RESUMEN

Since its public release on November 30, 2022, ChatGPT has shown promising potential in diverse healthcare applications despite ethical challenges, privacy issues, and possible biases. The aim of this study was to identify and assess the most influential publications in the field of ChatGPT utility in healthcare using bibliometric analysis. The study employed an advanced search on three databases, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, to identify ChatGPT-related records in healthcare education, research, and practice between November 27 and 30, 2023. The ranking was based on the retrieved citation count in each database. The additional alternative metrics that were evaluated included (1) Semantic Scholar highly influential citations, (2) PlumX captures, (3) PlumX mentions, (4) PlumX social media and (5) Altmetric Attention Scores (AASs). A total of 22 unique records published in 17 different scientific journals from 14 different publishers were identified in the three databases. Only two publications were in the top 10 list across the three databases. Variable publication types were identified, with the most common being editorial/commentary publications (n=8/22, 36.4%). Nine of the 22 records had corresponding authors affiliated with institutions in the United States (40.9%). The range of citation count varied per database, with the highest range identified in Google Scholar (1019-121), followed by Scopus (242-88), and Web of Science (171-23). Google Scholar citations were correlated significantly with the following metrics: Semantic Scholar highly influential citations (Spearman's correlation coefficient ρ=0.840, p<0.001), PlumX captures (ρ=0.831, p<0.001), PlumX mentions (ρ=0.609, p=0.004), and AASs (ρ=0.542, p=0.009). In conclusion, despite several acknowledged limitations, this study showed the evolving landscape of ChatGPT utility in healthcare. There is an urgent need for collaborative initiatives by all stakeholders involved to establish guidelines for ethical, transparent, and responsible use of ChatGPT in healthcare. The study revealed the correlation between citations and alternative metrics, highlighting its usefulness as a supplement to gauge the impact of publications, even in a rapidly growing research field.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Journal selection is very important for any researcher in every field. Publication in a reputable journal not only has a higher reach among a greater number of people but also sets a benchmark for significance and quality. This primer aims to guide researchers in the field of cardiothoracic research, including medicine, surgery, and imaging, to assist in journal selection for their respective articles. Journal selection depends on a variety of factors, such as impact factors, publication charges, review processes, article types that a journal accepts, and indexing. This primer highlights all these factors in detail that are essential for the selection of a suitable journal. The article emphasizes the importance of these factors in making a reasoned decision about journal selection. This article also focuses on different types of publication models and their implications, including hybrid open access, gold open access, and diamond open access. In conclusion, this primer aims to provide insights to researchers in the fields of cardiothoracic surgery, medicine, and imaging about the publication landscapes and guide them to strategically plan their submissions.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate all recorded corneal and ocular surface research by Mexican authors. METHODS: The output data was extracted from SCOPUS to account for all publications regarding the corneal or ocular surface by Mexican authors. Data screening, extraction, and critical revision were performed by two of the authors to avoid duplication and ensure the authenticity of all papers. Performance analysis, science mapping, and network metrics were employed to retrieve trends in publication. RESULTS: A total of 1,091 indexed journal documents by 3965 authors were retrieved, covering the period the period from 1919 to 2022. In performance analysis, the document types included 881 articles, 20 book chapters, 17 conference papers, three editorials, 37 letters to the editor, nine notes, and 123 reviews. A total of 3,965 contributing authors made 6,081 author appearances. In terms of total citations per country, Mexican authors received a total of 7,087 citations, with an average article citation of 8.76 per author. CONCLUSION: This bibliometric analysis highlights impactful research contributions to corneal and ocular surface research from Mexican authors, identifies influential authors and institutions, and also emphasizes the need for increased interaction in the international arena.

