A survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2007.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mulholland RC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2365553 | biostudies-other | 2008 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10410472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Since 2010, the European Journal of Anaesthesiology has required the reporting of five items concerning ethical approval in articles describing human research: ethics committee's name and address, chairperson's name, study's protocol number and approval date. We aimed to assess whether this requirement has helped to identify and to contact the referenced ethics committees. METHODS:In this cross-sectional study, we analysed articles requiring ethical approval, according to the Swiss federal law for human research and published in the European Journal of Anaesthesiology in 2011. Ethics committees were searched through our institutional Internet access based on information provided in the articles. The last search was performed in November 2015. Numbers (%) of items reported, of ethics committees identified, and of those that confirmed having provided ethical approval are reported. RESULTS:Of 76 articles requiring ethical approval, 74 (97%) declared it. Ethics committees' names and addresses were mentioned in 63/74 (85%), protocol numbers in 51/74 (69%), approval dates in 48/74 (65%), and chairpersons' names in 45/74 (61%). We could identify 44/74 (59%) committees; 36/74 (49%) answered our inquiry and 24/74 (32%) confirmed their role. Thirty-four of 74 articles (46%) reported all five items; in 25/34 (74%), we were able to identify an ethics committee, 18/34 (53%) answered our inquiry, and 15/34 (44%) confirmed their role. Forty of 74 articles (54%) reported ?4 items; in 19/40 (48%), we were able to identify an ethics committee, 18/40 (45%) answered our inquiry, and 9/40 (23%) confirmed their role. Reporting five items significantly increased identification of ethics committees (p?=?0.023) and their confirmation of ethical approval (p?=?0.048). Twelve of 74 ethics committees (16%) were unable to confirm their role in approving the study. CONCLUSIONS:Even when details concerning ethical approval were reported in these studies of human research, we were unable to identify almost half of the ethics committees concerned. The reporting of five items, compared with reporting ?4, was associated with facilitated identification of ethics committees, and increased the likelihood that they would be able to confirm the study's approval. Future research should identify which information facilitates identification of, and contact with, ethics committees.
| S-EPMC5994111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Enthusiasm for using Twitter as a source of data in the social sciences extends to measuring the impact of research with Twitter data being a key component in the new altmetrics approach. In this paper, we examine tweets containing links to research articles in the field of dentistry to assess the extent to which tweeting about scientific papers signifies engagement with, attention to, or consumption of scientific literature. The main goal is to better comprehend the role Twitter plays in scholarly communication and the potential value of tweet counts as traces of broader engagement with scientific literature. In particular, the pattern of tweeting to the top ten most tweeted scientific dental articles and of tweeting by accounts is examined. The ideal that tweeting about scholarly articles represents curating and informing about state-of-the-art appears not to be realized in practice. We see much presumably human tweeting almost entirely mechanical and devoid of original thought, no evidence of conversation, tweets generated by monomania, duplicate tweeting from many accounts under centralized professional management and tweets generated by bots. Some accounts exemplify the ideal, but they represent less than 10% of tweets. Therefore, any conclusions drawn from twitter data is swamped by the mechanical nature of the bulk of tweeting behavior. In light of these results, we discuss the compatibility of Twitter with the research enterprise as well as some of the financial incentives behind these patterns.
| S-EPMC5570264 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveResearch on publication trends in journal articles on sleep disorders (SDs) and the associated methodologies by using text mining has been limited. The present study involved text mining for terms to determine the publication trends in sleep-related journal articles published during 2000-2013 and to identify associations between SD and methodology terms as well as conducting statistical analyses of the text mining findings.MethodsSD and methodology terms were extracted from 3,720 sleep-related journal articles in the PubMed database by using MetaMap. The extracted data set was analyzed using hierarchical cluster analyses and adjusted logistic regression models to investigate publication trends and associations between SD and methodology terms.ResultsMetaMap had a text mining precision, recall, and false positive rate of 0.70, 0.77, and 11.51%, respectively. The most common SD term was breathing-related sleep disorder, whereas narcolepsy was the least common. Cluster analyses showed similar methodology clusters for each SD term, except narcolepsy. The logistic regression models showed an increasing prevalence of insomnia, parasomnia, and other sleep disorders but a decreasing prevalence of breathing-related sleep disorder during 2000-2013. Different SD terms were positively associated with different methodology terms regarding research design terms, measure terms, and analysis terms.ConclusionInsomnia-, parasomnia-, and other sleep disorder-related articles showed an increasing publication trend, whereas those related to breathing-related sleep disorder showed a decreasing trend. Furthermore, experimental studies more commonly focused on hypersomnia and other SDs and less commonly on insomnia, breathing-related sleep disorder, narcolepsy, and parasomnia. Thus, text mining may facilitate the exploration of the publication trends in SDs and the associated methodologies.
| S-EPMC4874549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This data article presents a corpus (i.e. a selection of a big number of words in an electronic form) and a concordancer (i.e. a tool to show the word in its context of use) of academic journal articles. As the title suggests, the data were collected from research articles published in academic journals. The corpus contains 5,686,428 words selected from 895 journal articles published by Elsevier in 2011-2015. The corpus is classified into four subject areas: Health sciences, Life sciences, Physical Sciences, and Social Sciences, following the classifications of Scopus, which is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed scientific journals, books and conference proceedings. To ease the access and utilization of the corpus, a program to produce the key word in context (KWIC) and word frequency was created and placed on the website: corpus.kwary.net. The corpus is a valuable resource for researchers, teachers, and translators working on academic English.
