Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 4.021
Filtrar
1.
J Assoc Physicians India ; 68(3): 14-18, 2020 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32138476

RESUMEN

Aim: : Appropriate calculation of sample size and choosing the correct sampling technique are of paramount importance to produce studies that are capable of drawing clinically relevant conclusions with generalizability of results. The current study was planned with an objective to determine reporting of sample size and sampling considerations in clinical research articles published in the year 2017. Methods: One high impact factor journal and one low impact factor journal belonging to the specialities of Medicine, Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Paediatrics and Pharmacology were selected and checked for adherence to reporting of sample size and sampling considerations. Results: A total of 264 articles were examined. These consisted of 55 interventional studies and 209 observational studies. Interventional studies showed higher reporting of sample size calculation/justification for sample size selection (29.1%) compared to observational studies (14.8%). Only 33 out of 155 articles from high impact factor journals and 14 out of 109 articles from low impact factor journals mentioned about sample size calculation or justified the sample size. In addition to this, merely 68 out of 209 observational studies mentioned about sampling considerations such as sampling technique/participant follow up/matching details. Conclusion: The reporting of sample size and sampling considerations was found to be low in both high impact factor and low impact factor journals. Though interventional studies had better reporting compared to other study designs, the reporting was still not adequate and there is an immense scope for improvement.


Asunto(s)
Periodismo Médico , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Publicaciones , Niño , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Obstetricia , Proyectos de Investigación , Tamaño de la Muestra
4.
Eur J Epidemiol ; 35(1): 5-10, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31993883

RESUMEN

To review the highest impact studies published from the UK Biobank and assess their contributions to "precision medicine." We reviewed 140 of 689 studies published between 2008 and May 2019 from the UK Biobank deemed to be high impact by citations, alternative metric data, or publication in a high impact journal. We classified studies according to whether they (1) were largely methods papers, (2) largely replicated prior findings or associations, (3) generated novel findings or associations, (4) developed risk prediction models that did not yield clinically significant improvements in risk estimation over prior models or (5) developed models that produced significant improvements in individualized risk assessment, targeted screening, or targeted treatment. This final category represents "precision medicine." We classified 15 articles as category 1, 33 as category 2, 85 as category 3, six as category 4, and one as category 5. In this assessment of the first 7 years of the UK Biobank and first 4 years of genetic data availability, the majority of high impact UK Biobank studies either replicated known associations or generated novel associations without clinically relevant improvements in risk prediction, screening, or treatment. This information may be useful for designers of other cohort studies in terms of input to design and follow-up to facilitate precision medicine research.


Asunto(s)
Bancos de Muestras Biológicas , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Medicina de Precisión , Edición , Humanos , Reino Unido
5.
Arch Pathol Lab Med ; 144(2): 133-135, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31990227

RESUMEN

• The Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine was first published in 1926 as a specialty journal of the American Medical Association. It became the official journal of the College of American Pathologists in 1995. Under the dynamic leadership of its most recent editor-in-chief, Philip T. Cagle, MD, the Archives has dramatically increased its impact factor and become the most widely read general pathology journal. Dr. Cagle has consistently added leading pathologists to the editorial board, and the collective expertise of these individuals is clearly evident in new, cutting-edge journal masthead sections. The Archives has featured innovative content in the field of digital pathology, including articles on the utilization of smart phones in pathology and the incorporation of whole-slide images and videos into the content of articles. During the current editorial board's tenure, special sections were introduced and have proven immensely popular with the journal's readership. As the Archives celebrates its 94th anniversary, its editorial board remains committed to providing insightful and relevant medical knowledge. The journal's open access Web site ( www.archivesofpathology.org ) allows the dissemination of this information to every corner of the globe at no expense to those who wish to expand their knowledge or improve their medical practice. Dr. Cagle, with support from the editorial board and journal staff, has worked tirelessly during his tenure as Archives editor-in-chief to greatly enhance the content of the journal and its stature within pathology and laboratory medicine.