RESUMEN

Introduction: Spontaneous intracranial hypotension (SIH) is an important cause of devastating headaches and caused by CSF-leaks in the spine. Research question: The aim of this analysis was to gain an overview of the progress of research on SIH over time. The global publication landscape relating to SIH was analyzed and comparisons between regions were made. Material and methods: A bibliometric analysis was performed by searching for research articles on SIH in PubMed published between 1983 and 2022. Countries responsible for the publications were ranked by the sum of citations. An average annual growth rate was calculated and the density of SIH publications per 100 000 physicians was determined. Results: We identified 974 articles. In 1983 only one SIH patient was reported; in 2021 the number of patients had increased to 4230. The average annual growth rate of SIH publications during this period was 12.7%. The most common publication type were case reports (n = 570). The most common medical specialty of the first author was neurology (n = 251) followed by neurosurgery (n = 250) and radiology (n = 191). Although most publications originated from the United States of America (USA), South Korea had the highest density of SIH investigators (37.86 publications per 100 000 medical doctors). The most cited paper (296 citations) was published in 2006 in JAMA (USA). Discussion and conclusion: Research on SIH has increased exponentially over the past four decades. The international community of SIH researchers is growing, and with it the opportunities for global networks involved in research, treatment, and patient education.

RESUMEN

Background: Compared with male senior authors, female senior authors publish less often in orthopedic journals than expected based on their population proportion. It is unknown whether this trend is also present among orthopedic trainees. Purpose: We sought to determine whether there is a gender discrepancy in the publication volume and authorship status among orthopedic residents. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis to evaluate the research productivity of male and female orthopedic residents. The top 10 ranked US orthopedic surgery residencies by research output in 2021-2022 were obtained from Doximity. Residents' names were recorded from each institution's residency website. We classified each resident as male or female, searched on PubMed, and recorded the number of publications relevant to orthopedic surgery. Resident contribution to each publication was recorded as either a first/last author or a middle author. To assess contributions by postgraduate year, we compared male and female junior residents (PGY1-3) and senior residents (PGY4-5) using the number of total publications, middle author publications, first/last author publications, and the difference between the number of middle and first/last author publications. Results: Among the 335 male and 117 female residents included, male residents had more total publications than female residents. Among PGY4-5, male residents had more total publications and middle author publications. There was no difference in the number of first/last author publications between male and female PGY4-5 residents. Conclusions: Our cross-sectional analysis found that in the 2021-2022 academic year, male orthopedic surgery residents published more often than female residents, although among PGY4-5 residents, we found no gender differences in number of first/last author publications. The difference in total publications among PGY4-5 residents is likely due to differences in middle author publications. Future research should consider residents' self-identified gender, including non-binary and gender-fluid identity.

