Search

How trade affects environmental emissions has generated heterogeneous results over the years. This is due to empirical ambiguities that are endemic in the literature. In order to evaluate and explain the discrepancy in the literature, this paper conducts a meta-analysis of 88 empirical studies published until 2018. Our results show that trade contributes to environmental emissions after controlling for publication bias and heterogeneity. In explaining the heterogeneous results across the primary studies, our findings largely suggest the estimated elasticities depend systematically on the estimation characteristics, the choice of pollutants and the publication characteristics of the primary studies. Accounting for heterogeneity, the result remains robust only for CO2 emissions compared to SO2. Overall, the trade elasticity of emissions effect remains robust when we decompose the analyses for different groups of countries, however, the emissions-content of trade is more pronounced for developed compared to developing countries.

The bibliometric analysis was conducted to evaluate the publication characteristics of Journal of Dental Sciences (JDS) from ScienceDirect Online between 2009 and 2020. The most common published article type in JDS was original articles. The top four highest number of published articles were related to oral and maxillofacial surgery, periodontology, endodontology, and oral pathology. The most productive geographic region for articles was Asia. Taiwan ranked in the highest country in terms of successful publication in JDS. The impact factor of JDS ranged from 0.107 in 2009 to 2.080 in 2020. As compared with years between 2009 and 2014, there was a significant increase in impact factor during 2015–2020 (P = 0.026). By this bibliometric analysis, JDS needs to attract more audience outside the Asia to gain the higher international influence.

BACKGROUND Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a life-threatening disease, the progression of which current drug therapy cannot reverse. This study analyzed current research hotspots and future research trends in IPF through bibliometric methods, with the aim of providing a reference for new therapeutic strategies. METHODS Publications on IPF obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database, The Literature Metrology Online Analysis Platform, and CiteSpace were used to analyze publication characteristics. VOSviewer was used to conduct keywords co-occurrence analysis and analyze research hotspots. RESULTS A total of 7,016 publications related to IPF were identified from 2011 to 2020. The most contributions were from the USA and the five research institutions with the largest number of publications were all from that country. The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine was the most cited journal and had an incontrovertible academic impact with five of the top 10 high-cited references published in this journal. G Raghu was the academic authority in this domain in terms of both the number of publications and the most citations. By analyzing keywords, we identified three IPF research hotspot clusters, which are "clinical research", "pathogenesis research" and "diagnosis research" respectively. CONCLUSIONS We evaluated all publications concerning IPF research in the past decade through bibliometric analysis. The current research hotspot in this field is drug therapy for the condition using nintedanib and pirfenidone. Future research will focus on conducting multi-center randomized controlled trials to explore and evaluate new therapeutic drugs for IPF. It is hoped that this study can provide information and data support for further research and the development of new therapeutic drugs.

Author and article publication characteristics in the Journal of Creativity in Mental Health were reviewed from the first 12 years of the journal’s publication history for this meta-study. Results ...

Publications of research conducted during short-term research education training programs serve as an outcome measure for students’ successes and a program’s value. We compared the impact of cancer publications from research conducted during a short-term cancer research education training program, to publications by program participants in the years following completion of the training program and earning an academic or professional degree. Bibliometrics and altmetrics from NIH, ResearchGate, Google Scholar and Scopus® that measure publication impact were collected on cancer publications by student interns in the CaRES (Cancer Research Experiences for Students) R25 program from 1999 to 2017; and on cancer publications in subsequent years by program alumni (students who completed CaRES). Publication characteristics and impact measures were described and compared. Of 558 publications, 206 (37%) were related to CaRES internship projects and 352 (63%) related to any cancer research in which program alumni engaged following their internships. CaRES project publications were cited more frequently and held a higher research interest score than later cancer publications by CaRES alumni but appeared in journals having lower impact factors (p

To (1) compare the Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) and citation rates between orthopaedic and nonorthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 5 high-impact medical journals and (2) identify general characteristics of these articles associated with greater exposure on social media platforms.Articles published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine, and Archives of Internal Medicine between January 2011 and December 2016 were analyzed. These journals were selected based on retaining high impact factors with rigorous publication standards and availability of the AAS for their publications. The queried time frame was chosen to balance the inception of the AAS with an optimal period for citation accrual. A total of 14 article characteristics, in addition to number of Tweets, Facebook shares, news mentions, and the AAS, were extracted. Inclusion criteria were orthopaedic RCTs reporting on outcomes after surgical intervention. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between publication characteristics and the AAS and social media attention.A total of 9 orthopaedic and 59 nonorthopaedic RCTs were included. The mean AASs were significantly different (574 ± 565.7 versus 256.9 ± 222.3, P = .003), whereas citation rate was not (192.2 ± 117.1 versus 382.3 ± 560.3, P = .317). Orthopaedic RCTs had a significantly greater number of mentions on Twitter and Facebook (P.001). A higher AAS significantly associated with a greater number of citations (β = 0.75, P = .019) for orthopaedic RCTs. The mean AAS of orthopaedic RCTs favoring nonoperative management (809.6 ± 676.3) was greater than those favoring operative treatment (292.0 ± 248.9) but was not statistically significant (P = .361).Orthopaedic RCTs published in 5 high-impact general medical journals had a significantly greater mean AAS relative to nonorthopaedic RCTs, with no differences in citation rates. Additionally, there was a strong association between the AAS and citation rate of orthopaedic RCTs. Orthopaedic RCTs had greater social media exposure on both Twitter and Facebook.Orthopaedic surgeons, researchers, and providers who publish RCTs in high-impact medical journals can anticipate extensive social media attention for their articles relative to other nonorthopaedic RCTs in the same journals. Social media attention may be related to operative versus nonoperative management topics. This study provides further evidence for the increasing use of the AAS and its association with citation accrual.