Asunto(s)
Políticas Editoriales , Ciencia del Laboratorio Clínico/historia , Patología Clínica/historia , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/historia , Historia del Siglo XX , Historia del Siglo XXI , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Ciencia del Laboratorio Clínico/métodos , Ciencia del Laboratorio Clínico/tendencias , Patología Clínica/métodos , Patología Clínica/tendencias , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/normas , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/tendencias
6.
Acad Med ; 95(2): 200-206, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31990724

RESUMEN

Securing extramural grant funding and publishing in peer-reviewed journals are key indicators of success for many investigators in academic settings. As a result, these expectations are also sources of stress for investigators and trainees considering such careers. As competition over grant funding, costs of conducting research, and diffusion of effort across multiple demands increase, the need to submit high-quality applications and publications is paramount. For over 3 decades, the Center for AIDS Prevention Studies at the University of California, San Francisco, has refined an internal, presubmission, peer review program to improve the quality and potential success of products before external submission. In this article, the rationale and practical elements of the system are detailed, and recent satisfaction reports, grant submission outcomes, and plans for ongoing tracking of the success rates of products reviewed are discussed. The program includes both early-stage concept reviews of ideas in their formative state and full product reviews of near-final drafts. Recent evaluation data indicate high levels of reviewee satisfaction with multiple domains of the process, including scheduling the review sessions, preparedness and expertise of the reviewers, and overall quality of the review. Outcome data from reviews conducted over a recent 12-month period demonstrate subsequent funding of 44% of proposals reviewed through the program, a success rate that surpasses the National Institutes of Health funding success rates for the same time period. Suggestions for the sustainability of the program and for its adoption at other institutions and settings less dependent on extramural funding are provided.


Asunto(s)
Revisión de la Investigación por Pares , Apoyo a la Investigación como Asunto , Factor de Impacto de la Revista
9.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(2): e18578, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31914037

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Bibliometric analysis highlights the key topics and research trends which have shaped the understanding and management of a concerned disease. The objective of this study was to identify and characterize the most-cited articles on oral lichen planus (OLP), and highlight the analysis of key topics and research trends. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed and identified in the Scopus database from 1907 to 5 March 2019 for the top-100 most-cited articles on OLP. RESULTS: The number of citations of the 100 selected articles varied from 101 to 570, with a mean of 178.7 citations per article. Malignant potential, immunopathogenesis, and topical drug therapy were the top-3 study topics, and the majority of high-quality articles were the research of the 3 topics. Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine (n = 19) and Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology (n = 14) were 2 journals with the most articles published. Both van der Waal I. and Scully C. were the most frequently contributing authors (n = 9). United States (n = 27) and Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (n = 7) was the most contributing country and institution, respectively. Systematic reviews (n = 2), randomized controlled trial (n = 1), cohort studies (n = 17) were study designs with higher evidence level, but the large majority (n = 80) were considered lower level. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this first citation analysis of the 100 most cited articles on OLP provide a historical perspective on scientific evolution, and suggest further research trends and clinical practice in the field of OLP.


Asunto(s)
Bibliometría , Liquen Plano Oral/tratamiento farmacológico , Liquen Plano Oral/fisiopatología , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/tendencias , Algoritmos , Autoria , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista
10.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(2): e18631, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31914046

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Many researchers use the National Health Insurance Research Database (HIRD) to publish medical papers and gain exceptional outputs in academics. Whether they also obtain excellent citation metrics remains unclear. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) using the terms Taiwan and HIRD. We then downloaded 1997 articles published from 2012 to 2016. An authorship-weighted scheme (AWS) was applied to compute coauthor partial contributions from the article bylines. Both modified x-index and author impact factor (AIF) proved complementary to Hirsch's h-index for calculating individual research achievements (IRA). The metrics from 4684 authors were collected for comparison. Three hundred eligible authors with higher x-indexes were located and displayed on Google Maps dashboards. Ten separate clusters were identified using social network analysis (SNA) to highlight the research teams. The bootstrapping method was used to examine the differences in metrics among author clusters. The Kano model was applied to classify author IRAs into 3 parts. RESULTS: The most productive author was Investigator#1 (Taichung City, Taiwan), who published 149 articles in 2015 and included 803 other members in his research teams. The Kano diagram results did not support his citation metrics beyond other clusters and individuals in IRAs. CONCLUSION: The AWS-based bibliometric metrics make individual weighted research evaluations possible and available for comparison. The study results of productive authors using HIRD did not support the view that higher citation metrics exist in specific disciplines.


