Search

Purpose To determine whether demographic differences exist among editors, reviewers, and authors in The Journal of Hand Surgery (JHS). We aimed to test the null hypothesis that there would be no difference among these 3 groups with respect to gender, geographic location, academic productivity, and financial relationships with industry. Methods Editors, reviewers, and physician authors were identified for 2018 JHS. Gender and geographic location were recorded for each person. We used the Scopus database to determine the Hirsch index (h-index) as well as the number of publications and citations for members of each group. Industry payment information was obtained using the Open Payments Web site. Results The editor group contained 20% women compared with the author group (17% women). Authors (59%) were less likely to be from the United States compared with editors (91%) and reviewers (88%). Editors were found to have a higher h-index (16) compared with reviewers (14) and authors (12). Authors demonstrated significantly higher mean total payments from industry ($41,738) compared with editors ($13,712) and reviewers ($20,457). Conclusions In 2018, there appeared to be an even distribution with respect to gender among editors, authors and reviewers in the JHS. International editors and reviewers are relatively under-represented compared to authors. Whereas editors and reviewers demonstrated higher h-indices compared with authors, JHS authors had significantly higher mean total payments in the Open Payments database. Clinical relevance Defining demographics, academic productivity, and conflicts of interest for journal editors, reviewers, and authors may aid in identifying potential sources of both author and peer review bias.

Introduction Writing a thesis or dissertation during a postgraduate medical or surgical training is a part of curriculum, which is considered a major component of training during residency. We aimed to analyze and find out the fate of thesis of our residents, their outcome, and impact. We have also evaluated the reasons for not publishing the thesis in a peer-reviewed paper. Methods This study was conducted at a neurosurgical department of a premier training institute. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for the topics of thesis and names of residents to find out whether any paper was published similar to topic of thesis. The faculties and residents were also personally contacted to evaluate the publication status of their thesis. A questionnaire was sent to the students who did not publish their thesis to find out the reasons for not submitting for publication. Results Total 56 residents submitted 85 thesis. The conversion rate to peer-reviewed publication was 32.5%. There was decreasing trend of conversion to publication over 10 years. The most common reasons for not publishing was a bad design of study, or deemed worthless for publication. Conclusion Conversion rate of thesis to paper is poor. In addition to writing thesis, candidates should be encouraged to have publications in indexed journal as full-length articles. Such publications carry more significance in long-term career of a resident.

Objective: Physical rehabilitation programs hold the potential to mitigate deterioration in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with head and neck cancer. The objective was to assess development in relevant domains of HRQoL following a physical exercise and nutrition intervention administrated during or after treatment. Methods: In a pilot study, 41 patients were randomized to resistance training and oral nutritional supplements during (EN-DUR, n = 20) or after (EN-AF, n = 21) radiotherapy. Global health status/QoL (GHS) and physical functioning (PF) were measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire at baseline, week 6, and week 14. Differences between the groups were assessed by analysis of covariance. A difference of ≥10 points in GHS and PF was interpreted as clinically relevant. Results: No statistically significant differences were detected between the groups; however, clinically relevant changes and differences in GHS and PF were observed. From baseline to week 6, GHS decreased 9 points in the EN-DUR group and 23 points in the EN-AF group and PF decreased 13 points and 21 points, respectively. From week 6 to week 14, GHS increased 14 points in the EN-DUR group and 26 points EN-AF group and PF did not change (0 points) in the EN-DUR group and increased 16 points in the EN-AF group. Conclusion: The findings from the present pilot study are promising and indicate that a physical rehabilitation program may have a positive impact on HRQoL during treatment and enhance recovery after treatment. A definitive randomized trial is warranted. Level of evidence: 1b-Individual randomized controlled trial. © 2020 The Authors. Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Triological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Background Centralization of pancreatic surgery is currently called for owing to superior outcomes in higher‐volume centres. Conversely, organizational and patient concerns speak for a moderation in centralization. Consensus on the optimal balance has not yet been reached. This observational study presents a volume–outcome analysis of a complete national cohort in a health system with long‐standing centralization. Methods Data for all pancreatoduodenectomies in Norway in 2015 and 2016 were identified through a national quality registry and completed through electronic patient journals. Hospitals were dichotomized (high‐volume (40 or more procedures/year) or medium–low‐volume). Results Some 394 procedures were performed (201 in high‐volume and 193 in medium–low‐volume units). Major postoperative complications occurred in 125 patients (31·7 per cent). A clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 66 patients (16·8 per cent). Some 17 patients (4·3 per cent) died within 90 days, and the failure‐to‐rescue rate was 13·6 per cent (17 of 125 patients). In multivariable comparison with the high‐volume centre, medium–low‐volume units had similar overall complication rates, lower 90‐day mortality (odds ratio 0·24, 95 per cent c.i. 0·07 to 0·82) and no tendency for a higher failure‐to‐rescue rate. Conclusion Centralization beyond medium volume will probably not improve on 90‐day mortality or failure‐to‐rescue rates after pancreatoduodenectomy., A complete 2‐year national cohort of pancreatoduodenectomies was analysed for a volume–outcome effect of postoperative complications, mortality and failure‐to‐rescue. Medium–low‐volume units (fewer than 40 procedures per year) performed on par with a high‐volume unit. Centralization beyond medium volume will probably not improve on 90‐day mortality or failure‐to‐rescue rates after pancreatoduodenectomy. Medium volume is sufficient goal.