Introduction and hypothesis Variations in outcome measures and reporting of outcomes in trials on surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) using synthetic mesh have been evaluated and reported. However, the quality of outcome reporting, methodology of trials and their publication parameters are important considerations in the process of development of Core Outcome Sets. We aimed to evaluate these characteristics in randomized controlled trials on surgery for POP using mesh. Methods Secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials on surgical treatments using synthetic mesh for POP previously included in a systematic review developing an inventory of reported outcomes and outcome measures. The methodological quality was investigated with the modified Jadad criteria. Outcome reporting quality was evaluated with the MOMENT criteria. Publication parameters included publishing journal, impact factor and year of publication. Results Of the 71 previously reviewed studies published from 2000 to 2017, the mean JADAD score was 3.59 and the mean MOMENT score was 4.63. Quality of outcomes (MOMENT) was related to methodological quality (JADAD) (rho = 0.662; p = 0.000) and to year of publication (rho = 0.262; p = 0.028). Conclusions Methodological quality and outcome reporting quality appear correlated. However, publication characteristics do not have strong associations with the methodological quality of the studies. Evaluation of the quality of outcomes, methodology and publication characteristics are all an indispensable part of a staged process for the development of Core Outcome and Outcome Measure Sets.

Background Nurses who are one of the pivotal elements of countries’ strategic responses to COVID-19 are being exposed to COVID-19. Aims To investigate the underlying characteristics of nurses who died due to COVID-19. Methods On 1 September 2020, a grey literature search was conducted. Data obtained through Medscape, Google, PubMed, government and non-government websites. The search strategy was carried out using variants and combinations of keywords related to ‘nurse’ and ‘COVID-19’ in English. Abstracted data included age, gender, type of nurse, department of nursing, country, date of death and publication characteristics. Results Out of reported 1518 COVID-19-related nurse deaths, details of age, gender and department of nursing were available for 766 (50%), 945 (62%) and 153 (10%) of nurses, respectively. The median age of the nurses was 56 years. The majority of deaths were reported in the 46- to 65 (32%)-year age range. While the registered nurses had the highest number of deaths according to types of nurses (680/957; 71%), they are mental health nurses (42/153; 28%) in the department of nursing. The countries with the most reported nurse deaths were USA, South Africa, Mexico and Russia. Conclusions The predominance of deceased mental health nurses among nursing departments can be examined in future studies. Supportive health policies can be developed to increase the motivation of nurses.

Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is underrepresented in the literature compared to other forms of rhinosinusitis, specifically in sinusitis guidelines and position statements. ODS publication characteristics could help explain why ODS has received less attention in sinusitis guidelines and position statements. The purpose of this study was to explore trends in the quantity and quality of ODS studies over 3 decades from 1990 to 2019. A systematic review was performed to identify all ODS studies from 1990 to 2019. The following variables from all ODS studies were compared between and across the 3 decades: authors’ specialties, journal specialties, authors’ geographic origins (continents), study topics, study designs, and evidence levels. From 1990 to 2019, there were 254 ODS studies that met inclusion criteria. Numbers of publications increased each decade, with 161 being published from 2010 to 2019. Otolaryngologists and dental authors published over 75% of ODS studies each decade, with 60–75% of ODS articles being published in otolaryngology or dental journals. European and Asian authors published the most ODS studies each decade. Overall, 92–100% of ODS publications per decade were level 4 and 5 evidence, with no significant changes between or across decades. While numbers of ODS publications increased each decade from 1990 to 2019, evidence levels remained low without significant changes over time. Otolaryngologists and dental authors published the majority of ODS studies each decade, with a minority of these studies being multidisciplinary. More ODS studies are needed across all aspects of the condition, and future projects would benefit from improved study designs and multidisciplinary collaboration.

This study provides a quantitative review of the empirical literature on partisan politics. Given the voluminous work on this subject, we focus on the relationship between government ideology and public spending. By exploiting a dataset of 800 estimates from papers published between 1992 and 2018, we find no evidence of publication bias. Taking into account the differences in the various categories of spending, proxies of ideologies, estimations methods, as well as, data and publication characteristics, we find evidence of a small positive and significant effect.

The Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte is a leading journal in the area of Reformation history with a long publication history. Content analysis, as a means toward understanding publication patterns...