Asunto(s)
Autoria , Bibliometría , Programas Nacionales de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Taiwán
12.
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal ; 25(2): e180-e187, 2020 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31893475

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In 2008 the journal Medicina Oral Patología Oral y Cirugía Bucal was included in Journal Citation Reports. To appraise its evolution and current status, this study carried out a bibliometric analysis and evaluation of the journal for the period 2008-2018. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the Web of Science, Journal Citation Reports we obtained the indicators Journal Impact Factor (JIF), 5-year JIF, JIF without self-cites, Eigenfactor score and Article Influence score (2010-2017); and from the Core Collection database the following variables: number and article types, institutions and countries of origin of the authors (2008-2018), and the variable cited and citing journal data in 2017. Twelve articles/year (n=132) were randomly selected to gather: the time between submittal and acceptance of an article, number of authors/article, representation of each section, gender of first author, and funding. RESULTS: The journal occupied the third quartile of the JCR from 2010 to 2017, when it moved up to the second quartile. From 2008 to 2018 it published a total of 1,518 documents, 90% articles and 9.5% reviews. Sixty countries were represented, 48.68% of the documents coming from Spain, and overall 1,293 institutions were involved. Between submittal and acceptance of articles, the average time was 134.42 days, without differences between years. The mean of authors/article was 5.15, increasing over time. The sections most represented were Oral Medicine and Pathology, and Oral Surgery. There were no differences regarding the gender of the first author, and in general the authors did not provide information about funding received. CONCLUSIONS: The bibliometric results indicate a steadily improving position of this journal, along with a tendency to reduce self-citation. The time between reception of an article and its acceptance was very stable, the number of authors per article showed an increase, and there was a nearly equal representation of males and females as the first author.


Asunto(s)
Bibliometría , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Orales , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Masculino , España
13.
Int Endod J ; 53(3): 308-316, 2020 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31566775

RESUMEN

AIM: To analyse and visualize the knowledge structure of scientific articles in the field of Endodontology with high altmetric attention scores to discover hot topics, active researchers and the journals involved. METHODOLOGY: On 5 June 2019, the altmetric database (Altmetric LLP, London, UK) was searched using the titles of 11 endodontic journals. Bibliometric data from endodontic articles and journals with an altmetric score >5 (top 5%) were retrieved from PubMed and analysed using the VOSviewer. Science mapping of articles with an altmetric score >5 at two levels was created: author keywords co-occurrence and co-authorship network analysis. RESULTS: Of the 2197 articles in the field of Endodontology identified with altmetrics, 192 had altmetric scores >5 (top 5%). Considering the total mentions amongst all altmetric resources, the Journal of Endodontics had the highest rank followed by the International Endodontic Journal and Australian Endodontic Journal. Twitter was the most popular altmetric data resource followed by patents and Facebook. Meta-analysis, systematic review and pulpitis were the hot topics. At the author level, Dummer P.M.H had the greatest influence on the network. There was no significant correlation between altmetric score and citations count (P > 0.05). Mendeley mentions correlated with citations (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the altmetric scores of topics within Endodontology were low, possibly due to the specific and specialized nature of the specialty, as well as the difficulty members of the public probably have in understanding endodontic research. Journals and researchers with a focus on Endodontology would have more influence if they were to set-up their own social media profiles and thus enhance their visibility and social impact by immediately sharing research findings and communicating with their network and audience.


