Scientific publications in internal medicine and family medicine: a comparative cross-sectional study in Swiss university hospitals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Sebo ◽  
Sylvain de Lucia ◽  
Nathalie Vernaz
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
H Index ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Number Of Citations

Abstract Background Family medicine is a relatively new academic medical discipline. We aimed to compare the main bibliometric indices of hospital-based senior physicians practicing internal medicine versus family medicine in Switzerland. Methods We conducted this cross-sectional study in March 2020. We selected all hospital-based senior physicians practicing internal medicine or family medicine in the six Swiss university hospitals. Using Web of Science, after removing from both groups of physicians the 5% with the highest number of publications, we extracted the number of publications, the number of publications per year, the number of citations, the number of citations per year, the number of citations per publication and the h-index. We compared the data between the two groups using negative binomial regressions and the proportion of physicians having at least one publication using chi-square tests. Results We included 349 physicians in the study (internal medicine: 51%, men: 51%). The median number of publications was three [interquartile range (IQR) = 18], the median number of citations was nine (IQR = 158) and the median h-index was one (IQR = 5). All bibliometric indices were similar in both groups, as was the proportion of physicians having at least one publication (family medicine: 87% versus 82%, P = 0.15). Conclusions We found no association between the bibliometric indices and the medical specialty. Further studies are needed to explore other important indicators of academic output, such as those more specifically assessing its quality and scientific importance.

scholarly journals SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and asymptomatic viral carriage in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study

Thorax ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (12) ◽  
pp. 1089-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Shields ◽  
Sian E Faustini ◽  
Marisol Perez-Toledo ◽  
Sian Jossi ◽  
Erin Aldera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Internal ◽  
Increased Risk

ObjectiveTo determine the rates of asymptomatic viral carriage and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in healthcare workers.DesignA cross-sectional study of asymptomatic healthcare workers undertaken on 24/25 April 2020.SettingUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), UK.Participants545 asymptomatic healthcare workers were recruited while at work. Participants were invited to participate via the UHBFT social media. Exclusion criteria included current symptoms consistent with COVID-19. No potential participants were excluded.InterventionParticipants volunteered a nasopharyngeal swab and a venous blood sample that were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein antibodies, respectively. Results were interpreted in the context of prior illnesses and the hospital departments in which participants worked.Main outcome measureProportion of participants demonstrating infection and positive SARS-CoV-2 serology.ResultsThe point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 viral carriage was 2.4% (n=13/545). The overall seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 24.4% (n=126/516). Participants who reported prior symptomatic illness had higher seroprevalence (37.5% vs 17.1%, χ2=21.1034, p<0.0001) and quantitatively greater antibody responses than those who had remained asymptomatic. Seroprevalence was greatest among those working in housekeeping (34.5%), acute medicine (33.3%) and general internal medicine (30.3%), with lower rates observed in participants working in intensive care (14.8%). BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) ethnicity was associated with a significantly increased risk of seropositivity (OR: 1.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.23, p=0.01). Working on the intensive care unit was associated with a significantly lower risk of seropositivity compared with working in other areas of the hospital (OR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.78, p=0.02).Conclusions and relevanceWe identify differences in the occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 between hospital departments and confirm asymptomatic seroconversion occurs in healthcare workers. Further investigation of these observations is required to inform future infection control and occupational health practices.

scholarly journals Difference in the general medicine in-training examination score between community-based hospitals and university hospitals: a cross-sectional study based on 15,188 Japanese resident physicians

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuji Nishizaki ◽  
Keigo Nozawa ◽  
Tomohiro Shinozaki ◽  
Taro Shimizu ◽  
Tomoya Okubo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Examination ◽  
General Medicine ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Medical Interview ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Clinical Competencies ◽  
Clinical Procedures