Este artigo tem como objetivo mapear quantitativa e qualitativamente a pesquisa científica sobre os estudos que estabelecem relações entre a educação ambiental e o ensino público. Utilizando o método bibliométrico, várias características de publicação serão obtidas, tais como ano de publicação, países de origem dos artigos, afiliação institucional, tópicos de conhecimento, principais periódicos e seus assuntos, bem como uma análise de conteúdo do banco de dados por wordcloud para medir sua consistência. Observou-se de maneira clara que a interseção da educação ambiental e o ensino público tem sido figurada como um tema central de pesquisa para um indivíduo ou um grupo de pesquisadores em todo o mundo. No geral, o artigo demonstra que o estudo bibliométrico é uma metodologia capaz de fornecer uma base de conhecimento útil no desenvolvimento de projetos e pesquisas, e é apoiada em artigos científicos de grande relevância e credibilidade.

International audience; IntroductionBibliometrics consists in quantitative and qualitative analysis of an individual's or group's communication (volume, visibility), and impacts research funding. There are a number of bibliometric data sources, functioning in different ways and liable to give rise to differing statistics. This point has not been investigated in relation to publication following presentation to a French congress. We therefore conducted a study comparing the main bibliometric instruments, aiming to assess: (1) publication rates following oral presentation to the 2013 and 2014 French Society of Arthroscopy (SFA) Congresses according to the database used, and (2) citation rates for these publications according to database.HypothesisPublication and citation rates differ according to database.Material and method All 199 Abstracts of oral presentations to the 2013 and 2014 SFA Congresses were included. Based on author names and key-words, manual search was conducted in the Medline, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases. Publication characteristics (citation rate) were studied using the 3 databases and the French SIGAPS (Système d’Interrogation, de Gestion et d’Analyse des Publications Scientifiques: Scientific Publication Search, Management and Analysis System) website.ResultsPublication rates according to Medline and Google Scholar were the same (48.2%: 96 articles for 199 presentations), but significantly lower on Web of Science (44.7%: 89/199; p = 0.002). Citation rates differed significantly (p < 0.001) between sources, with Google Scholar listing a mean 1.5-3.4-fold more citations per article than the other 2 databases. Citation rates between the 3 databases correlated strongly (r = 0.93).DiscussionThe example presented in this study illustrates the differences in bibliometrics found between different databases. There was a 4% difference (7/199 articles) in publication rates following oral presentation to an SFA Congress, and even greater differences in citation rates per article, with 1.5-3.4-fold more citations according to Google Scholar. Bibliometric studies need to acknowledge the database(s) being used, which should be as many as possible to enhance exhaustiveness.Level of evidenceIV; descriptive epidemiologic study.

Articles published in Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation (CORE) from 2010–2019 were analyzed using meta-study procedures for trends over time related to author characteristics (e.g., gender...

Articles published in the Journal of Mental Health Counseling (JMHC) from 2000 to 2019 were analyzed to find patterns over time in author characteristics (e.g., demographic information, work setting, and leading contributors and institutions) and article content (e.g., typology, research methodology, research design, sophistication of statistical applications, and participant characteristics). A majority of JMHC lead and total authors are women, while the proportion of practitioner authors dropped significantly over the past 20 years from nearly 15% to less than 5%. Topical content was stable, while the proportion of research articles rose significantly to more than 50% from 2000 to 2019. JMHC displayed consistency in nearly all research study characteristics, commensurate with a mature scholarly journal. Journal reporting standards were stable for sample reliability and validity. JMHC made great strides in increasing the proportion of research studies reporting effect sizes over the past 20 years and is well positioned to continue meeting the scholarly needs of the mental health community.

We examined whether the publication characteristics of various scientific disciplines exhibit age-related trends. Our analysis was based on two large data sets comprising all major scientific disciplines. Citation data for European Research Council grant holders (ERC, n = 756) were obtained from Google Scholar. Publication data for Hungarian researchers (HUN, n = 2469) were obtained from the Hungarian Scientific Work Archive. The evaluated performance parameters include the number of citations received and the number of high quality first/last author papers published in the last five years. We designated the time between maximum growth and the achieved maximal annual value of total citations as the Golden Age of a researcher. Regarding citation growth, the mean age at the highest growth was 41.75 and 41.53 years for ERC grantees and Hungarian researchers, respectively. Each discipline had different values, with mathematics (38.5 years, ERC) and biology (34.7 years, HUN) having the youngest mean age of highest citation growth and agriculture (45.2 years, ERC) and language sciences (49.9 years, HUN) having the oldest mean age. The maximal growth of publications occurred at 44.5 years, with physics starting first (40.5 years, HUN) and language sciences as last (51.4 years, HUN). Most academic careers require decades to reach their peak and the length of the period of maximum performance varies across disciplines. The most creative time period is rising and is currently in the second half of the forties. Identifying the Golden Age in diverse research careers may be of substantial help in the distribution of grants and tenure positions.

Objective To systematically review all published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of imaging technologies in children. Methods We identified all CEAs involving fetal and pediatric imaging included in a publicly available repository of CEAs published since 1976. Information on publication characteristics, methods, costs, quality of life weights, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) was recorded for each article. Results Of 480 diagnostic CEAs, only 10 focused on fetal and pediatric imaging. The 10 studies reported 43 quality of life weights based on previously published adult data (n = 20, 46.5%); pregnant women perspective (n = 11, 25.6%), and treating physician perspective (n = 12, 27.9%). None of the studies elicited quality of life weights from children nor took into consideration the postnatal impact of disease on family’s quality of life. All studies used a health care payer perspective without incorporating patients’ incurred cost such as loss wages or travel related cost. Of 37 ICERs, 7 (18.9%) were cost saving and 6 (16.2%) were more expensive and less effective. The remaining ICERs ranged from $1,400 per quality-adjusted life-year (MRI versus ultrasound in newborns with moderate risk of occult spinal dysraphism) to $10,000,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (CT versus no imaging in children at low risk for craniosynostosis). Conclusion There is a striking paucity of cost-effectiveness studies evaluating imaging technologies in children. Existing studies do not incorporate the patient and family perspectives regarding utilities (eg, impact of child’s disease on families’ quality of life) or cost (eg, loss wages, travel, time off). Future studies should elicit and incorporate the impact of disease on families to better reflect real-world scenarios.

BACKGROUND A growing trend of survey-based research has been seen in the field of pediatric orthopaedics. The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of surveys of Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) membership and evaluate for associations between study characteristics and response rates in order to inform future research efforts. We hypothesized that studies with fewer survey questions and study group or committee involvement would demonstrate higher response rates. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify all peer-reviewed survey publications targeting POSNA members published up to December 2017. Included studies were reviewed to identify author and publication characteristics, survey development and methodology, survey distribution procedures, and response rates. Statistical analyses were performed to describe publication patterns and evaluate for associations between study characteristics and response rates. RESULTS Thirty-four studies published from 1991 to 2017 were identified as meeting inclusion criteria, with a substantial increase noted over the last 3 years. Studies included 4.6 (SD 1.9) authors and 14.7% had affiliations with study groups or committees. Survey development methodology was detailed in only 1 study. Surveys included a median of 19.5 questions (3 to 108) and were primarily electronically distributed. The mean survey response rate was 42% with a downward trend noted over the studied time period. None of the studied author, publication, and design characteristics were associated with increased response rates. CONCLUSIONS Survey-based studies of the POSNA membership have become increasingly popular study designs in recent years. Response rates are lower than reports in other physician cohorts, and appear to be declining, possibly representative of respondent fatigue. No associations were identified between response rates and the modifiable study characteristics evaluated (number of authors, committee or subgroup affiliation, number of questions, and mode of distribution). Efforts should be made to identify tactics to sustain participation as these studies become more widely utilized within our field. Optimizing study design and implementation features while valuing physician time and effort spent on survey completion is important to avoid member survey fatigue. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level V-systematic review of Level V research.

Background: As a new publication, the Journal of Natural Health Product Research (JNHPR) sought to develop a two-step protocol that (1) creates an international database of natural health product (NHP) researchers and (2) surveys their perceptions, needs, and preferences for a legitimate, broad-based, open access scientific journal in their field. This protocol could be useful to other researchers and publishers and can be adapted to establish similarly legitimate journals within their academic discipline.Methods: The database will initially be created using publicly available information online. A keyword-based, systematized search will identify the majority of NHP researchers, with referrals completing the process. Key research and publication characteristics of each person will be recorded. Subsequently, a survey will be developed and administered to all identified individuals to capture their attitudes and opinions on both open access in general, as well as the JNHPR. Construction of our NHP researcher database began in early-2018 and the development of our survey began in mid-2019. The survey is slated to be administered in early 2020.Conclusion: This protocol provides a process for constructing an international researcher database and a survey that aims to understand the community of NHP researchers’ interests and needs regarding open access publishing and a new field-specific journal. This process can be modified and replicated for the purpose of establishing other legitimate journals in any scientific research discipline.

Rare diseases (defined as affecting

Injuries to the menisci of the knee are common in orthopedic sports medicine. Bibliometric studies can identify the core literature on a topic and help further our collective knowledge for both clinical and educational purposes. The purpose of the current study was to (1) identify and describe the 50 most cited articles in meniscus research over an 80-year time period to capture a wide range of influential articles and (2) identify the “citation classics” and milestone articles related to the meniscus of the knee. The Science Citation Index Expanded subsection of the Web of Science Core Collection was systematically searched for the 50 most cited meniscus articles. Data pertaining to bibliometric and publication characteristics were extracted and reported using descriptive statistics. The top 50 articles were published between the years 1941 and 2014 and collectively cited 13,152 times. The median (interquartile [IQR]) number of total citations per article was 203.5 (167.0–261.8), while the median citation rate was 9.6 (7.4–13.9) citations per year. The most cited article was “Knee joint changes after meniscectomy,” published in 1948. The article with the highest citation rate of 78.4 citations per year was “The long-term consequence of anterior cruciate ligaments and meniscus injuries – osteoarthritis,” published in 2007. The majority of articles were clinical outcome studies (n = 28, 56%). The top 50 most cited meniscus articles represent a compilation of highly influential articles which may augment reading curriculums and provide a strong knowledge base for orthopaedic surgery residents and fellows. The decade with the most articles was the 2000s, representing a recent acceleration in meniscus-based research. This is a level IV, cross-sectional study.