Asunto(s)
Endodoncia , Medios de Comunicación Sociales , Australia , Bibliometría , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Metaanálisis como Asunto
14.
Int J Paediatr Dent ; 30(1): 66-74, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31519054

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Traditional metrics have been extensively used to evaluate the scientific performance. Despite being widespread accepted, citation-based metrics are not able to describe the social impact of research. A diverse metric, Altmetric, was proposed to overcome those limitations. AIM: This study aims to analyse the social impact of research in the field of paediatric dentistry and to assess if a correlation exists between the JCR citations, the AAS score, and the recently released Dimensions citation count. DESIGN: A bibliometric study was conducted on the four journals related to Paediatric Dentistry listed in the JCR from 2014 to 2017. Descriptive statistics was used to describe the articles and the journals. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to explore the relationship among JCR citations, AAS, and Dimensions. RESULTS: The percentage of articles with an AAS presents a huge variability and was significantly higher in the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. In our sample, the correlation between the JCR citation count and the AAS was poor in the years 2014, 2015, and 2016 and low in 2017. The correlation between JCR citation and Dimensions citation count was strong. CONCLUSIONS: The social impact of research in paediatric dentistry can be increased. Dimensions could be an alternative to the JCR. Both the editors and the researcher should change their vision and facilitate the access to research information to scholar and non-scholar audiences.


Asunto(s)
Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Bibliometría , Niño , Humanos , Odontología Pediátrica , Cambio Social
15.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 106(2): 243-252, 2020 02 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31288053

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: A large proportion of preclinical or translational studies using radiation have poor replicability. For a study involving radiation exposure to be replicable, interpretable, and comparable, its experimental methodology must be well reported, particularly in terms of irradiation protocol, including the amount, rate, quality, and geometry of radiation delivery. Here we perform the first large-scale literature review of the current state of reporting of essential experimental physics and dosimetry details in the scientific literature. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 1758 peer-reviewed articles from 469 journals, we evaluated the reporting of basic experimental physics and dosimetry details recommended by the authoritative National Institute of Standards and Technology symposium. RESULTS: We demonstrate that although some physics and dosimetry parameters, such as dose, source type, and energy, are well reported, the majority are not. Furthermore, highly cited journals and articles are systematically more likely to be lacking experimental details related to the irradiation protocol. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show a crucial deficiency in the reporting of basic experimental details and severely affect the reproducibility and translatability of a large proportion of radiation biology studies.


Asunto(s)
Física , Radiobiología , Radiometría , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Bibliometría , Investigación Biomédica/estadística & datos numéricos , Congresos como Asunto , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Exposición a la Radiación , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Estándares de Referencia , Factores de Tiempo , Investigación en Medicina Traslacional/estadística & datos numéricos
16.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res ; 22(1): 54-58, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31829512

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The influence of research has long been studied using citations and impact factors (IFs). Electronic media is changing how people interact with the scientific literature. There are few investigations into these trends. PURPOSE: To explore whether Altmetrics correlate with traditional bibliometrics in the Implantology literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five Implantology journals with the highest IF and the 10 most highly-cited articles within those journals from 2013 to 2016 were reviewed. Altmetric score, citation count, and media "mentions" were recorded. Comparisons were conducted between Altmetric score, citations, and IF by performing Pearson correlation coefficients and descriptive statistics. Twitter accounts were studied and compared to other metrics. RESULTS: Analysis revealed no correlation between citations and Altmetrics (r = .096,P = .506) or IF and Altmetrics (r = .111,P = .443) in 2013. Altmetrics were also not significantly correlated with citations (r = 0.148,P = .305) or IF (r = .145,P = .315) in 2016. Total Altmetric scores were nine times higher in 2016 compared to 2013, with news outlets and Twitter seeing large increases in mentions. Twitter was the top medium receiving mentions across the two cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other fields, Implantology articles received lower Altmetric scores, noting an area of improvement. Altmetrics at this time are insufficient to replace traditional bibliometrics, but may provide helpful real-time information concerning article dissemination.


