RESUMO
This statement revises our earlier "WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications" (January 20, 2023). The revision reflects the proliferation of chatbots and their expanding use in scholarly publishing over the last few months, as well as emerging concerns regarding lack of authenticity of content when using chatbots. These recommendations are intended to inform editors and help them develop policies for the use of chatbots in papers published in their journals. They aim to help authors and reviewers understand how best to attribute the use of chatbots in their work and to address the need for all journal editors to have access to manuscript screening tools. In this rapidly evolving field, we will continue to modify these recommendations as the software and its applications develop.
Esta declaración revisa las anteriores "Recomendaciones de WAME sobre ChatGPT y Chatbots en Relation to Scholarly Publications" (20 de enero de 2023). La revisión refleja la proliferación de chatbots y su creciente uso en las publicaciones académicas en los últimos meses, así como la preocupación por la falta de autenticidad de los contenidos cuando se utilizan chatbots. Estas recomendaciones pretenden informar a los editores y ayudarles a desarrollar políticas para el uso de chatbots en los artículos sometidos en sus revistas. Su objetivo es ayudar a autores y revisores a entender cuál es la mejor manera de atribuir el uso de chatbots en su trabajo y a la necesidad de que todos los editores de revistas tengan acceso a herramientas de selección de manuscritos. En este campo en rápida evolución, seguiremos modificando estas recomendaciones a medida que se desarrollen el software y sus aplicaciones.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Editoração , HumanosRESUMO
This statement revises our earlier "WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications" (January 20, 2023). The revision reflects the proliferation of chatbots and their expanding use in scholarly publishing over the last few months, as well as emerging concerns regarding lack of authenticity of content when using chatbots. These recommendations are intended to inform editors and help them develop policies for the use of chatbots in papers published in their journals. They aim to help authors and reviewers understand how best to attribute the use of chatbots in their work and to address the need for all journal editors to have access to manuscript screening tools. In this rapidly evolving field, we will continue to modify these recommendations as the software and its applications develop.
Esta declaración revisa las anteriores "Recomendaciones de WAME sobre ChatGPT y Chatbots en Relation to Scholarly Publications" (20 de enero de 2023). La revisión refleja la proliferación de chatbots y su creciente uso en las publicaciones académicas en los últimos meses, así como la preocupación por la falta de autenticidad de los contenidos cuando se utilizan chatbots. Estas recomendaciones pretenden informar a los editores y ayudarles a desarrollar políticas para el uso de chatbots en los artículos sometidos en sus revistas. Su objetivo es ayudar a autores y revisores a entender cuál es la mejor manera de atribuir el uso de chatbots en su trabajo y a la necesidad de que todos los editores de revistas tengan acceso a herramientas de selección de manuscritos. En este campo en rápida evolución, seguiremos modificando estas recomendaciones a medida que se desarrollen el software y sus aplicaciones.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experience with a new peer review method, "Select Crowd Review" (SCR): anonymized PDFs of manuscripts are accessible to a reviewer crowd via an online platform. It has access for 10 days to enter anonymized comments directly into the manuscript. A SCR-Editor summarizes the annotations, giving a recommendation. Both reviewed PDF and summary are sent back to authors. Upon submission, authors are given a choice to accept or decline SCR. DESIGN: All manuscript submissions since introduction in July 2021 until July 2022 were analyzed regarding acceptance and quality. Manuscripts were sent to a crowd of 45 reviewers and regular double-blinded peer review at the same time. Efficiency and performance of the crowd's reviews were compared with those of regular review. For thoracic manuscripts, a crowd was not yet available. RESULTS: SCR was accepted by the authors for 73/179 manuscripts (40.8%). After desk rejections, 51 cardiac manuscripts entered SCR. For five manuscripts, the crowd did not respond. In all remaining papers, the crowd's recommendation concurred with that of the normal reviewers. Regular peer review took up to 6 weeks. Twelve manuscripts underwent repeated SCR after revision. A median of 2 (0-9) crowd members sent in reviews. In revisions, average response was one reviewer responding. CONCLUSION: SCR encountered good acceptance by authors. As the first experience showed concordant recommendations compared with traditional review, we have extended SCR to thoracic manuscripts for more experience. SCR may become the sole review method for eligible manuscripts. Efficiency should be increased, especially for re-review of revisions.
Assuntos
Editoração , Cirurgiões , Humanos , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares , Resultado do Tratamento , EficiênciaRESUMO
Background: For documentation of COVID-19 pandemic-related changes in cardiac surgery in Germany, the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery carried out a structured survey. Methods: From 79 German institutions for cardiac surgery, 53 took part in the survey. The cut-off date before the pandemic was taken as 1 January 2020 and 30 April 2021 as the cut-off date for data recruitment. At this point of time, the third wave of the pandemic in Germany had already ebbed away and the return to routine surgery seemed to be foreseeable. Results: On 1 January 2020, in 53 German cardiac surgery departments 800 intensive care beds were allocated. In April 2021, this capacity was reduced by 25.6% to 595 beds. Accordingly, the number of operating rooms for cardiac surgery procedures was reduced from 207 to 152 (-26.9%) during the first two lockdowns. During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital facilities were restructured: 50.9% of participants delegated medical personnel, and 75.5% had to transfer nursing personnel to special COVID-19 facilities in their hospitals. Conclusion: From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic until the end of the third wave during April 2021, cardiac surgery in Germany changed profoundly, leading to a substantial reduction of intensive care beds and operating rooms for patients requiring cardiac surgery.
RESUMO
The evolution and progress in cardiovascular medicine and substantial changes in the German health care system require both a reflection of the principles of patient-centered care in general and an update of the criteria that define a department of cardiac surgery in Germany. This position paper lists the core requirements for a cardiac surgical department with regard to infrastructure, facilities, necessary staff, and standard of care (processes). This standard may be used by hospitals and health care providers to ensure the safety and quality of cardiac surgical departments in Germany.