RESUMEN

The publication productivity of residents has been reported in various specialties, mainly in North America, but never in pathology. In France, pathology residents must defend a medical thesis to obtain the title of medical doctor and to practice medicine. The aim of this study was to assess the thesis performance and publication output of a nationwide cohort of pathology residents from six graduating classes in France. Among 231 theses, 110 (48%) resulted in publications, of which 95% were original articles (OA) and 74% were resident first-author publications. The median impact factor (IF) was 3.6 (2.8-5.9). During residency and in the 4 years following defense, residents published a median of 5 (2-10) total publications, 2 (1-6) OA, and 1 (0-3) first-author manuscripts. Among 1849 publications, 822 (44%) were first, second, or last-authored by residents. The median IF of the 362 (20%) OA published as first, second, and last author was 3.1 (2.4-5), 3.3 (2.2-5.2), and 3.2 (0.9-3.3), respectively. Only 44% of these OA were indexed in the pathology category according to Web of Science, with Virchows Arch being the most common journal. Residents who published their medical thesis had a higher median number of total publications, as well as first- and last-author OA (p = 0.0005, p = 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively). The publication record of pathology residents goes beyond the field of pathology, with most contributions to non-pathology journals. The mandatory medical thesis provides a valuable opportunity for pathology residents to engage in research and may be the first step towards publication productivity.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the impact of periodontal therapy on systemic biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search without restriction on dates or languages was performed in six electronic databases, protocol records and other sources until May 2024. To develop the search strategy, clinical question was formulated using the PICOD method. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials on the effects of periodontitis-therapy on the inflammatory parameters of T2DM patients. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed by RoB2 and GRADE tools, respectively. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO platform (CRD42020206295). RESULTS: Of 1,062 records screened, the authors determined that 14 studies enrolling 1223 participants proved eligible. Moderate-quality evidence suggested a positive effect of periodontitis-therapy on serum levels of c-reactive protein [0.39 (CI95%: 0.27-0.5)], even without the use of antibiotics [0.34 (CI95%: 0.22-0.46)], in T2DM patients. The significant reduction in C-reactive protein (CRP) among smokers in favor of periodontitis-therapy was greatest at six months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Non-surgical periodontal therapy improved short-term biomarkers of systemic inflammation in T2DM patients, with moderate evidence of improvement in serum levels of high sensitivity-CRP. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Systemic inflammation in T2DM patients can be reduced after non-surgical periodontal therapy, which also has the potential to reduce the risk of other important systemic outcomes, such as cardiovascular disease.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Bibliometric methods were used to analyze publications on artificial intelligence in skin cancer from 2010 to 2022, aiming to explore current publication trends and future directions. A comprehensive search using four terms - "artificial intelligence," "machine learning," "deep learning," and "skin cancer" was performed in the Web of Science database for original English-language publications on artificial intelligence in skin cancer from 2010 to 2022. We visually analyzed publication, citation, and coupling information, focusing on authors, countries and regions, publishing journals, institutions, and core keywords. The analysis of 989 publications revealed a consistent year-on-year increase in publications from 2010 to 2022 (0.51% vs. 33.57%). The USA, India, and China emerged as the leading contributors. IEEE Access was identified as the most prolific journal in this area. Key journals and influential authors were highlighted. Examination of the top 10 most cited publications highlights the significant potential of AI in oncology. Co-citation network analysis identified four primary categories of classical literature on AI in skin tumors. Keyword analysis indicated that "melanoma," "classification," and "deep learning" were the most prevalent keywords, suggesting that deep learning for melanoma diagnosis and grading is the current research focus. The term "pigmented skin lesions" showed the strongest burst and longest duration, while "texture" was the latest emerging keyword. AI represents a rapidly growing area of research in skin cancer with the potential to significantly improve skin cancer management. Future research is likely to focus on machine learning and deep learning technologies for screening and diagnostic purposes.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), an asymptomatic precursor of multiple myeloma (MM), carries a variable risk of progression to MM. There is little consensus on the efficacy or optimal timing of treatment in SMM. We systematically reviewed the landscape of all clinical trials in SMM. We compared the efficacy of treatment regimens studied in SMM to results from these regimens when used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), to determine whether the data suggest deeper responses in SMM versus NDMM. METHODS: All prospective interventional clinical trials for SMM, including published studies, meeting abstracts, and unpublished trials listed on ClinicalTrials.gov up to April 1, 2023, were identified. Trial-related variables were captured, including treatment strategy and efficacy results. Relevant clinical endpoints were defined as overall survival (OS) and quality of life. RESULTS: Among 45 SMM trials identified, 38 (84.4%) assessed active myeloma drugs, while 7 (15.6%) studied bone-modifying agents alone. Of 18 randomized trials in SMM, only one (5.6%) had a primary endpoint of OS; the most common primary endpoint was progression-free survival (n = 7, 38.9%). Among 32 SMM trials with available results, 9 (28.1%) met their prespecified primary endpoint, of which 5 were single-arm studies. Six treatment regimens were tested in both SMM and NDMM; 5 regimens yielded a lower rate of very good partial response rate or better (≥VGPR) in SMM compared to the corresponding NDMM trial (32% vs 63%, 43% vs 53%, 40% vs 63%, 86% vs 89%, 92% vs 95%, and 94% vs 87%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this systematic review of all prospective interventional clinical trials in SMM, we found significant variability in trial design, including randomization status, primary endpoints, and types of intervention used. Despite the statistical limitations, comparison of treatment regimens revealed no compelling evidence that the treatment is more effective when introduced early in SMM compared to NDMM.