Asunto(s)
Implantes Dentales , Bibliometría , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Medios de Comunicación Sociales
17.
Eur Radiol ; 30(1): 482-486, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31428826

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether there is a difference in citation rate between open access and subscription access articles in the field of radiology. METHODS: This study included consecutive original articles published online in European Radiology. Pearson χ2, Fisher's exact, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to assess for any differences between open access and subscription access articles. Linear regression analysis was performed to determine the association between open access publishing and citation rate, adjusted for continent of origin, subspeciality, study findings in article title, number of authors, number of references, length of the article, and number of days the article has been online. In a secondary analysis, we determined the association between open access and number of downloads and shares. RESULTS: A total of 500 original studies, of which 86 (17.2%) were open access and 414 (82.8%) were subscription access articles, were included. Articles from Europe or North America were significantly more frequently published open access (p = 0.024 and p = 0.001), while articles with corresponding authors from Asia were significantly less frequently published open access (p < 0.001). In adjusted linear regression analysis, open access articles were significantly more frequently cited (beta coefficient = 3.588, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.668 to 6.508, p = 0.016), downloaded (beta coefficient = 759.801, 95% CI 630.917 to 888.685, p < 0.001), and shared (beta coefficient = 0.748, 95% CI 0.124 to 1.372, p = 0.019) than subscription access articles (beta coefficient = 3.94, 95% confidence interval 1.44 to 6.44, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Open access publishing is independently associated with an increased citation, download, and share rate in the field of radiology. KEY POINTS: • A minority of articles are currently published open access in European Radiology. • European and North American authors tend to publish more open access articles than Asian authors. • Open access publishing seems to offer an independent advantage in terms of citation, download, and share rate.


Asunto(s)
Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Publicación de Acceso Abierto/estadística & datos numéricos , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Radiología/estadística & datos numéricos , Acceso a la Información , Asia , Bibliometría , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , Modelos Lineales , América del Norte , Edición/estadística & datos numéricos
18.
Meat Sci ; 159: 107943, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31522103
20.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 106(1): 5-12, 2020 01 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31404580

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: In studies evaluating the benefit of adjuvant therapies, immortal time bias (ITB) can affect the results by incorrectly reporting a survival advantage. It does so by including all deceased patients who may have been planned to receive adjuvant therapy within the observation cohort. Given the increase in National Cancer Database (NCDB) analyses evaluating postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) as an adjuvant therapy, we sought to examine how often such studies accounted and adjusted for ITB. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A systematic review was undertaken to search MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 2014 until May 2019 for NCDB studies evaluating PORT. After appropriate exclusion criteria were applied, 60 peer-reviewed manuscripts in which PORT was compared with postoperative observation or maintenance therapy were reviewed. The manuscripts were reviewed to evaluate whether ITB was accounted for, the method with which it was adjusted for, impact factor, year of publication, and whether PORT was beneficial. RESULTS: Of the 60 publications reviewed, 23 studies (38.3%) did not include an adjustment for ITB. Most studies that did adjust for ITB employed a single landmark (LM) time (n = 31), 4 used a sequential landmark analyses, and 2 used a time-dependent Cox model. In 23 of 31 studies (74.2%) that did adjust for ITB via a single LM time, the rationale behind why the specified LM time was chosen was not clearly explained. There was no relationship between adjusting for ITB and year of publication (P = .074) or whether the study was published in a high-impact journal (P = .55). CONCLUSIONS: Studies assessing adjuvant radiation therapy by analyzing the NCDB are susceptible to ITB, which overestimates the effect size of adjuvant therapies and can provide misleading results. Adjusting for this bias is essential for accurate data representation and to better quantify the impact of adjuvant therapies such as PORT.


Asunto(s)
Sesgo , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias/mortalidad , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Radioterapia Ayuvante/mortalidad , Humanos , Factor de Impacto de la Revista , Modelos Logísticos , Neoplasias/cirugía , Cuidados Posoperatorios/métodos , Cuidados Posoperatorios/mortalidad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Análisis de Supervivencia , Factores de Tiempo , Espera Vigilante
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA