Interesting statistics regarding the papers published in Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions in 2017.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hur Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5801431 | biostudies-literature | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Interesting statistics regarding the papers published in Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions in 2017.
Journal of educational evaluation for health professions 20171229
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5286216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to suggest a more suitable study design and the corresponding reporting guidelines in the papers published in the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professionals from January 2021 to September 2022.MethodsAmong 59 papers published in the Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professionals from January 2021 to September 2022, research articles, review articles, and brief reports were selected. The followings were analyzed: first, the percentage of articles describing the study design in the title, abstracts, or methods; second, the portion of articles describing reporting guidelines; third, the
| S-EPMC9889887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the consistency of causal statements in observational studies published in The BMJ.DesignReview of observational studies published in a general medical journal.Data sourceCohort and other longitudinal studies describing an exposure-outcome relationship published in The BMJ in 2018. We also had access to the submitted papers and reviewer reports.Main outcome measuresProportion of published research papers with 'inconsistent' use of causal language. Papers where language was consistently causal or non-causal were classified as 'consistently causal' or 'consistently not causal', respectively. For the 'inconsistent' papers, we then compared the published and submitted version.ResultsOf 151 published research papers, 60 described eligible studies. Of these 60, we classified the causal language used as 'consistently causal' (48%), 'inconsistent' (20%) and 'consistently not causal'(32%). Eleven out of 12 (92%) of the 'inconsistent' papers were already inconsistent on submission. The inconsistencies found in both submitted and published versions were mainly due to mismatches between objectives and conclusions. One section might be carefully phrased in terms of association while the other presented causal language. When identifying only an association, some authors jumped to recommending acting on the findings as if motivated by the evidence presented.ConclusionFurther guidance is necessary for authors on what constitutes a causal statement and how to justify or discuss assumptions involved. Based on screening these papers, we provide a list of expressions beyond the obvious 'cause' word which may inspire a useful more comprehensive compendium on causal language.
| S-EPMC8141434 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5801429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs production of rapid reviews (RRs) increases in healthcare, knowing how to efficiently convey RR evidence to various end-users is important given they are often intended to directly inform decision-making. Little is known about how often RRs are produced in the published or unpublished domains, and what and how information is structured.ObjectivesTo compare and contrast report format and content features of journal-published (JP) and non-journal published (NJP) RRs.MethodsJP RRs were identified from key databases, and NJP RRs were identified from a grey literature search of 148 RR producing organizations and were sampled proportionate to cluster size by organization and product type to match the JP RR group. We extracted and formally compared 'how' (i.e., visual arrangement) and 'what' information was presented.ResultsWe identified 103 RRs (52 JP and 51 NJP) from 2016. A higher percentage of certain features were observed in JP RRs compared to NJP RRs (e.g., reporting authors; use of a traditional journal article structure; section headers including abstract, methods, discussion, conclusions, acknowledgments, conflict of interests, and author contributions; and use of figures (e.g., Study Flow Diagram) in the main document). For NJP RRs, a higher percentage of features were observed (e.g., use non-traditional report structures; bannering of executive summary sections and appendices; use of typographic cues; and including outcome tables). NJP RRs were more than double in length versus JP RRs. Including key messages was uncommon in both groups.ConclusionsThis comparative study highlights differences between JP and NJP RRs. Both groups may benefit from better use of plain language, and more clear and concise design. Alternative innovative formats and end-user preferences for content and layout should be studied further with thought given to other considerations to ensure better packaging of RR results to facilitate uptake into policy and practice.Study registrationThe full protocol is available at: https://osf.io/29xvk/.
| S-EPMC7449464 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNumerous studies have explored the most productive and influential authors in a specific field. However, 2 challenges arise when conducting such research. First, some authors may have identical names in the study data, and second, the contributions of coauthors may vary in the article by line, requiring consideration. Failure to address these issues may result in biased research findings. Our objective was to illustrate how the author-weighted scheme (AWS) and betweenness centrality (BC) can be employed to identify the 10 most frequently cited authors in a particular journal and analyze their research themes.MethodsWe collected 24,058 abstracts from the PubMed library between 2000 and 2020 using the keyword "Medicine [Journal]." Author names, countries/regions, and medical subject headings (MeSH terms) were collected. The AWS to identify the top 10 authors with a higher x-index was applied. To address the issue of authors with identical names affiliated with different research institutes, we utilized the BC method. Social network analysis (SNA) was conducted, and 10 major clusters were identified to highlight authors with a higher x-index within the corresponding clusters. We utilized SNA to analyze the MeSH terms from articles of the 10 top-cited authors to identify their research themes.ResultsOur findings revealed the following: within the top 10 cited authors, 2 authors from China shared identical names with Jing Li and Tao-Wang; JA Winkelstein from Maryland (US) had the highest x-index (15.58); Chia-Hung Kao from Taiwan was the most prolific author, having published 115 articles in Medicine since 2003; and the 3 primary research themes, namely, complications, etiology, and epidemiology, were identified using MeSH terms from the 10 most frequently cited authors.ConclusionsUsing AWS and BC, we identified the top 10 most cited authors. The research methods we utilized in this study (BC and AWS) have the potential to be applied to other bibliometric analyses in the future.