| S-EPMC5694964 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceWomen are less likely to be promoted and hold leadership positions in academic medicine. How often academic articles are cited is a key measure of scholarly impact and frequently assessed for professional advancement; however, it is unknown whether peer-reviewed articles written by men and women are cited differently.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether academic articles from high-impact medical journals written by men and women are cited differently.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cross-sectional study of all original research and commentary articles from 5 high-impact medical journals (Annals of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, JAMA, JAMA Internal Medicine, and The New England Journal of Medicine) from 2015 to 2018, the gender of the primary and senior authors of each article were identified using an online database, and the number of times each article has been cited was identified using Web of Science. The number of citations by primary and senior author gender were then compared. Data were analyzed from July 2020 to April 2021.ExposuresPrimary and senior authors' genders.Main outcomes and measuresNumber of citations per article.ResultsAmong 5554 articles, women wrote 1975 (35.6%) as primary author and 1273 of 4940 (25.8%) as senior author. Original research articles written by women as primary authors had fewer median (interquartile range) citations than articles written by men as primary authors (36 [17-82] citations vs 54 [22-141] citations; P < .001) and senior authors (37 [17-93] citations vs 51 [20-128] citations; P < .001). Articles written by women as both primary and senior authors had approximately half as many median (interquartile range) citations as those authored by men as both primary and senior authors (33 [15-68] citations vs 59 [23-149] citations; P < .001). Differences in citations remained in each year of the study and were less pronounced among commentary articles.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, articles written by women in high-impact medical journals had fewer citations than those written by men, particularly when women wrote together as primary and senior authors. These differences may have important consequences for the professional success of women and achieving gender equity in academic medicine.
| S-EPMC8254129 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This article describes a systematic analysis of the relationship between empirical data and theoretical conclusions for a set of experimental psychology articles published in the journal Science between 2005-2012. When the success rate of a set of empirical studies is much higher than would be expected relative to the experiments' reported effects and sample sizes, it suggests that null findings have been suppressed, that the experiments or analyses were inappropriate, or that the theory does not properly follow from the data. The analyses herein indicate such excess success for 83% (15 out of 18) of the articles in Science that report four or more studies and contain sufficient information for the analysis. This result suggests a systematic pattern of excess success among psychology articles in the journal Science.
| S-EPMC4256411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigated current trends in spine publications of the membership of Orthopaedic Research Society Spine Section (ORS3) and the more global and clinically focused International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (ISSLS). The PubMed database was probed to quantify trends in the overall number of articles published, the number of journals these articles were published in, and the number of active scientists producing new manuscripts. We also evaluated trends in flagship spine journals (Spine, European Spine Journal, and The Spine Journal) and in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research. The total number of active ORS3 and ISSLS authors and articles published have increased over the last 10 years. These articles are being published in hundreds of distinct journals; the number of journals is also increasing. Members of both societies published their work in Spine more than any other journal. Yet, publications in Spine decreased over the last 5 years for both ORS3 and ISSLS members, while those in European Spine Journal, and The Spine Journal remained unchanged. Furthermore, members of both societies have published in Journal of Orthopaedic Research at a consistent level. The increasing number of manuscripts and journals reflects a characteristic intrinsic to science as a whole-the global scientific workforce and output are growing and new journals are being created to accommodate the demand. These data suggest that existing spine journals do not fully serve the diverse publication needs of ORS3 and ISSLS members and highlight an unmet need for consolidating the premiere basic and translational spine research in an open access spine-specific journal. This analysis was an important part of a decision process by the ORS to introduce JOR Spine.
| S-EPMC5944392 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To practice evidence-based medicine, physicians should have a solid understanding of fundamental epidemiological and biostatistical concepts. Research suggests that only a minority of physicians have such an understanding of biostatistics.To collect pilot data on a novel biostatistical educational tool, a hyperlink-embedded journal article, which is aimed at improving knowledge in biostatistics.Forty-four physicians-in-training participated in this pilot study. Participants completed a pretest consisting of 5 questions about biostatistical terms that would be encountered in the article. They were randomized to either an unmodified journal article or to the same article with hyperlinked biostatistical terms. All participants then completed a posttest that was identical to the pretest.Having access to hyperlinked information had a positive association with the number of improved test answers (P = .05). Use of hyperlinks varied, and were seemingly dependent on user comfort with terms; well-understood definitions ("average") were clicked on a few times (5.5% of participants), whereas more obscure method terms ("Lexis diagram") were clicked on by 94% of participants. While only 42% of participants stated they would have looked up definitions of the biostatistical terms if they had not been provided in the hyperlinked article, 94% of participants identified the hyperlink tool as something they would use if readily available to them when reading journal articles.Results of this pilot study of a novel educational intervention suggest that embedded hyperlinks within journal articles may be a useful tool to teach biostatistical terms to physicians.
| S-EPMC4675424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary scientific literature can be difficult to navigate for anyone unfamiliar with its foreign, formal structure. We sought to create a fun, easy learning tool to help familiarize students of all ages with the structure of a scientific article. Our main learning objective was for the student to realize that science writing is formulaic-that specific information is found in predictable locations within an article-and that, with an understanding of the formula, anyone can comfortably navigate any journal article and accurately predict what to expect to find in each section. To this end, we designed a Journal Article Scavenger Hunt that requires the user to find and identify a series of commonplace features of a primary research article. The scavenger hunt activity is quick and easy to implement, and is adaptable to various ages and settings, including the classroom, lab, and at outreach events. The questions in the scavenger hunt can be scaled in difficulty and specificity to suit the instructor's needs. Over many years of using this activity, we have received positive feedback from students of all ages, from elementary school students to lay adult-learners as well as science teachers themselves. By making the unknown seem predictable and approachable, the scavenger hunt helps a variety of audiences feel more comfortable with science and more confident in their ability to engage directly with the scientific literature. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education.
| S-EPMC4798794 | biostudies-literature