36162079

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Spin-the misrepresentation of a study's actual results-has the potential to alter a clinician's interpretation of the study's findings and therefore could affect patient care. Studies have shown spin frequently occurs in abstracts of systematic reviews from a variety of other medical disorders and specialties. AIMS: Our primary aim was to evaluate whether the nine most severe types of spin occurred in systematic review abstracts' concerning diabetic neuropathy treatments. Secondly, we aimed to determine whether spin presence was associated with the methodological quality of a systematic review. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE and Embase collected 1297 articles focused on diabetic neuropathy treatments, of which we included 114 systematic reviews for spin assessment. Each included study was evaluated for the nine most severe types of spin as defined by Yachitz et al. The methodological quality of a systematic review was determined by using the AMSTAR-2 instrument. All screening and data extraction were conducted in a masked, duplicate fashion. Since the final sample size of 114 was not sufficiently powered to do multivariable logistic regression, we calculated unadjusted odds ratios which evaluated relationships between spin presence within abstracts and study characteristics. RESULTS: From the 114 articles reviewed, spin was present in 7.9% of the studies (9/114), with spin type 5: "conclusion claims the beneficial effect of the experimental treatment despite the high risk of bias in the included primary studies" as the most frequent in our study. Spin types 1, 2, 6, and 8 were not identified. No association was observed between the study characteristics and spin presence, including the methodological quality of a systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, spin is infrequently observed in abstracts of systematic reviews covering diabetic neuropathy treatments. When comparing our results to other fields of medicine, the field of diabetic neuropathy research publishes systematic reviews whose abstracts mostly portray the findings of the review's full-text to reflect the results adequately.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Diabetic Neuropathies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetic Neuropathies/therapy , Humans , MEDLINE , Research Report , Systematic Reviews as Topic
8.
BMJ Open ; 12(9): e060976, 2022 Sep 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36167369

ABSTRACT

Research must be well designed, properly conducted and clearly and transparently reported. Our independent medical research institute wanted a simple, generic tool to assess the quality of the research conducted by its researchers, with the goal of identifying areas that could be improved through targeted educational activities. Unfortunately, none was available, thus we devised our own. Here, we report development of the Quality Output Checklist and Content Assessment (QuOCCA), and its application to publications from our institute's scientists. Following consensus meetings and external review by statistical and methodological experts, 11 items were selected for the final version of the QuOCCA: research transparency (items 1-3), research design and analysis (items 4-6) and research reporting practices (items 7-11). Five pairs of raters assessed all 231 articles published in 2017 and 221 in 2018 by researchers at our institute. Overall, the results were similar between years and revealed limited engagement with several recommended practices highlighted in the QuOCCA. These results will be useful to guide educational initiatives and their effectiveness. The QuOCCA is brief and focuses on broadly applicable and relevant concepts to open, high-quality, reproducible and well-reported science. Thus, the QuOCCA could be used by other biomedical institutions and individual researchers to evaluate research publications, assess changes in research practice over time and guide the discussion about high-quality, open science. Given its generic nature, the QuOCCA may also be useful in other research disciplines.


Subject(s)
Checklist , Research Report , Academies and Institutes , Humans , Reproducibility of Results
9.
J Environ Public Health ; 2022: 5852729, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36105514

ABSTRACT

Herein, we report a novel nanofiber as a humidity sensor applied to autonomous vehicles. We prepared copper oxide nanofibers by electrospinning, characterized the obtained materials by XRD, SEM, and TEM, and fabricated MEMS sensors based on copper oxide nanofibers. The humidity sensitivity performance of the sensor was tested in different humidity environments. We found that the MEMS humidity sensor based on copper oxide nanofibers can detect the change of humidity in the environment over a large humidity range. Its fast response/mixing speed (1 s), good stability, and sensitivity make it to fully adapt to the high speed of the car.


Subject(s)
Micro-Electrical-Mechanical Systems , Nanofibers , Autonomous Vehicles , Copper , Oxides , Research Report
10.
BMJ ; 378: o2251, 2022 09 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36137602
11.
J Evid Based Dent Pract ; 22(3): 101646, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36162876

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To present the actual usage of different structure formats in abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) published in SCIE-indexed dental journals, and to assess the awareness, knowledge, as well as attitudes towards the structured formats of RCT and SR abstracts among editors-in-chief (EICs) of dental journals. METHODS: In the first part of this study, we selected SCIE-indexed dental journals and assessed their eligibility according to pre-determined criteria. All RCTs and SRs published in the included journals during January-June 2020 were identified through a hand-search. The actual usage of different structure formats and headings, as well as relevant editorial policies were extracted. In the second part, an anonymous online survey among the EICs of included dental journals was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 88 journals were included, from which 364 RCT abstracts and 130 SR abstracts were identified. For RCT abstracts, 86% were structured, with 83% in IMRaD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) and 3% in highly structured (HS) format. For SR abstracts, 80% were structured, including 73% in IMRaD and 7% in HS format. According to the "instructions to authors", most journals required either IMRaD (68%) or HS (5%) for RCTs, while less than half required either IMRaD (36%) or HS (9%) for SRs. Twenty-one (24%) EICs participated in our survey, among which 18 agreed that structured formats could improve the reporting quality of RCT abstracts, while only 12 of them thought HS format should be widely recommended in the dental field. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the HS format, IMRaD was more frequently used and required among RCT and SR abstracts in dentistry. Structured formats held a relatively high degree of recognition among EICs of dental journals. Joint efforts are needed for improving the awareness and usage of HS format.


