scholarly journals Non-efficacy benefits and non-inferiority margins: a scoping review of contemporary high-impact non-inferiority trials in clinical cardiology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarten J. G. Leening ◽  
Karim D. Mahmoud
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Clinical Cardiology

scholarly journals Compilation and Analysis of Web-Based Orthopedic Personalized Predictive Tools: A Scoping Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 223
Author(s):  
Patrick Curtin ◽  
Alexandra Conway ◽  
Liu Martin ◽  
Eugenia Lin ◽  
Prakash Jayakumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Orthopedic Surgery ◽  
Surgical Planning ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Predictive Tools ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeons ◽  
Expectation Management

Web-based personalized predictive tools in orthopedic surgery are becoming more widely available. Despite rising numbers of these tools, many orthopedic surgeons may not know what tools are available, how these tools were developed, and how they can be utilized. The aim of this scoping review is to compile and synthesize the profile of existing web-based orthopedic tools. We conducted two separate PubMed searches—one a broad search and the second a more targeted one involving high impact journals—with the aim of comprehensively identifying all existing tools. These articles were then screened for functional tool URLs, methods regarding the tool’s creation, and general inputs and outputs required for the tool to function. We identified 57 articles, which yielded 31 unique web-based tools. These tools involved various orthopedic conditions (e.g., fractures, osteoarthritis, musculoskeletal neoplasias); interventions (e.g., fracture fixation, total joint arthroplasty); outcomes (e.g., mortality, clinical outcomes). This scoping review highlights the availability and utility of a vast array of web-based personalized predictive tools for orthopedic surgeons. Increased awareness and access to these tools may allow for better decision support, surgical planning, post-operative expectation management, and improved shared decision-making.

scholarly journals Is Irritable Bowel Syndrome Considered in Clinical Trials on Physical Therapy Applied to Patients with Temporo-Mandibular Disorders? A Scoping Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (22) ◽  
pp. 8533
Author(s):  
Daiana P. Rodrigues-de-Souza ◽  
Javier Paz-Vega ◽  
César Fernández-de-las-Peñas ◽  
Joshua A. Cleland ◽  
Francisco Alburquerque-Sendín
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Irritable Bowel Syndrome ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Journal Citation Report ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Irritable Bowel ◽  
Journal Citation

The aim of the current scoping review was to identify if the presence of irritable bowel syndrome was included as eligibility criteria of participants included in clinical trials investigating the effects of physical therapy in individuals with temporomandibular pain disorders (TMDs). A systematic electronic literature search in the Web of Science database was conducted. Scientifically relevant, randomized clinical trials (those cited in other studies at least 5 times, or clinical trials published in high-impact journals, i.e., first and second quartiles (Q1-Q2) of any category of the Journal Citation Report (JCR)) evaluating the effects of any physical therapy intervention in patients with TMDs were included. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the selected trials. Authors affiliated to a clinical or non-clinical institution, total number of citations, objective, sex/gender, age, and eligibility criteria in each article were extracted and analyzed independently by two authors. From a total of 98 identified articles, 12 and 19 clinical trials were included according to the journal citation criterion or JCR criterion, respectively. After removing duplicates, a total of 23 trials were included. The PEDro score ranged from 4 to 8 (mean: 6.26, SD: 1.48). Based on the eligibility criteria of the trials systematically reviewed, none considered the presence of comorbid irritable bowel syndrome in patients with TMDs. The comorbidity between TMDs and irritable bowel syndrome is not considered within the eligibility criteria of participants in highly cited clinical trials, or published in a high-impact journal, investigating the effects of physical therapy in TMDs.

scholarly journals How frail is frail? A systematic scoping review and synthesis of high impact studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E. H. Gordon ◽  
N. Reid ◽  
I. S. Khetani ◽  
R. E. Hubbard
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Frailty Index ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Aged Care ◽  
Continuous Variable ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Residential Aged Care ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Impact Studies