| S-EPMC10289667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A crossmapping technique is introduced for visualizing multiple and overlapping relations among entity types in collections of journal articles. Groups of entities from two entity types are crossplotted to show correspondence of relations. For example, author collaboration groups are plotted on the x axis against groups of papers (research fronts) on the y axis. At the intersection of each pair of author group/research front pairs a circular symbol is plotted whose size is proportional to the number of times that authors in the group appear as authors in papers in the research front. Entity groups are found by agglomerative hierarchical clustering using conventional similarity measures. Crossmaps comprise a simple technique that is particularly suited to showing overlap in relations among entity groups. Particularly useful crossmaps are: research fronts against base reference clusters, research fronts against author collaboration groups, and research fronts against term co-occurrence clusters. When exploring the knowledge domain of a collection of journal papers, it is useful to have several crossmaps of different entity pairs, complemented by research front timelines and base reference cluster timelines.
| S-EPMC387310 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the completeness of the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in a general radiology journal using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.Materials and methodsTwenty-four articles (systematic review and meta-analysis, n = 18; systematic review only, n = 6) published between August 2009 and September 2021 in the Korean Journal of Radiology were analyzed. Completeness of the reporting of main texts and abstracts were evaluated using the PRISMA 2020 statement. For each item in the statement, the proportion of studies that met the guidelines' recommendation was calculated and items that were satisfied by fewer than 80% of the studies were identified. The review process was conducted by two independent reviewers.ResultsOf the 42 items (including sub-items) in the PRISMA 2020 statement for main text, 24 were satisfied by fewer than 80% of the included articles. The 24 items were grouped into eight domains: 1) assessment of the eligibility of potential articles, 2) assessment of the risk of bias, 3) synthesis of results, 4) additional analysis of study heterogeneity, 5) assessment of non-reporting bias, 6) assessment of the certainty of evidence, 7) provision of limitations of the study, and 8) additional information, such as protocol registration. Of the 12 items in the abstract checklists, eight were incorporated in fewer than 80% of the included publications.ConclusionSeveral items included in the PRISMA 2020 checklist were overlooked in systematic review and meta-analysis articles published in the Korean Journal of Radiology. Based on these results, we suggest a double-check list for improving the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors and reviewers should familiarize themselves with the PRISMA 2020 statement and check whether the recommended items are fully satisfied prior to publication.
| S-EPMC8876652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Given an observed test statistic and its degrees of freedom, one may compute the observed P value with most statistical packages. It is unknown to what extent test statistics and P values are congruent in published medical papers. METHODS: We checked the congruence of statistical results reported in all the papers of volumes 409-412 of Nature (2001) and a random sample of 63 results from volumes 322-323 of BMJ (2001). We also tested whether the frequencies of the last digit of a sample of 610 test statistics deviated from a uniform distribution (i.e., equally probable digits). RESULTS: 11.6% (21 of 181) and 11.1% (7 of 63) of the statistical results published in Nature and BMJ respectively during 2001 were incongruent, probably mostly due to rounding, transcription, or type-setting errors. At least one such error appeared in 38% and 25% of the papers of Nature and BMJ, respectively. In 12% of the cases, the significance level might change one or more orders of magnitude. The frequencies of the last digit of statistics deviated from the uniform distribution and suggested digit preference in rounding and reporting. CONCLUSIONS: This incongruence of test statistics and P values is another example that statistical practice is generally poor, even in the most renowned scientific journals, and that quality of papers should be more controlled and valued.
| S-EPMC443510 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe piloted an educational intervention that aimed to enhance awareness about nutrition-age-related macular degeneration (AMD) links among practising and student dietitians then expanded the scope of this intervention to include general eye health, which was delivered to pharmacy students.MethodsA pilot intervention was conducted in 2019 at the Dietitians Australia Conference (Gold Coast, Australia) where practising and student dietitians underwent a 2-hour small group educational workshop on nutrition and AMD links. Pre-post questionnaires were administered to participants, with voluntary completion of both questionnaires an indicator of consent to participate in the intervention. The primary intervention outcome was a change in AMD-related nutrition knowledge pre-post intervention. A larger intervention was then conducted at the University of Sydney (Sydney, Australia) where pharmacy students underwent a 4-hour educational module to improve general eye health knowledge, as well as student perceptions and attitudes towards a pharmacists' role in low vision care. Similarly, pre-post questionnaires were administered, with voluntary completion of both questionnaires an indicator of consent to participate in the intervention. The primary intervention outcomes were changes in total knowledge, total perception and total attitude scores pre-post intervention.Results(1) Among 10 accredited and 5 student dietitians, there was significant overall knowledge improvement (mean pre-post score: 7.07 ± 1.94 vs. 10.8 ± 1.01, p = 0.001) specifically around appropriate dietary advice, food sources of key AMD-related nutrients, and awareness of supplements. (2) Among 179 second-year pharmacy students enrolled in the 'Pharmacy Practice' Unit of Study (Bachelor of Pharmacy, University of Sydney), total eye health knowledge (6.25 ± 1.93 vs. 6.64 ± 2.0; p = 0.011) significantly improved, along with total perception scores (41.54 ± 5.26 vs. 42.45 ± 4.95; p = 0.004). Total attitude scores were not significantly different.ConclusionsThe pilot intervention improved relevant nutrition-AMD knowledge among practising/student dietitians. The modified intervention for pharmacy students also significantly improved general eye health knowledge as well as students' perception of a pharmacists' role in low vision care.
| S-EPMC8424804 | biostudies-literature