Subject(s)
Periodicals as Topic , Abstracting and Indexing , Editorial Policies , Humans , Research Report , Surveys and Questionnaires
12.
JAMA ; 328(12): 1173-1174, 2022 09 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36166007
13.
Syst Rev ; 11(1): 191, 2022 Sep 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36064610

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With the exponential growth of published systematic reviews (SR), there is a high potential for overlapping and redundant duplication of work. Prospective protocol registration gives the opportunity to assess the added value of a new study or review, thereby potentially reducing research waste and simultaneously increasing transparency and research quality. The PROSPERO database for SR protocol registration was launched 10 years ago. This study aims to assess the proportion SRs of intervention studies with a protocol registration (or publication) and explore associations of SR characteristics with protocol registration status. METHODS: PubMed was searched for SRs of human intervention studies published in January 2020 and January 2021. After random-stratified sampling and eligibility screening, data extraction on publication and journal characteristics, and protocol registration status, was performed. Both descriptive and multivariable comparative statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 357 SRs (2020: n = 163; 2021: n = 194) were included from a random sample of 1267 publications. Of the published SRs, 38% had a protocol. SRs that reported using PRISMA as a reporting guideline had higher odds of having a protocol than publications that did not report PRISMA (OR 2.71; 95% CI: 1.21 to 6.09). SRs with a higher journal impact factor had higher odds of having a protocol (OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.25). Publications from Asia had a lower odds of having a protocol (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80, reference category = Europe). Of the 33 SRs published in journals that endorse PROSPERO, 45% did not have a protocol. Most SR protocols were registered in PROSPERO (n = 129; 96%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that 38% of recently published SRs of interventions reported a registered or published protocol. Protocol registration was significantly associated with a higher impact factor of the journal publishing the SR and a more frequent self-reported use of the PRISMA guidelines. In some parts of the world, SR protocols are more often registered or published than others. To guide strategies to increase the uptake of SR protocol registration, further research is needed to gain understanding of the benefits and informativeness of SRs protocols among different stakeholders. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: osf.io/9kj7r/.


Subject(s)
Research Report , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Asia , Humans , Journal Impact Factor , Prospective Studies , Research Design
14.
Trials ; 23(1): 758, 2022 Sep 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36068565

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Despite the importance of intervention fidelity in interpreting the outcomes of complex public health interventions, there is a lack of both reporting fidelity trial protocols and uniformity. In evaluating complex, adaptable/pragmatic interventions in resource-strapped settings with systemic issues, unique challenges to intervention adherence and monitoring are introduced, increasing the importance of a fidelity protocol. We aim to describe the intervention fidelity and monitoring protocol for the Healthy Life Trajectories Initiative (HeLTI) South Africa, a complex four-phase intervention set in urban Soweto, starting preconceptionally and continuing through to pregnancy, infancy, and early childhood to improve the health of young women and reduce the intergenerational risk of obesity. METHODS: The HeLTI SA fidelity protocol was based on the NIH Behaviour Change Consortium (NIH BCC) Treatment Fidelity Framework, outlining the following components of intervention fidelity: study design, provider training, intervention delivery, intervention receipt, and intervention enactment. Context-specific fidelity challenges were identified. The intervention fidelity components and associated monitoring strategies were developed to align with HeLTI SA. Strategies for fidelity monitoring include, amongst others, qualitative process evaluation methods, reviewing observed and recorded intervention sessions, monitoring of activity logs, standardized training, and intervention session checklists. Possible challenges to fidelity and fidelity monitoring include high provider turnover, lack of qualification amongst providers, difficulty tracing participants for follow-up sessions, participant health literacy levels, and the need to prioritize participants' non-health-related challenges. Solutions proposed include adapting intervention delivery methods, recruitment methods, and provider training methods. DISCUSSION: The NIH BCC Treatment Fidelity Framework provided a solid foundation for reporting intervention fidelity across settings to improve intervention validity, ability to assess intervention effectiveness, and transparency. However, context-specific challenges to fidelity (monitoring) were identified, and transparency around such challenges and possible solutions in low- and middle-income settings could help foster solutions to improve adherence, reporting, and monitoring of intervention fidelity in this setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201903750173871 . Registered on 27 March 2019.


Subject(s)
Life Change Events , Research Design , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Status , Humans , Pregnancy , Research Report , South Africa
15.
JCO Clin Cancer Inform ; 6: e2200036, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36103641

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The extensive growth and use of electronic health records (EHRs) and extending medical literature have led to huge opportunities to automate the extraction of relevant clinical information that helps in concise and effective clinical decision support. However, processing such information has traditionally been dependent on labor-intensive processes with human errors such as fatigue, oversight, and interobserver variability. Hence, this study aims at the processing of EHRs and performing multilevel and multiclass classification by fetching dominant characteristic features that are sufficient to detect and differentiate various types of breast lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, unstructured EHRs on breast lesions obtained through fine-needle aspiration cytology technique are considered. The raw text was normalized into structured tabular form and converted to scores by performing sentiment analysis that helps to decide the total polarity or class label of the EHR. Supervised machine learning approaches, namely random forest and feed-forward neural network trained using Levenberg-Marquardt training function, are used for classification of the collected EHR data set containing 2,879 records that are split in the ratio of 80:20 as training and testing data sets, respectively. RESULTS: Random forest and feed-forward neural network classifiers gave the best performance with an accuracy of 99.36%, an overall receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve of 99.2%, a correlation with ground truth of 98.3%, and a histopathologic correlation of 98.6%. CONCLUSION: Natural language processing has huge potential to automate the extraction of clinical features from breast lesions. The proposed multilevel and multiclass classification approach is used to classify 13 different types of breast lesions with 20 different labels into five classes to decide the type of treatment that should be given to patients by a physician or oncologist.


Subject(s)
Natural Language Processing , Research Report , Electronic Health Records , Humans , Neural Networks, Computer , ROC Curve
16.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0274810, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36126090

ABSTRACT

Can the male citation advantage (more citations for papers written by male than female scientists) be explained by gender homophily bias, i.e., the preference of scientists to cite other scientists of the same gender category? Previous studies report much evidence that this is the case. However, the observed gender homophily bias may be overestimated by overlooking structural aspects such as the gender composition of research topics in which scientists specialize. When controlling for research topics at a high level of granularity, there is only little evidence for a gender homophily bias in citation decisions. Our study points out the importance of controlling structural aspects such as gendered specialization in research topics when investigating gender bias in science.


Subject(s)
Research Report , Sexism , Female , Humans , Male
17.
BMJ ; 378: o2209, 2022 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36109019
18.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0274241, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36084114

ABSTRACT

Hyperbaric pressure experiments have provided researchers with valuable insights into the effects of pressure changes, using various species as subjects. Notably, extensive work has been done to observe rodents subjected to hyperbaric pressure, with differing imaging modalities used as an analytical tool. Decompression puts subjects at a greater risk for injury, which often justifies conducting such experiments using animal models. Therefore, it is important to provide a broad view of previously utilized methods for decompression research to describe imaging tools available for researchers to conduct rodent decompression experiments, to prevent duplicate experimentation, and to identify significant gaps in the literature for future researchers. Through a scoping review of published literature, we will provide an overview of decompression bubble information collected from rodent experiments using various non-invasive methods of ultrasound for decompression bubble assessment. This review will adhere to methods outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Literature will be obtained from the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Extracted sources will first be sorted to a list for inclusion based on title and abstract. Two independent researchers will then conduct full-text screening to further refine included papers to those relevant to the scope. The final review manuscript will cover methods, data, and findings for each included publication relevant to non-invasive in vivo bubble imaging.


Subject(s)
Research Personnel , Rodentia , Animals , Decompression , Humans , Research Design , Research Report , Review Literature as Topic , Systematic Reviews as Topic
19.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0275192, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36170296

ABSTRACT

The rapid development of modern science nowadays makes it rather challenging to pick out valuable ideas from massive scientific literature. Existing widely-adopted citation-based metrics are not adequate for measuring how well the idea presented by a single publication is developed and whether it is worth following. Here, inspired by traditional X-ray imaging, which returns internal structure imaging of real objects along with corresponding structure analysis, we propose Scientific X-ray, a framework that quantifies the development degree and development potential for any scientific idea through an assembly of 'X-ray' scanning, visualization and parsing operated on the citation network associated with a target publication. We pick all 71,431 scientific articles of citation counts over 1,000 as high-impact target publications among totally 204,664,199 publications that cover 16 disciplines spanning from 1800 to 2021. Our proposed Scientific X-ray reproduces how an idea evolves from the very original target publication all the way to the up to date status via an extracted 'idea tree' that attempts to preserve the most representative idea flow structure underneath each citation network. Interestingly, we observe that while the citation counts of publications may increase unlimitedly, the maximum valid idea inheritance of those target publications, i.e., the valid depth of the idea tree, cannot exceed a limit of six hops, and the idea evolution structure of any arbitrary publication unexceptionally falls into six fixed patterns. Combined with a development potential index that we further design based on the extracted idea tree, Scientific X-ray can vividly tell how further a given idea presented by a given publication can still go from any well-established starting point. Scientific X-ray successfully identifies 40 out of 49 topics of Nobel prize as high-potential topics by their prize-winning papers in an average of nine years before the prizes are released. Various trials on articles of diverse topics also confirm the power of Scientific X-ray in digging out influential/promising ideas. Scientific X-ray is user-friendly to researchers with any level of expertise, thus providing important basis for grasping research trends, helping scientific policy-making and even promoting social development.


Subject(s)
Abstracting and Indexing , Awards and Prizes , Humans , Nobel Prize , Publications , Research Personnel , Research Report
20.
BMJ ; 378: o2322, 2022 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36170997
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...