Background Patients' perceptions of health change after bariatric surgery are complex. The aim of this study was to explore whether self‐rated health (SRH), a widely used tool in public health research, might be relevant as an outcome measure after Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for severe obesity. Methods This was a single‐centre retrospective study of a local quality registry. SRH score was registered at baseline and 5 years after RYGB. SRH, one of the 36 items in the quality‐of‐life Short Form 36 (SF‐36®) questionnaire, is the answer to this single question: ‘In general, would you say your health is excellent (1), very good (2), good (3), fair (4) or poor (5)?’ Change in SRH was analysed in relation to change in weight, co‐morbidities and quality of life after 5 years. Results Of a total of 359 patients who underwent RYGB between September 2006 and February 2011, 233 (64·9 per cent) reported on SRH before and 5 years after surgery. Of these, 180 (77·3 per cent) were women, and the mean(s.d.) age was 40(9) years. Some 154 patients (66·1 per cent) reported an improvement in SRH, 60 (25·8 per cent) had no change, and SRH decreased in 19 patients (8·2 per cent). SRH in improvers was related to better scores in all SF‐36® domains, whereas SRH in non‐improvers was related to unchanged or worsened scores in all SF‐36® domains except physical function. Conclusion Two‐thirds of patients reported improved SRH 5 years after RYGB for severe obesity. In view of its simplicity, SRH may be an easy‐to‐use outcome measure in bariatric surgery., A single question on self‐rated health (SRH) could provide an easy‐to‐use outcome measure in bariatric surgery. Two‐thirds of patients who had Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass for severe obesity reported improved SRH after 5 years. Self‐rated health ‐ One question to replace a questionnaire?

PURPOSE: To summarize the main findings from research on structured abstracts. METHODS: A narrative review of all the relevant papers known to the author was conducted. RESULTS: Authors and readers judged the structured abstracts to be more useful than traditional ones. In 1987 the Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature proposed guidelines for informative seven-headings abstracts. In 1990 Haynes et al. reconsidered the structured abstract of clinical research and review articles and proposed revised guidelines. Nowadays, most abstracts are informative, and the most commonly used structure is IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results And Discussion) format. CONCLUSIONS: There are many variations in the structured-abstract formats prescribed by different journals. But even in recent years, not all abstracts of original articles are structured. More research is needed on a number of questions related to the quality and utility of structured abstracts.OBJETIVO: Sintetizar os principais resultados das pesquisas sobre resumos estruturados.. MÉTODOS: Uma revisão narrativa de todos os estudos, considerados relevantes pelo autor, foi realizada. RESULTADOS: Os autores e os leitores julgaram que os resumos estruturados são mais úteis que os tradicionais. Em 1987, o Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature propôs diretrizes para a elaboração de resumos informativos com sete seções. Haynes e col., em 1990, reestudaram os resumos estruturados para a pesquisa clínica e para os artigos de revisão e propuseram novas diretrizes. Atualmente, a maioria dos resumos é informativa e a estrutura mais utilizada é aquela do formato IMRAD (Introdução, Métodos, Resultados e Discussão) CONCLUSÃO: Há muita variação nos formatos dos resumos estruturados solicitados pelo vários periódicos. Contudo, mesmo nos anos mais recentes, nem todos os resumos dos artigos originais são estruturados. Necessita-se de mais pesquisas relacionadas à qualidade e à utilidade dos resumos estruturados.

Background The recent article by Guller, Klein, Hagen was reviewed and discussed by the authors of this response to critically analyze the validity of the conclusions, at a time when patients and providers depend on peer reviewed data to guide their health care choices. The authors of this response all have high volume bariatric surgery practices encompassing experience with both gastric bypass and gastric banding, and have made significant contributions to the peer reviewed literature. We examined the assumptions of the paper, reviewed the main articles cited, provided more evidence from articles that were included in the materials and methods of the paper, but not cited, and challenge the conclusion that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is superior to gastric banding. Results and discussion The paper by Guller et al was subject to significant bias. The authors did not demonstrate an understanding of gastric banding, selectively included data with unfavorable results towards gastric banding, did not provide equal critique to the literature on gastric bypass, and deliberately excluded much of the favorable data on gastric banding. Conclusion The paper's conclusion that gastric bypass is the procedure of choice is biased, unsubstantiated, not supported by the current literature and represents a disservice to the scientific and health care community.