Abstract Background The general medicine in-training examination (GM-ITE) is designed to objectively evaluate the postgraduate clinical competencies (PGY) 1 and 2 residents in Japan. Although the total GM-ITE scores tended to be lower in PGY-1 and PGY-2 residents in university hospitals than those in community-based hospitals, the most divergent areas of essential clinical competencies have not yet been revealed. Methods We conducted a nationwide, multicenter, cross-sectional study in Japan, using the GM-ITE to compare university and community-based hospitals in the four areas of basic clinical knowledge“. Specifically, “medical interview and professionalism,” “symptomatology and clinical reasoning,” “physical examination and clinical procedures,” and “disease knowledge” were assessed. Results We found no significant difference in “medical interview and professionalism” scores between the community-based and university hospital residents. However, significant differences were found in the remaining three areas. A 1.28-point difference (95% confidence interval: 0.96–1.59) in “physical examination and clinical procedures” in PGY-1 residents was found; this area alone accounts for approximately half of the difference in total score. Conclusions The standardization of junior residency programs and the general clinical education programs in Japan should be promoted and will improve the overall training that our residents receive. This is especially needed in categories where university hospitals have low scores, such as “physical examination and clinical procedures.”

scholarly journals Patients’ Perspectives about Lifestyle Behaviors and Health in the Context of Family Medicine: A Cross-Sectional Study in Portugal

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 2981
Author(s):  
Rosália Páscoa ◽  
Andreia Teixeira ◽  
Micaela Gregório ◽  
Rosa Carvalho ◽  
Carlos Martins
Keyword(s):  
Family Medicine ◽  
Family Doctor ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Lifestyle Behaviors ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Family

Lifestyle interventions are recognized as essential in the prevention and treatment of non-communicable diseases. Previous studies have shown that Portuguese patients tend to give more importance to diagnostic and laboratory tests than to lifestyle measures, and seem unaware that behavioral risks are the main modifiable risk factors. The study aimed to analyze patients’ perspectives about lifestyle behaviors and health in the context of family medicine in Portugal. A population-based cross-sectional study was carried out in Portugal (the mainland). A total of 900 Portuguese patients aged ≥20 years, representative of the population, were surveyed using face-to-face questionnaires. Participants were selected by the random route method. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests were performed to evaluate differences between the personal beliefs and the personal behavior self-assessment, as well as between the level of importance given to the family doctor to address health behaviors and the reported approach implemented by the family doctor, and its association with bio-demographic variables. The results indicate that the vast majority of this Portuguese cohort has informed beliefs regarding lifestyle behaviors, tends to overestimate their own behavior self-assessment, and strongly agrees that it is important that their family doctor asks/advises on these lifestyle behaviors, although the proportion of those who totally agree that their family doctor usually does this is significantly lower. Differences concerning bio-demographic variables were found. Future research directions should focus on the politics, economics, and policy aspects that may have an impact in this area. It will also be important to understand more broadly the relationships between lifestyle behaviors and clinical, physical, and sociodemographic variables.

scholarly journals Thinker, Soldier, Scribe: cross-sectional study of researchers' roles and author order in the Annals of Internal Medicine

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. e013898 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas V Perneger ◽  
Antoine Poncet ◽  
Marc Carpentier ◽  
Thomas Agoritsas ◽  
Christophe Combescure ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional

Increased frequency of fibromyalgia among patients with chronic pain presenting to internal medicine clinics of a tertiary care hospital: a cross sectional study

2022 ◽  
Vol 71 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sana Javed ◽  
Muhammad Zaid ◽  
Sumera Imran ◽  
Ayesha Hai ◽  
Muhammad Junaid Patel
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Chronic Fatigue ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
National Language ◽  
P Value ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Female Ratio

Objective: To estimate the frequency of patients with fibromyalgia (by using the 2010 Modified Criteria for Fibromyalgia by American College of Rheumatology ( ACR ) presenting to Internal Medicine clinics  Methods: A cross-sectional study conducted in the department of Internal Medicine, the Indus Hospital, khi, Pakistan between December 2016 and March 2018. Patients who visited internal medicine clinics, met the selection criteria, were included in the study. After taking informed consent patients were assessed for fibromyalgia according to the new 2010 Fibromyalgia Diagnostic criteria questionnaire. The patients were asked the questions in the national language, Urdu. Data analyzed using SPSS version 21. P value of < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Of the 267 patients presenting to the internal medicine clinics and consenting for participating in the study 149 (55.80%) met at least one of the 2010 Fibromyalgia Criteria. The prevalence of fibromyalgia as estimated in this study was 56% with no difference in gender. Mean age of patients with fibromyalgia was 42.3 ± 14.6 and patients without fibromyalgia was 38.9 ± 13.7 which was statistically significant (p-value = 0.05, 10% level of significance). Of the 267 patient 197 (73.8%) were female and 70 (26.2%) were males, a male to female ratio of 1:2.81.  Conclusion: All patients with generalized pain should be evaluated for fibromyalgia and a diagnosis made to reduce the cost of further referrals and investigations and delay in the management of this debilitating disorder. Keywords: Fibromyalgia, Chronic fatigue, Generalized Pain  

scholarly journals Assessment of transparent and reproducible research practices in the psychiatry literature