RESUMEN

Background and Aims: While the number of female physicians has increased since the 1970s, there continues to be a lack of female surgeons compared to their male counterparts, with the gender gap more prominent in surgical subspecialties such as neurosurgery. While surgical subspecialities have accelerated initiatives to close the gap, potential disparities in research opportunities may position women at a disadvantage, particularly in neurosurgery, where academic publications are an indicator of residency match success. In this paper, we sought to investigate whether gender disparities exist in preresidency neurosurgery publications among current neurosurgery residents. Methods: The present study selected residency programs from the top 25 neurology and neurosurgery hospitals in US News & World Report's 2022 Ranking. A database of neurosurgery residents and their publications was created using PubMed, neurosurgery residency program websites, and supplementary search. Articles published between the time of birth and December 31st of the year of graduation (medical degree) were used to determine publications before residency. Results: Our research indicates that 25.7% (n = 135/526) of US neurosurgery residents at top 25 hospitals are women and 74.3% (n = 391/526) are men. Men (n = 391) had a median of 7 (interquartile range [IQR], 3-14.5; range, 0-129) publications before residency, and women (n = 135) had a median of 7 (IQR, 4-11.0; range, 0-74) publications before residency. There were no significant differences in the median number of publications between genders (p = 0.65). Conclusion: In conclusion, our research indicates there is no gender disparity in preresidency publications among neurosurgery residents. To improve women's representation in the field, further study is needed to better understand gender inequality among neurosurgeons, particularly in the earlier stages of medical training.

RESUMEN

The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve has been recommended as one important meta-analytical summary to represent the accuracy of a diagnostic test in the presence of heterogeneous cutoff values. However, selective publication of diagnostic studies for meta-analysis can induce publication bias (PB) on the estimate of the SROC curve. Several sensitivity analysis methods have been developed to quantify PB on the SROC curve, and all these methods utilize parametric selection functions to model the selective publication mechanism. The main contribution of this article is to propose a new sensitivity analysis approach that derives the worst-case bounds for the SROC curve by adopting nonparametric selection functions under minimal assumptions. The estimation procedures of the worst-case bounds use the Monte Carlo method to approximate the bias on the SROC curves along with the corresponding area under the curves, and then the maximum and minimum values of PB under a range of marginal selection probabilities are optimized by nonlinear programming. We apply the proposed method to real-world meta-analyses to show that the worst-case bounds of the SROC curves can provide useful insights for discussing the robustness of meta-analytical findings on diagnostic test accuracy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: International English language publication activities in orthopaedic surgery comparing the years 2008/09 to 2018/19 were analyzed. METHODS: 20 international journals listed on PubMed were examined. The impact factor (IF) for each journal was determined using the InCites Journal Citation Report. RESULTS: 9,205 publications in 2008/09 and 15,549 in 2018/19 with 21,435 cumulative IF (CIF) in 2008/09 and 50,552 in 2018/19 were registered. Most publications consisted of narrative reviews (42.0%), followed by clinical studies (22.0%), experimental investigations (16.9%), randomized controlled trials (6.0%), and meta-analyses (5.6%). The highest increase in publications was observed for narrative reviews from 33.5% in 2008/09 to 41.1% in 2018/19. The USA had the highest number of publications (2,981 and 4,796), followed by UK (806 and 879) and Germany (606 and 922) in 2008/09 and 2018/19, resp. Per 1 Mio inhabitants, Switzerland (13.6 and 28.4), Sweden (10.9 and 18.1), the Netherlands (9.6 and 15.4), and Denmark (9.0 and 21.8) were the most productive countries in 2008/09 and 2018/19, resp. CONCLUSIONS: International publishing activity in orthopaedic surgery has increased substantially over the last 10 years. The quality of the published articles has not increased in the same way, as evidenced by the disproportionate rise in narrative reviews. Over the entire period, the US were the leader with respect to number of publications and CIF. In terms of population, however, smaller countries such as Switzerland and Sweden were much more active.

RESUMEN

AIM: To evaluate the experience and effectiveness of six semi-structured writing retreats on research publication quantity and quality for nursing and midwifery academics and research students. BACKGROUND: Research publications are necessary to develop a track record to gain competitive funding and for promotion. Publications also improve the standing of universities because their performance is measured in-part by research outputs. However, there are challenges to writing for publication, especially for new nursing and midwifery academics and research students. Therefore, four of the authors initiated semi-structured writing retreats to support nursing and midwifery academics and research students to overcome these challenges. METHODS: A mixed methods exploratory sequential design consisting of two distinct phases and data collection methods. In phase one, an online evaluation was administered to collect participant experiences which were then analysed using content analysis. In phase two, data about the quantity and quality of publications arising from each retreat was collected, and descriptive statistics performed. RESULTS: A total of 70 participants responded to the online evaluation. Qualitative analysis of their responses demonstrated that the writing retreats were highly valued as they offered a collaborative environment with dedicated time to focus on writing for publication. Quantitative analysis identified 81 publications were planned over the six writing retreats. Of these, 60 have been published, 5 are under review, 5 have not yet been submitted, and 11 were abandoned. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrated that our six semi-structured writing retreats enabled and developed nursing and midwifery academics and research students writing for publication. Semi-structured writing retreats are a research investment that enabled preparation of high-quality publications by offering protected time to write, expert peer review and collaboration and networking opportunities.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing recognition of the importance of research in undergraduate dental education, limited studies have explored the nature of undergraduate research activities in dental schools in the Middle East region. This study aimed to evaluate the research experience of final year dental students from three dental schools in the Middle East. METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted among final-year dental students from three institutions, namely Jordan University of Science and Technology, University of Sharjah (UAE), and Oman Dental College. Participants were asked about the nature and scope of their research projects, the processes involved in the research, and their perceived benefits of engaging in research. RESULTS: A total of 369 respondents completed the questionnaire.  Cross-sectional studies represented the most common research type  (50.4%), with public health (29.3%) and dental education (27.9%) being the predominant domains. More than half of research proposals were developed via discussions with instructors (55.0%), and literature reviews primarily utilized PubMed (70.2%) and Google Scholar (68.5%). Regarding statistical analysis, it was usually carried out with instructor's assistance (45.2%) or using specialized software (45.5%). The students typically concluded their projects with a manuscript (58.4%), finding the discussion section most challenging to write (42.0%). The research activity was considered highly beneficial, especially in terms of teamwork and communication skills, as well as data interpretation skills, with 74.1% of students reporting a positive impact on their research perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: The research experience was generally positive among surveyed dental students. However, there is a need for more diversity in research domains, especially in qualitative studies, greater focus on guiding students in research activities s, especially in manuscript writing and publication. The outcomes of this study could provide valuable insights for dental schools seeking to improve their undergraduate research activities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Over the past six decades, authorship numbers in academic publications have increased significantly, a phenomenon known as authorship inflation. This study aims to analyze comparative authorship trends and the influence of multicenter collaborations across major orthopedic, medical, and surgical journals. We reviewed metadata from The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Annals of Surgery (AS), and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) from January 1, 1960, to December 31, 2019. The number of authors per publication, the prevalence of multicenter studies, and their correlation were analyzed. Data was visualized using heat maps and box plots, and trends were statistically tested using the Jonckheere-Terpstra, Mann-Kendall, and generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs). A total of 73,062 articles were analyzed, with 1,190 articles identified as originating from multicenter studies. The number of multicenter trials was found to have increased significantly over time (p < 0.001), plateauing in NEJM but continuing to rise in JBJS and AS. There was a significant increase in authorship numbers per publication over time, across all journals (p < 0.0001). There was a significant statistical correlation (p < 0.0001) as indicated by the coefficient of determination (r2), for the association between the proportion of publications with >10 authors and the proportion of multicenter publications across all three journals. Authorship inflation in academic publishing may be attributable to the rise in multicenter collaborations. The rate of increase in authorship was more pronounced in medical and surgical journals compared to orthopedic journals, reflecting differing trends across specialties. These findings highlight the evolving nature of research collaboration and authorship practices in academic publishing.