Abstract Aims While the frailty index (FI) is a continuous variable, an FI score of 0.25 has construct and predictive validity to categorise community-dwelling older adults as frail or non-frail. Our study aimed to explore which FI categories (FI scores and labels) were being used in high impact studies of adults across different care settings and why these categories were being chosen by study authors. Methods For this systematic scoping review, Medline, Cochrane and EMBASE databases were searched for studies that measured and categorised an FI. Of 1314 articles screened, 303 met the eligibility criteria (community: N = 205; residential aged care: N = 24; acute care: N = 74). For each setting, the 10 studies with the highest field-weighted citation impact (FWCI) were identified and data, including FI scores and labels and justification provided, were extracted and analysed. Results FI scores used to distinguish frail and non-frail participants varied from 0.12 to 0.45 with 0.21 and 0.25 used most frequently. Additional categories such as mildly, moderately and severely frail were defined inconsistently. The rationale for selecting particular FI scores and labels were reported in most studies, but were not always relevant. Conclusions High impact studies vary in the way they categorise the FI and while there is some evidence in the community-dweller literature, FI categories have not been well validated in acute and residential aged care. For the time being, in those settings, the FI should be reported as a continuous variable wherever possible. It is important to continue working towards defining frailty categories as variability in FI categorisation impacts the ability to synthesise results and to translate findings into clinical practice.

Postmortem and in situ TEM methods to study the mechanism of failure in controlled-morphology high-impact polystrene resin

1996 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 178-179
Author(s):  
R. C. Cieslinski ◽  
M. T. Dineen ◽  
J. L. Hahnfeld
Keyword(s):  
Poisson Ratio ◽  
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene ◽  
High Impact ◽  
In Situ Tem ◽  
Styrene Copolymers ◽  
Controlled Morphology ◽  
Point Bend ◽  
Mechanism Of Failure ◽  
Impact Energies

Advanced Styrenic resins are being developed throughout the industry to bridge the properties gap between traditional HIPS (High Impact Polystyrene) and ABS (Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene copolymers) resins. These new resins have an unprecedented balance of high gloss and high impact energies. Dow Chemical's contribution to this area is based on a unique combination of rubber morphologies including labyrinth, onion skin, and core-shell rubber particles. This new resin, referred as a controlled morphology resin (CMR), was investigated to determine the toughening mechanism of this unique rubber morphology. This poster will summarize the initial studies of these resins using the double-notch four-point bend test of Su and Yee, tensile stage electron microscopy, and Poisson Ratio analysis of the fracture mechanism.

The Collaborative Network Approach: a model for advancing patient-centric research for Castleman disease and other rare diseases

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Mary Zuccato ◽  
Dustin Shilling ◽  
David C. Fajgenbaum
Keyword(s):  
Rare Diseases ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Castleman Disease ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Collaborative Network ◽  
Network Approach ◽  
Grant Applications ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Novel Strategy ◽  
Patient Centric

Abstract There are ∼7000 rare diseases affecting 30 000 000 individuals in the U.S.A. 95% of these rare diseases do not have a single Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy. Relatively, limited progress has been made to develop new or repurpose existing therapies for these disorders, in part because traditional funding models are not as effective when applied to rare diseases. Due to the suboptimal research infrastructure and treatment options for Castleman disease, the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network (CDCN), founded in 2012, spearheaded a novel strategy for advancing biomedical research, the ‘Collaborative Network Approach’. At its heart, the Collaborative Network Approach leverages and integrates the entire community of stakeholders — patients, physicians and researchers — to identify and prioritize high-impact research questions. It then recruits the most qualified researchers to conduct these studies. In parallel, patients are empowered to fight back by supporting research through fundraising and providing their biospecimens and clinical data. This approach democratizes research, allowing the entire community to identify the most clinically relevant and pressing questions; any idea can be translated into a study rather than limiting research to the ideas proposed by researchers in grant applications. Preliminary results from the CDCN and other organizations that have followed its Collaborative Network Approach suggest that this model is generalizable across rare diseases.