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. e100149
Author(s):  
Caroline Elizabeth Sherry ◽  
Jonathan Z Pollard ◽  
Daniel Tritz ◽  
Branden K Carr ◽  
Aaron Pierce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
The State ◽  
Reproducible Research ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Core ◽  
Scientific Advancement ◽  
Core Components ◽  
Number Of Publications

BackgroundReproducibility is a cornerstone of scientific advancement; however, many published works may lack the core components needed for study reproducibility.AimsIn this study, we evaluate the state of transparency and reproducibility in the field of psychiatry using specific indicators as proxies for these practices.MethodsAn increasing number of publications have investigated indicators of reproducibility, including research by Harwicke et al, from which we based the methodology for our observational, cross-sectional study. From a random 5-year sample of 300 publications in PubMed-indexed psychiatry journals, two researchers extracted data in a duplicate, blinded fashion using a piloted Google form. The publications were examined for indicators of reproducibility and transparency, which included availability of: materials, data, protocol, analysis script, open-access, conflict of interest, funding and online preregistration.ResultsThis study ultimately evaluated 296 randomly-selected publications with a 3.20 median impact factor. Only 107 were available online. Most primary authors originated from USA, UK and the Netherlands. The top three publication types were cohort studies, surveys and clinical trials. Regarding indicators of reproducibility, 17 publications gave access to necessary materials, four provided in-depth protocol and one contained raw data required to reproduce the outcomes. One publication offered its analysis script on request; four provided a protocol availability statement. Only 107 publications were publicly available: 13 were registered in online repositories and four, ten and eight publications included their hypothesis, methods and analysis, respectively. Conflict of interest was addressed by 177 and reported by 31 publications. Of 185 publications with a funding statement, 153 publications were funded and 32 were unfunded.ConclusionsCurrently, Psychiatry research has significant potential to improve adherence to reproducibility and transparency practices. Thus, this study presents a reference point for the state of reproducibility and transparency in Psychiatry literature. Future assessments are recommended to evaluate and encourage progress.

scholarly journals Gender gap in medical research: a bibliometric study in Swiss university hospitals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Sebo ◽  
Sylvain de Lucia ◽  
Nathalie Vernaz
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Gender Gap ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Bibliometric Study ◽  
Gender Inequalities ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Female Physicians ◽  
Number Of Citations

Abstract Several studies explored gender inequalities in research, but only limited data are available concerning general internal medicine and family medicine. We aimed to assess the level of gender inequalities in Swiss academic medical research. In this bibliometric study conducted in March 2020, we selected all senior hospital physicians practicing internal medicine or family medicine in the six Swiss university hospitals. The list of these physicians was extracted from the hospitals’ websites. We recorded their socio-demographic characteristics. Then, using Web of Science, we retrieved the number of publications (overall, as first author, per year, per year as first author), the proportion of publications as first author, the number of citations (overall, per year, per publication) and the h-index, and we compared the data by gender. 367 senior physicians were included in the study [female physicians: 172 (47%), internal medicine: 187 (51%)]. Female physicians were four times less likely to be a professor (5% vs. 20%, p value < 0.001) and half as often heads of division or staff physicians (19% vs. 40%, p value < 0.001). The proportion of physicians having published at least one article was lower among women than men (79% vs. 90%, p value 0.003). Finally, all bibliometric indices were associated with male gender (incident rate ratios ranging from 1.9 [(95% CI 1.3–2.8), p value 0.001] for number of citations per publication to 9.3 [(95% CI 5.3–16.2), p value < 0.001] for number of citations), except the proportion of publications as first author that was associated with female gender [odds ratio 1.7 (95% CI 1.2–2.3), p value 0.003). Our data suggest a “leaky pipeline” phenomenon (a lower proportion of women moving up the academic ladder). In addition, with the exception of the proportion of publications as first author, all bibliometric indices were lower for female than male physicians.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document