This paper provides a comparative analysis of the discipline-specific publication characteristics of the Section of Earth Sciences of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. The analysis focuses in particular on an evaluation of the following aspects: the publication output of individual researchers, co-author characteristics, international visibility, and the citation impact of the publications. The main goals of the analysis are as follows: 1) to justify that, on the basis of the discipline specific publication characteristics, the Section is considered to be inhomogeneous, and 2) to demonstrate that the discipline-specific inhomogeneity is not appropriately acknowledged by the Section’s scientometric requirements that need to be fulfilled to obtain the title ‘DSc’. The results of this analysis point to the clear need for a more accurate re-evaluation of the Section’s scientometric requirements, and at the very least should inspire the leadership of the Section to implement more thorough comparative analysis focusing on the investigation of discipline-specific publication characteristics.

Transparent evaluations of FAIRness are increasingly required by a wide range of stakeholders, from scientists to publishers, funding agencies and policy makers. We propose a scalable, automatable framework to evaluate digital resources that encompasses measurable indicators, open source tools, and participation guidelines, which come together to accommodate domain relevant community-defined FAIR assessments. The components of the framework are: (1) Maturity Indicators - community-authored specifications that delimit a specific automatically-measurable FAIR behavior; (2) Compliance Tests - small Web apps that test digital resources against individual Maturity Indicators; and (3) the Evaluator, a Web application that registers, assembles, and applies community-relevant sets of Compliance Tests against a digital resource, and provides a detailed report about what a machine “sees” when it visits that resource. We discuss the technical and social considerations of FAIR assessments, and how this translates to our community-driven infrastructure. We then illustrate how the output of the Evaluator tool can serve as a roadmap to assist data stewards to incrementally and realistically improve the FAIRness of their resources.

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) is a key model describing teachers' intentions to use technology. This meta-analysis clarifies some of the contradictory findings surrounding the relations within the TAM for a sample of 45 studies comprising 300 correlations. We evaluate the overall fit of the TAM and its structural parameters, and quantify the between-sample variation through meta-analytic structural equation modeling. The TAM fitted the data well, and all structural parameters were statistically significant. On average, the TAM variables explained 39.2% of the variance in teachers' intentions to use technology. Several sample, measurement, and publication characteristics, including teachers’ experience and the representation of the TAM variables, moderated the relations within the TAM. Overall, the TAM represents a valid model explaining technology acceptance—however, the degree of explanation and the relative importance of predictors vary across samples. Implications for further research, in particular the generalizability of the TAM, are discussed.

Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are biased and difficult to reproduce due to methodological flaws and poor reporting. There is increasing attention for responsible research practices and implementation of reporting guidelines, but whether these efforts have improved the methodological quality of RCTs (e.g., lower risk of bias) is unknown. We, therefore, mapped risk-of-bias trends over time in RCT publications in relation to journal and author characteristics. Meta-information of 176,620 RCTs published between 1966 and 2018 was extracted. The risk-of-bias probability (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of patients/personnel, and blinding of outcome assessment) was assessed using a risk-of-bias machine learning tool. This tool was simultaneously validated using 63,327 human risk-of-bias assessments obtained from 17,394 RCTs evaluated in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Moreover, RCT registration and CONSORT Statement reporting were assessed using automated searches. Publication characteristics included the number of authors, journal impact factor (JIF), and medical discipline. The annual number of published RCTs substantially increased over 4 decades, accompanied by increases in authors (5.2 to 7.8) and institutions (2.9 to 4.8). The risk of bias remained present in most RCTs but decreased over time for allocation concealment (63% to 51%), random sequence generation (57% to 36%), and blinding of outcome assessment (58% to 52%). Trial registration (37% to 47%) and the use of the CONSORT Statement (1% to 20%) also rapidly increased. In journals with a higher impact factor (>10), the risk of bias was consistently lower with higher levels of RCT registration and the use of the CONSORT Statement. Automated risk-of-bias predictions had accuracies above 70% for allocation concealment (70.7%), random sequence generation (72.1%), and blinding of patients/personnel (79.8%), but not for blinding of outcome assessment (62.7%). In conclusion, the likelihood of bias in RCTs has generally decreased over the last decades. This optimistic trend may be driven by increased knowledge augmented by mandatory trial registration and more stringent reporting guidelines and journal requirements. Nevertheless, relatively high probabilities of bias remain, particularly in journals with lower impact factors. This emphasizes that further improvement of RCT registration, conduct, and reporting is still urgently needed., Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are biased and difficult to reproduce due to methodological flaws and poor reporting. Analysis of 176,620 RCTs published between 1966 and 2018 reveals that the risk of bias in RCTs generally decreased. Nevertheless, relatively high probabilities of bias remain, showing that further improvement of RCT registration, conduct, and reporting is still urgently needed.

Background The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare publishing characteristics in foot and ankle trauma articles published in two subspecialty journals and two general orthopedic journals. Methods All trauma articles related to foot and ankle surgery published from five different time intervals over a 20-year period were collected and the following was analyzed: authorship, level of evidence, type of study, citations, and geographic region. Results Foot and Ankle International (FAI) had the highest percentage of last and corresponding authors that were fellowship-trained in foot and ankle. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American and British volumes (JBJS(A) and JBJS(B), respectively) and the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT) articles had a higher percentage of last and corresponding authors that were fellowship-trained in trauma. Conclusion Foot and ankle-trained authors are currently under-represented in foot and ankle trauma literature. As the field of foot and ankle continues to grow, it is important that the experts in the field are well represented in the literature.

Background The aims of this bibliometric study were to determine author self-citation trends in high-impact orthodontic literature and to investigate possible association between self-citation and publication characteristics. Methods Six orthodontic journals with the highest impact factor as ranked by 2017 Journal Citation Reports were screened for a full publication year (2018) for original research articles, reviews, and case reports. Eligible articles were scrutinized for article and author characteristics and citation metrics. Univariable and multivariable negative binomial regression was used to examine associations between self-citation incidence and publication characteristics. Results Medians for author self-citation rate of the most self-citing authors and self-citations were 3.03% (range 0–50) and 1 (range 0–19), respectively. In the univariable analysis, there was no association between self-citation counts and study type (P = 0.41), article topic (P = 0.61), number of authors (P = 0.62), and rank of authors (P = 0.56). Author origin (P = 0.001), gender (P = 0.001) and journal (P = 0.05) were associated with self-citation counts and in the multivariable analysis only origin and gender remained strong self-citation predictors. Asian authors and females self-cited significantly less often than all other regions and male authors. Conclusions Authors in orthodontics do not self-cite at a frequency that suggests potential citation manipulation. Author origin and gender were the only variables associated with citations counts. More bibliometric research is necessary to draw solid conclusions about author self-citation trends in orthodontic literature.

Policy has been developed to promote the conduct of high-quality pediatric randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Whether these strategies have influenced publication trends in high-impact journals is unknown. We aim to evaluate characteristics, citation patterns, and publication trends of pediatric RCTs published in general medical journals (GMJs) compared with adult RCTs over a 13-year period. Studies were identified using Medline, and impact metrics were collected from Web of Science and Scopus. All RCTs published from 2005&ndash, 2018 in 7 GMJs with the highest impact factors were identified for analysis. A random sample of matched pediatric and adult RCTs were assessed for publication characteristics, academic and non-academic citation. Citations were counted from publication until June 2019. Among 4146 RCTs, 2794 (67.3%) enrolled adults, 591 (14.2%) enrolled children, and 761 RCTs (18.3%) enrolled adult and pediatric patients. Adult RCTs published in GMJs grew by 5.1 publications per year (95% CI: 3.3&ndash, 6.9), while the number of pediatric RCTs did not show significant change (&minus, 0.4 RCTs/year, 95% CI: &minus, 1.4&ndash, 0.6). Adult RCTs were cited more than pediatric RCTs (median(IQR): 29.9 (68.5&ndash, 462.8) citations/year vs. 13.2 (6.8&ndash, 24.9) citations/year, p &lt, 0.001), however, social media attention was similar (median(IQR) Altmetric Attention Score: 37 (13.75&ndash, 133.8) vs. 26 (6.2&ndash, 107.5), p = 0.25). Despite policies which may facilitate conduct of pediatric RCTs, the publishing gap in high-impact GMJs is widening.

Introduction: The Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) has been associated with citation rates across medical and surgical disciplines. However, factors that drive high AAS remain poorly understood and there remains multiple pitfalls to correlating these metrics alone with the quality of a study. The purpose of the current study was to determine the relationship between methodologic and study biases and the AAS in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in total joint arthroplasty journals. Methods: All RCTs from 2016 published in The Journal of Arthroplasty, The Bone and Joint Journal, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, The Journal of Knee Surgery, Hip International, and Acta Orthopaedica were extracted. Methodologic bias was graded with the JADAD scale, whereas study bias was graded with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. Publication characteristics, social media attention (Facebook, Twitter, and Mendeley), AAS, citation rates, and bias were analyzed. Results: A total of 42 articles were identified. The mean (±SD) citations and AAS per RCT was 17.8 ± 16.5 (range, 0 to 78) and 8.0 ± 15.4 (range, 0 to 64), respectively. The mean JADAD score was 2.6 ± 0.94. No statistically significant differences were observed in the JADAD score or total number of study biases when compared across the seven journals (P = 0.57 and P = 0.27). Higher JADAD scores were significantly associated with higher AAS scores (β = 6.7, P = 0.006) but not citation rate (P = 0.16). The mean number of study biases was 2.0 ± 0.93 (range, 0 to 4). A greater total number of study biases was significantly with higher AAS scores (β = −8.0, P < 0.001) but not citation rate (P = 0.10). The AAS was a significant and positive predictor of citation rate (β = 0.43, P = 0.019). Conclusion: High methodologic quality and limited study bias markedly contribute to the AAS of RCTs in the total joint arthroplasty literature. The AAS may be used as a proxy measure of scientific quality for RCTs, although readers should still critically appraise these articles before making changes to clinical practice.

Portfolio analysis is a fundamental practice of organizational leadership and is a necessary precursor of strategic planning. Successful application requires a highly detailed model of research options. We have constructed a model, the first of its kind, that accurately characterizes these options for the biomedical literature. The model comprises over 18 million PubMed documents from 1996–2019. Document relatedness was measured using a hybrid citation analysis + text similarity approach. The resulting 606.6 million document-to-document links were used to create 28,743 document clusters and an associated visual map. Clusters are characterized using metadata (e.g., phrases, MeSH) and over 20 indicators (e.g., funding, patent activity). The map and cluster-level data are embedded in Tableau to provide an interactive model enabling in-depth exploration of a research portfolio. Two example usage cases are provided, one to identify specific research opportunities related to coronavirus, and the second to identify research strengths of a large cohort of African American and Native American researchers at the University of Michigan Medical School., Measurement(s) Biomedical Research • document relatedness Technology Type(s) digital curation • machine learning • Cluster Analysis • text similarity • citation analysis Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: 10.6084/m9.figshare.13010537

Since its inception in 2017, npj Digital Medicine has attracted a disproportionate number of manuscripts reporting on uses of artificial intelligence. This field has matured rapidly in the past several years. There was initial fascination with the algorithms themselves (machine learning, deep learning, convoluted neural networks) and the use of these algorithms to make predictions that often surpassed prevailing benchmarks. As the discipline has matured, individuals have called attention to aberrancies in the output of these algorithms. In particular, criticisms have been widely circulated that algorithmically developed models may have limited generalizability due to overfitting to the training data and may systematically perpetuate various forms of biases inherent in the training data, including race, gender, age, and health state or fitness level (Challen et al. BMJ Qual. Saf. 28:231–237, 2019; O’neil. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy, Broadway Book, 2016). Given our interest in publishing the highest quality papers and the growing volume of submissions using AI algorithms, we offer a list of criteria that authors should consider before submitting papers to npj Digital Medicine.

Background. We evaluated the benefits and risks of using the Abstrackr machine learning (ML) tool to semi-automate title-abstract screening, and explored whether Abstrackr’s predictions varied by review or study-level characteristics.Methods. For a convenient sample of 16 reviews for which adequate data were available to address our objectives (11 systematic reviews and 5 rapid reviews) we screened a 200-record training set in Abstrackr and downloaded the relevance (relevant or irrelevant) of the remaining records, as predicted by the tool. We retrospectively simulated the liberal-accelerated screening approach. We estimated the time savings and proportion missed compared with dual independent screening. For reviews with pairwise meta-analyses, we evaluated changes to the pooled effects after removing the missed studies. We explored whether the tool’s predictions varied by review and study-level. Results. Using the ML-assisted liberal-accelerated approach, we wrongly excluded 0 to 3 (0 to 14%) records that were included in the final reports, but saved a median (IQR) 26 (9, 42) hours of screening time. One missed study was included in eight pairwise meta-analyses in one systematic review. The pooled effect for just one of those meta-analyses changed considerably (from MD (95% CI) -1.53 (-2.92, -0.15) to -1.17 (-2.70, 0.36)). Of 802 records in the final reports, 87% were correctly predicted as relevant. The correctness of the predictions did not differ by review (systematic or rapid, P=0.37) or intervention type (simple or complex, P=0.47). The predictions were more often correct in reviews with multiple (89%) vs. single (83%) research questions (P=0.01), or that included only trials (95%) vs. multiple designs (86%) (P=0.003). At the study level, trials (91%), mixed methods (100%), and qualitative (93%) studies were more often correctly predicted as relevant compared with observational studies (79%) or reviews (83%) (P=0.0006). Studies at high or unclear (88%) vs. low risk of bias (80%) (P=0.039), and those published more recently (mean (SD) 2008 (7) vs. 2006 (10), P=0.02) were more often correctly predicted as relevant. Conclusion. Our screening approach saved time and may be suitable in conditions where the limited risk of missing relevant records is acceptable. As several of our findings are paradoxical, and require further study to fully understand the tasks to which ML-assisted screening is best suited.

Objective: To determine chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE)-related publication characteristics associated with higher Altmetric scores.Methods: A systematic review of the CTE literature was con...

