Imaging Publications in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Applying New Research Results to Clinical Practice.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Eng J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7233392 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Imaging Publications in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Applying New Research Results to Clinical Practice.
Radiology 20200423 1
<i>Online supplemental material is available for this article.</i> ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Abstract Objectives Pharmacy practice journals are considered the main player in promoting pharmacy practice research and the pharmacy profession globally. The current study aimed to explore and analyze literature on the COVID-19 pandemic published in pharmacy practice journals. Methods COVID-19 research articles were extracted from 32 pharmacy practice journals indexed in Scopus for the study period from 01 January 2020, up until 31 December 2021 Key findings A total of 581 documents were found with an average of 4.5 authors per article and 4.8 citations per document. The retrieved documents were published in 28 pharmacy practice-related journals with the Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy and the American Journal of Health System Pharmacy journals being the leaders in this field. The major findings of the analysis indicated (1) a limited number of contributing countries with limited author-author interactions and cross country collaboration; (2) specific topics were encountered, mainly hospital pharmacy services, survey studies on knowledge, and pharmacy education; (3) several contributing countries in the Middle East, mainly Saudi Arabia; Egypt, and Jordan contributed to the retrieved documents, and (4) the highly-cited documents discussed issues related to pharmacy services and role of the community pharmacists during the pandemic. Conclusion Research activity on COVID-19 in pharmacy practice journals represents the commitment of researchers and professionals to transform and promote the profession of pharmacy. Research on pharmacy practice and pharmacists in low- and middle-income countries during pandemics needs to be prioritized by scholars and journal editors.
| S-EPMC9494489 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGender imbalances in academia have been evident historically and persist today. For the past 60 years, we have witnessed the increase of participation of women in biomedical disciplines, showing that the gender gap is shrinking. However, preliminary evidence suggests that women, including female researchers, are disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of unequal distribution of childcare, elderly care, and other kinds of domestic and emotional labor. Sudden lockdowns and abrupt shifts in daily routines have had disproportionate consequences on their productivity, which is reflected by a sudden drop in research output in biomedical research, consequently affecting the number of female authors of scientific publications.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a disproportionate adverse effect on the productivity of female researchers in the biomedical field in terms of authorship of scientific publications.MethodsThis is a retrospective observational bibliometric study. We investigated the proportion of male and female researchers who published scientific papers during the COVID-19 pandemic, using bibliometric data from biomedical preprint servers and selected Springer-Nature journals. We used the ordinary least squares regression model to estimate the expected proportions over time by correcting for temporal trends. We also used a set of statistical methods, such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and regression discontinuity design, to test the validity of the results.ResultsA total of 78,950 papers from the bioRxiv and medRxiv repositories and from 62 selected Springer-Nature journals by 346,354 unique authors were analyzed. The acquired data set consisted of papers that were published between January 1, 2019, and August 2, 2020. The proportion of female first authors publishing in the biomedical field during the pandemic dropped by 9.1%, on average, across disciplines (expected arithmetic mean yest=0.39; observed arithmetic mean y=0.35; standard error of the estimate, Sest=0.007; standard error of the observation, σx=0.004). The impact was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19 research, where the proportion of female scientists in the first author position dropped by 28% (yest=0.39; y=0.28; Sest=0.007; σx=0.007). When looking at the last authors, the proportion of women dropped by 7.9%, on average (yest=0.25; y=0.23; Sest=0.005; σx=0.003), while the proportion of women writing about COVID-19 as the last author decreased by 18.8% (yest=0.25; y=0.21; Sest=0.005; σx=0.007). Further, by geocoding authors' affiliations, we showed that the gender disparities became even more apparent when disaggregated by country, up to 35% in some cases.ConclusionsOur findings document a decrease in the number of publications by female authors in the biomedical field during the global pandemic. This effect was particularly pronounced for papers related to COVID-19, indicating that women are producing fewer publications related to COVID-19 research. This sudden increase in the gender gap was persistent across the 10 countries with the highest number of researchers. These results should be used to inform the scientific community of this worrying trend in COVID-19 research and the disproportionate effect that the pandemic has had on female academics.