Pelvic Impairments

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
James Talmage ◽  
Jay Blaisdell
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Ring ◽  
Reproductive Organs ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Pelvic Fractures ◽  
Motor Dysfunction ◽  
Impact Event ◽  
Concomitant Injuries ◽  
Rating Process ◽  
Pass Through ◽  
A Minor

Abstract Pelvic fractures are relatively uncommon, and in workers’ compensation most pelvic fractures are the result of an acute, high-impact event such as a fall from a roof or an automobile collision. A person with osteoporosis may sustain a pelvic fracture from a lower-impact injury such as a minor fall. Further, major parts of the bladder, bowel, reproductive organs, nerves, and blood vessels pass through the pelvic ring, and traumatic pelvic fractures that result from a high-impact event often coincide with damaged organs, significant bleeding, and sensory and motor dysfunction. Following are the steps in the rating process: 1) assign the diagnosis and impairment class for the pelvis; 2) assign the functional history, physical examination, and clinical studies grade modifiers; and 3) apply the net adjustment formula. Because pelvic fractures are so uncommon, raters may be less familiar with the rating process for these types of injuries. The diagnosis-based methodology for rating pelvic fractures is consistent with the process used to rate other musculoskeletal impairments. Evaluators must base the rating on reliable data when the patient is at maximum medical impairment and must assess possible impairment from concomitant injuries.

Repräsentanz von Pflegewissenschaftlerinnen und Pflegewissenschaftlern aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum in Zeitschriften mit hohem Impact Factor

Pflege ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Hirt ◽  
Christian Buhtz ◽  
Benedikt Mersdorf ◽  
Gabriele Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Impact Factor ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Journal Citation

Zusammenfassung.Hintergrund: Die Häufigkeit pflegewissenschaftlicher Beiträge aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum in Zeitschriften mit hohem Impact Factor gibt Hinweise auf die Teilhabe der Disziplin am internationalen Diskurs. Bisherige Analysen beschränken sich auf pflegewissenschaftliche Zeitschriften. Diese konstatieren eine Unterrepräsentanz experimenteller Studien und klinischer Themen. Ziel: Identifikation und Analyse der Publikationen von im deutschsprachigen Raum ansässigen Pflegewissenschaftlerinnen/Pflegewissenschaftlern in internationalen pflegerelevanten High Impact Journals. Methode: Mittels Journal Citation Reports wurden pflegerelevante Zeitschriftenkategorien identifiziert, in denen die nach dem 5-Jahres-Impact-Factor höchsten 10 % der Zeitschriften der Jahre 2010 bis 2014 ausgewählt wurden. Der Einschluss der Publikationen und die Datenextraktion erfolgten durch zwei unabhängige Personen. Ergebnisse: Durchsucht wurden 106939 Publikationen aus 126 Zeitschriften. Eingeschlossen wurden 100 Publikationen, an denen 114 Pflegewissenschaftler/-innen aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum insgesamt 229 Mal beteiligt sind. Insgesamt 42 % sind Beobachtungsstudien, 11 % sind experimentelle Studien. Die berichteten Themen sind mehrheitlich klinisch orientiert (55 %). Über 50 % sind in den letzten zwei Jahren publiziert worden. Schlussfolgerungen: Das pflegewissenschaftliche Publikationsaufkommen aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum in High Impact Journals ist gering. Eine Zunahme über den Beobachtungszeitraum ist zu verzeichnen. Im Gegensatz zu früheren Analysen zeigt sich ein höherer Anteil klinischer Forschung.

A Cause for Chronic Maximizing: High Impact Expectations

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Kiesekoms ◽  
Maarten Elen ◽  
Mario Pandelaere ◽  
Maggie Geuens
Keyword(s):  
High Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document