Publisher's version (útgefin grein), Last years, more than 46 unique biosimilars were approved by EMA and/or US-FDA following patent expiration of reference products. Biosimilars are not identical like generics, but highly similar versions where demonstrating biosimilarity of quality attributes (QAs) to a reference product is the basis of development and regulatory approval. Information on QAs assessed to establish biosimilarity may not always be publicly available, although this information is imperative to understand better the science behind biosimilars approval. This study aims to identify QA types reported in publications presenting biosimilarity assessments of (intended) biosimilars over time. English full-text publications presenting biosimilarity assessments of QAs for (intended) biosimilars between 2000 and 2019 identified from PubMed and EMBASE. Publication characteristics and QAs classified into: structural (physicochemical properties, primary structure, higher-order structures (HOSs), post-translational modifications (PTMs), and purity and impurities) and functional (biological and immunochemical activities) were extracted from publications. Seventy-nine publications were identified (79% open-access, 75% industry-sponsored, 62% including unapproved biosimilars, and 66% involving antibodies). Reporting frequencies varied for QA types: biological activity (94%), physicochemical properties (81%), PTMs (79%), primary structure (77%) purity and impurities (73%), HOSs (58%), and immunochemical activity (41%). The number of publications increased from 6 (7%) during 2009–2011 to 62 (79%) during 2015–2019. Eighteen (28%) publications reported all QA types relevant to an active-biological-substance. Reporting of most QA types increased over time that most evidenced by immunochemical activity (from 0% to 47%) which occured after EMA monoclonal antibody (mAbs) guidline in 2012 and more publications on mAbs later on when compared to earlier period. Biosimilarity assessments of QAs have been published in peer-reviewed publications for about 60% of approved biosimilars. Publishing biosimilarity assessments and reporting QAs over time appears to be affected by regulatory actions that occurred in 2012-2015, including regulatory approval and development of regulatory guidelines for biosimilars. Availability of a complete, publicly accessible and unbiased biosimilarity assessment of QAs, as part of a trusted and transparent regulatory process, will contribute to increased confidence and acceptance of biosimilars in clinical practice., This study was funded by the Saudi Food and Drug Authority(SFDA) through the Saudi Arabian cultural mission (SACM), the Hague,Netherlands as a part of a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) project for AMA.The SFDA has no role in any aspect of the study, including the pre-paration, review, the approval of the manuscript, nor the decision topublish the manuscript.

INTRODUCTION: Completing a medical thesis (MT) is regarded as a complementary component of residency training in Turkey. We believe, announcing these precious scientific records in worldwide accepted scientific journals is the most reliable way to promote their accessibility. In the presented research, our aim is to examine the publication statistics and the scientific quality of the MT written in the field of Anesthesiology and Reanimation (A&R). METHODS: We collected the data about MTs from the web-site of the National Thesis data center of the Academic Educational Board in Turkey, and scanned the author name, title, and keywords of the MTs in the search engines of PubMed, Google Scholar, and Turkish Academic Network and Information Center Turkish Database. RESULTS: Between the years 1975-2019, three thousand three hundred and fifty-two MTs were published, and we accessed to full texts of 1207 (36%) MTs. The publication rate was 11.3% (n=137), and 76 (55.4%) of these theses were published in a journal indexed in SCI/SCIE databases. MTs focusing on peripheral blocks, algology, and the subjects related to the problems in outpatient clinics had higher publication rates (p=0.003; p=0.022; p=0.014, respectively). According to Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation System only 21 MTs were in Level III (15.3%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: MTs in the field of A&R have low publication rates. The foremost cause of the problem is that most MTs have low scientific evidence levels.

Wind tunnels have been widely employed in aerodynamic research. To characterize the high impact research, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on highly cited articles related to wind tunnel based on the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) database from 1900 to 2014. Articles with at least 100 citations from the Web of Science Core Collection were selected and analyzed in terms of publication years, authors, institutions, countries/territories, journals, Web of Science categories, and citation life cycles. The results show that a total of 77 highly cited articles in 37 journals were published between 1959 and 2008. Journal of Fluid Mechanics published the most of highly cited articles. The USA was the most productive country and most frequent partner of internationally collaboration. The prolific institutions were mainly located in the USA and UK. The authors who were both first author and corresponding author published 88% of the articles. The Y index was also deployed to evaluate the publication characteristics of authors. Moreover, the articles with high citations in both history and the latest year with their citation life cycles were examined to provide insights for high impact research. The highly cited articles were almost earliest wind tunnel experimental data and reports on their own research specialty, and thus attracted high citations. It was revealed that classic works of wind tunnel research was frequently occurred in 1990s but much less in 2000s, probably due to the development of numerical models of computational fluid dynamic (CFD) in recent decades.

Purpose To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) from 2011 through 2014 and to compare the level of evidence (LoE) between published and unpublished studies. Methods A comprehensive search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar for all abstracts given as podium presentations at the 2011 through 2014 AANA Annual Meetings. A publication rate was calculated from all presented abstracts. Each abstract was reviewed to determine the study's LoE (I-V or nonclinical). Among published studies, the average time from presentation to publication was calculated. The journals in which these studies were published were also noted. Results A total of 290 abstracts were given as podium presentations at AANA Annual Meetings from 2011 through 2014. Of the 290 studies presented, 195 (195/290, 67%) were published in peer-reviewed journals. Of the 195 published studies, 184 (184/195, 94%) were published within 3 years of the meeting date. Studies were most frequently published in Arthroscopy (n = 59) and the American Journal of Sports Medicine (n = 48). The average time from presentation to publication was 12.2 months. Overall, there was no significant difference between published and unpublished studies in terms of LoE ( P = .24). Conclusions In recent years, studies presented at AANA Annual Meetings have achieved a high publication rate (67%). Based on other studies, this publication rate is comparable to recent American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) Annual Meetings and is higher than that of AANA Annual Meetings from previous years. The level of evidence of presented studies does not necessarily correlate with eventual publication. Clinical Relevance The publication rate and level of evidence of podium presentations at AANA demonstrate the scientific impact the annual meeting has for peers pursuing orthopaedic research.