| S-EPMC8043146 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Research publications related to the novel coronavirus disease COVID-19 are rapidly increasing. However, current online literature hubs, even with artificial intelligence, are limited in identifying the complexity of COVID-19 research topics. We developed a comprehensive Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) model with 25 topics using natural language processing (NLP) techniques on PubMed® research articles about "COVID." We propose a novel methodology to develop and visualise temporal trends, and improve existing online literature hubs. Our results for temporal evolution demonstrate interesting trends, for example, the prominence of "Mental Health" and "Socioeconomic Impact" increased, "Genome Sequence" decreased, and "Epidemiology" remained relatively constant. Applying our methodology to LitCovid, a literature hub from the National Center for Biotechnology Information, we improved the breadth and depth of research topics by subdividing their pre-existing categories. Our topic model demonstrates that research on "masks" and "Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)" is skewed toward clinical applications with a lack of population-based epidemiological research.
| S-EPMC8522017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this opinion paper, I argue that the Covid-19 pandemic, as tragic and disastrous as it undoubtedly is, has also given us a rare opportunity to deeply examine the research and practice of information management in particular and information systems in general. To cope with the pandemic, we have retreated to the digital world and drastically changed the way we work. Yet these very practices can well shape the way we work in the post-pandemic world. Moreover, the pandemic is also a sharp lens through which we can study deep-rooted theoretical issues that otherwise would not have surfaced, or at least remained in the background. My call to the research community is to seize this rare opportunity.
| S-EPMC7261442 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other
Project description:Across the globe, pharmacists on the frontline continue to fight COVID-19 and its continuously evolving physical, mental, and economic consequences armed by their knowledge, professionalism, and dedication. Their need for credible scientific evidence to inform their practice has never been more urgent. Despite the exponentially increasing number of publications since the start of the pandemic, questions remain unanswered, and more are created, than have been resolved by the increasing number of publications. A panel of leading journal editors was convened by the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) Pharmacy Practice Research Special Interest Group to discuss the current status of COVID-19 related research, provide their recommendations, and identify focal points for pharmacy practice, social pharmacy, and education research moving forward. Key priorities identified spanned a wide range of topics, reflecting the need for good quality research to inform practice and education. The panel insisted that a foundation in theory and use of rigorous methods should continue forming the basis of inquiry and its resultant papers, regardless of topic area. From assessing the clinical and cost effectiveness of COVID-19 therapies and vaccines to assessing different models of pharmaceutical services and education delivery, these priorities will ensure that our practice is informed by the best quality scientific evidence at this very challenging time.
| S-EPMC7448778 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7183952 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7326415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To understand and analyse the global impact of COVID-19 on outpatient services, inpatient care, elective surgery, and perioperative colorectal cancer care, a DElayed COloRectal cancer surgery (DECOR-19) survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous international colorectal societies with the objective of obtaining several learning points from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on our colorectal cancer patients which will assist us in the ongoing management of our colorectal cancer patients and to provide us safe oncological pathways for future outbreaks.
| 2346925 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has unleashed a deluge of publications. For this cross-sectional study we compared the amount and reporting characteristics of COVID-19-related academic articles and preprints and the number of ongoing clinical trials and systematic reviews. To do this, we searched the PubMed database of citations and abstracts for published life science journals by using appropriate combinations of medical subject headings (MeSH terms), and the COVID-19 section of the MedRxiv and BioRxiv archives up to 20 May 2020 (21 weeks). In addition, we searched Clinicaltrial.gov, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, EU Clinical Trials Register, and 15 other trial registers, as well as PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews. The characteristics of each publication were extracted. Regression analyses and Z tests were used to detect publication trends and their relative proportions. A total of 3635 academic publications and 3805 preprints were retrieved. Only 8.6% (n = 329) of the preprints were already published in indexed journals. The number of academic and preprint publications increased significantly over time (p<0.001). Case reports (6% academic vs 0.9% preprints; p<0.001) and letters (17.4% academic vs 0.5% preprints; p<0.001) accounted for a greater share of academic compared to preprint publications. Differently, randomized controlled trials (0.22% vs 0.63%; p<0.001) and systematic reviews (0.08% vs 5%) made up a greater share of the preprints. The relative proportion of clinical studies registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, and EU Clinical Trials Register was 57.9%, 49.5%, and 98.9%, respectively, most of which were still "recruiting". PROSPERO listed 962 systematic review protocols. Preprints were slightly more prevalent than academic articles but both were increasing in number. The void left by the lack of primary studies was filled by an outpour of immediate opinions (i.e., letters to the editor) published in PubMed-indexed journals. Summarizing, preprints have gained traction as a publishing response to the demand for prompt access to empirical, albeit not peer-reviewed, findings during the present pandemic.
| S-EPMC7537872 | biostudies-literature