Types of articles in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine in 2021 and 2022: Editors' perspective.

The present editorial summarizes the last 2 calendar years of Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine (ACEM) publication (2021 and 2022). The specific aims were: 1) To clarify the classification of papers published in ACEM; 2) To present motivations behind choosing this classification; 3) To show how this classification is reflected in citations. Six categories of papers published in ACEM are presented: editorials, meta-analyses, reviews (including systematic reviews), multicenter studies, research-in-progress studies, and research letters; lack of clear definitions for editorials, research letters and research-in-progress studies is discussed. Thematic fields covered by all categories in 2021 and 2022 are presented and differences in this regard between 2021 and 2022 are highlighted. Reasons for not publishing case reports (CRs) are discussed, with some of the debate on this issue in medical literature summarized. The article type classification used in ACEM in only one of many possible solutions and may be modified in the future - it should be both clear for the authors and allow for orientation in the journal's content. The motivation for choosing the employed categories stem both from their position on the accepted levels of evidence in evidence-based medicine (EBM) and their potential to be cited.

In a blink of an eye: Graphical abstracts in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine.

This editorial discusses graphical abstracts (GAs) as a relatively new tool used to concisely summarize a scientific paper and promote it on social media to boost the visibility of research and the number of citations. This article attempts to define GA as clearly as possible and to explain the role of GAs as scientific communication tools in medical journals. A clear definition of a GA is lacking. Several definitions from the literature are presented, which illustrates that the terms "visual abstract" and "graphical abstract" can be used interchangeably. The role of GAs can be described in 3 aspects: 1) time required for communication (GAs are meant to convey the key contents of a scientific paper in a time much shorter than required for reading the full text), 2) means of communication (social media), and 3) mechanism of communication (research results in many fields of medicine can be better conveyed through visual or at least more visual means rather than plain text). A review of the existing literature concerning the effectiveness of GAs presents studies regarding the use of GAs in promoting scientific papers on Twitter - visual abstracts attracted significantly more engagement than plain English ones, especially from medical professionals. Visual abstract tweets were associated with a significantly higher number of impressions, retweets, and link clicks compared to text abstract tweets. Journals that have introduced GAs demonstrated significantly higher impact factor (IF) increases for the past 3 years than those of journals without GAs. The longer GAs have been utilized in a journal, the higher the IF the journal had. The experience of the editors of Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine (ACEM) concerning GAs are discussed, divided by types of papers published in this journal (original papers, meta-analyses, reviews, research-in-progress articles, and editorials), illustrated with examples of well-prepared GAs, and supplemented with a brief description of the feedback from authors and readers amassed following the introduction of GAs in ACEM. Finally, the authors offer the readership of ACEM 8 practical tips on how to prepare a useful GA, and list 8 common mistakes and misconceptions regarding GAs - both in text form and summarized in tables. The conclusion of the paper is that there is currently no universal standard for GAs, which can lead to inconsistencies in their formats and content; therefore, more detailed guidelines to standardize GAs for scientific research are warranted.

Gynecological Fistulae-Has Anything Changed in the Diagnosis and Treatment over the Last Decade? A Narrative Literature Review.

Gynecological fistulae are a rare but severe complication of radiation therapy, pelvic surgery, prolonged labor, cesarean deliveries, or inflammatory bowel diseases. A gynecological fistula is an abnormal pathway formed between the urinary and gynecological tract, most commonly located between the urinary bladder and vagina. Vesico-uterine and vesicovaginal fistulae are an important health issue, common in women of reproductive age in developing countries with limited access to obstetrical care. Various surgical techniques have been described for VVF repair, depending on the location, severity, and cause of the fistula and the surgeon's experience. The purpose of our review was to evaluate the present state of knowledge about the prevalence and treatment of gynecological fistulae. The PubMed scientific database was searched for original articles on the subject of gynecological fistulae that had been published between 2013 and 2023.

COVID-19 pandemic as reflected in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine.

The editorial demonstrates changes in the number and subject matter of papers dealing with issues related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which were published in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine (ACEM) during 3 years of the pandemic (2020-2022). In 2020, 24 such manuscripts were submitted to the editorial office, of which 9 were published; in 2021, 48 were submitted and 10 published, while in 2022, there were 34 articles submitted and 4 published. Authors of this editorial point out that while initially chances for publication of papers regarding COVID-19 were greater than papers covering other issues, the editors of ACEM gradually enforced the same requirements for COVID-19-related papers as for the others (the acceptance rate for these papers was 37.5% in 2020, 20.8% in 2021 and 11.8% in 2022). The published papers described, among other aspects, the relationship between COVID-19 and other diseases (e.g., pneumonia, Parkinson's disease and acute kidney injury) and methods of preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare staff. An emergency situation of pandemic called for disseminating the results of scientific research as promptly as possible; however, the proper answer to this challenge is not lowering and simplifying requirements for peer review, but releasing the results in a form of registered preprints, which allow for provisionally making the paper available for the scientific community while the peer review verification is still ongoing.

Checklists for reporting research in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine: How to choose a proper one for your manuscript?

Various guidelines for authors of research papers and the checklists that often accompany these statements play an important role in the creation of carefully written scientific papers - for authors, they serve as tools to ensure the correct structure and content of the manuscript, increasing the chances that a paper will be published in a journal with a high rejection rate. The aim of this editorial is to provide a concise outline of the checklists most frequently used to guide the structuring of papers published in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, and to support current and prospective authors of this journal in choosing a checklist for their manuscript.The EQUATOR website is presented as a useful tool in choosing a checklist: https://www.equator-network.org/. Then, 8 checklists that are most popular among authors who publish their work in Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine are outlined: STROBE - for observational studies; ARRIVE - for any area of bioscience research using laboratory animals; CASP - for qualitative studies; CONSORT - for parallel group randomized trials; PRISMA - for all reviews and meta-analyses; SQUIRE - for studies on quality improvement in healthcare; STARD - for diagnostic accuracy studies; REMARK - for tumor marker prognostic studies. Each of the 8 presented checklists is discussed in a following order: 1) the name of the checklist is explained; 2) the type of articles to which it is intended is pointed out; 3) the structure of the checklist is explained; 4) if there are any extensions of the presented checklist for specific subtypes of papers, they are listed; 5) the most important literature on the presented checklist is provided.As a take-home message, basic tips for choosing a checklist are formulated. Finally, examples of papers adhering to each discussed checklist are provided.

[An exceptionally long line: 50 years of "Polymers in Medicine"].

The history of "Polymers in Medicine" reflects not only the development of utilizing such materials in medicine and pharmaceutics, but also changes in Polish scientific journals - dissemination of results of scientific research and broader scientific activity always takes place in a specific linguistic and sociopolitical context. The paper presents a brief historical sketch of the journal, starting from the establishment of the information bulletin "Plastics in Medicine", through the 1st International Conference of the COMECON "Utilization of plastics in medicine", which took place in Warsaw in October 1969, and the founding of "Polymers in Medicine" in 1970-1971, until the present day. Subsequent editors-in-chief are introduced, along with transformations of the layout, and above all, the evolution of issues described in the published papers, which initially concerned chiefly polymer materials in general, orthotics and plastic medical equipment. The changing rhythm of publication of the journal is discussed on the background of economic transformations during the decline of Polish People's Republic and the early days of modern Poland. Languages in which articles and additional materials were published in "Polymers in Medicine" can be regarded as a symbol of changes in the globalizing world of science: between 1964 and 1986 four languages (Polish, English, Russian, and German), then three (without German) until 1997, then two (Russian also disappeared) and - since 2021 - one (English).