RESUMEN

Meta-analysis is a powerful tool to synthesize findings from multiple studies. The normal-normal random-effects model is widely used to account for between-study heterogeneity. However, meta-analyses of sparse data, which may arise when the event rate is low for binary or count outcomes, pose a challenge to the normal-normal random-effects model in the accuracy and stability in inference since the normal approximation in the within-study model may not be good. To reduce bias arising from data sparsity, the generalized linear mixed model can be used by replacing the approximate normal within-study model with an exact model. Publication bias is one of the most serious threats in meta-analysis. Several quantitative sensitivity analysis methods for evaluating the potential impacts of selective publication are available for the normal-normal random-effects model. We propose a sensitivity analysis method by extending the likelihood-based sensitivity analysis with the $t$-statistic selection function of Copas to several generalized linear mixed-effects models. Through applications of our proposed method to several real-world meta-analyses and simulation studies, the proposed method was proven to outperform the likelihood-based sensitivity analysis based on the normal-normal model. The proposed method would give useful guidance to address publication bias in the meta-analysis of sparse data.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Nurses who earn a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) degree are expected to make essential contributions to the scholarship of practice and the improvement of health care outcomes. The DNP program at Duke University School of Nursing requires that students demonstrate scholarship competence by writing a manuscript based on their DNP project and submitting it for publication. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to share an evaluation of the effectiveness of this approach. METHODS: The authors used a bibliometric study design. RESULTS: This study demonstrates that manuscripts authored by students based on the DNP projects they conduct while earning their DNP degree can be published and are cited by other scholars. Additionally, the majority of these authors continue to publish scholarly work in the nursing and broader health-focused literature after they graduate. CONCLUSION: Nurses who developed and submit manuscripts for publication based on their DNP project contribute to the literature and evidence base for practice.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Journal editors instruct authors to describe human participant protections in original research reports. However, little is known about African biomedical journal authors' adherence to such journal editors' instructions. This study investigated changes in editors' instructions to authors and authors' reporting of research ethics information in selected African biomedical journals between 2008 and 2017. Twelve selected journal websites and online articles were reviewed in Eastern, Southern, and Western African [ESWA] countries. A pre-tested schema and a checklist were used to collect data from journal websites and articles published in 2008 and 2017, and the data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Half of the journals requested prospective authors to disclose ethics approval and related issues in their manuscripts between 2008 and 2017. There was a significant increase in instructions to authors regarding information on the protection of research participants within this period; more authors complied with these requirements in 2017 than in 2007.

RESUMEN

Despite recent calls to engage in scholarship with attention to anti-racism, equity, and social justice at a global level in Health Professions Education (HPE), the field has made few significant advances in incorporating the views of the so-called "Other" in understanding the nature, origin, and scope of knowledge as well as the epistemic justification of knowledge production. Editors, authors, and reviewers must take responsibility for questioning existing systems and structures, specifically about how they diffuse the knowledge of a few and silence the knowledge of many. This article presents 12 recommendations proposed by The Global South Counterspace Authors Collective (GSCAC), a group of HPE professionals, representing countries in the Global South, to help the Global North enact practical changes to become more inclusive and engage in authentic and representative work in HPE publishing. This list is not all-encompassing but a first step to begin rectifying non-inclusive structures in our field.