Analysis of Author Gender in the Pediatric Orthopaedic Literature from 2011 to 2020

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjali Prior ◽  
Ngozi Ogburu-Ogbonnaya ◽  
William R. Barfield ◽  
James F. Mooney ◽  
Sara Van Nortwick ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. e385-e389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Drake G. LeBrun ◽  
Mininder S. Kocher ◽  
Keith D. Baldwin ◽  
Neeraj M. Patel

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0013
Author(s):  
Kevin A. Williams ◽  
Michael Horan

Background: Vitamin D deficiency is a global issue, affecting adults and children of all ages, races and genders. Within the last decade, multiple studies have demonstrated the potential health benefits of vitamin D supplementation including improved bone health, reduced fracture risk, protection from autoimmune disease, and decreased cancer risk. Because of the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in pediatric populations despite recent evidence of increased vitamin D supplementation in the US, our goal is to assess the knowledge of current vitamin D recommendations among Pediatric Society of North America (POSNA) members. It is our purpose to use the data to increase awareness and understanding of vitamin D amongst all pediatric providers. Methods: Our survey was distributed to 1316 POSNA members via a series of 2 email requests in which they were invited to participate in the survey on the Survey Monkey website. Their participation was entirely voluntary and they agreed to participate by responding positively on the first page of the survey. The data was depersonalized and analyzed via chi square and Fisher’s exact testing. Results: 395 responses were recorded. 9 participants opted out of the survey. 69% of participants rated their vitamin D knowledge as fair to good. 68% of participants have been in practice over ten years and represented most US geographic regions fairly equally. Most estimate that over 25% of their practice is vitamin D deficient with about a 50% compliance rate of supplementation. Over 30% of participants feel vitamin D management is mostly the role of the pediatrician, however 64% of participants discuss or check vitamin D levels in their practice for patients with repeat fractures, medical comorbidities, or nonunions most commonly. Conclusion: Survey participants demonstrated a wide variety of responses indicating their understanding of vitamin D testing and supplementation. Although providers estimate a high deficiency rate, many do not routinely check vitamin D. When they do check, there is no standard indication for testing or supplementation and many believe this to be the role of the pediatrician or endocrinologist. More studies are needed to provide a standardized protocol for vitamin D testing/supplementation in the pediatric orthopaedic literature.


2010 ◽  
Vol 92 (5) ◽  
pp. 1155-1161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon R Davids ◽  
Daniel M Weigl ◽  
Joye P Edmonds ◽  
Dawn W Blackhurst

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0013
Author(s):  
Drake G. LeBrun ◽  
Mininder S. Kocher ◽  
Keith D. Baldwin ◽  
Neeraj M. Patel

Background: Observational studies are the most commonly employed study designs in the pediatric orthopaedic literature. The differences between observational study designs are important but not widely understood, leading to potential discrepancies between the reported and actual study design. Study design misclassification is associated with a potential for misreporting level of evidence (LOE). Purpose: To determine the degree of study design and LOE misclassification in the pediatric orthopaedic literature. Methods: The Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science was queried to identify all pediatric orthopaedic observational studies published from 2014-2017. Reported study design and LOE were recorded for each study. The actual study design and LOE were determined based on established clinical epidemiological criteria by reviewers with advanced epidemiological training. Studies with a discrepancy between reported and actual study design and LOE were identified. The following covariates were recorded for each study: subspecialty, inclusion of a statistician coauthor, sample size, journal, and journal impact factor. Chi-square analysis was used to identify factors associated with study design and LOE misreporting. Results: One thousand articles were screened, yielding 647 observational studies. Three hundred thirty-five publications (52%) did not clearly report a study design in either the abstract or manuscript text. Of those that did, 59/312 (19%) reported the incorrect study design (Figure 1). The largest discrepancy was in the 109 studies that were reported to be case series, among which 30 (27.5%) were actually retrospective cohort studies. Three hundred thirteen publications (48%) did not report a LOE. Of those that did, 95/334 (28%) reported the incorrect LOE (Figure 2). Thirty-three studies (19%) reported a LOE that was higher than the actual LOE and 62 (35%) under-reported the LOE. Conclusion: The majority of observational pediatric orthopaedic studies either did not report a study design or reported the wrong study design. Similarly, the majority of studies did not report or misreported their LOE. Greater epidemiological rigor in classifying and evaluating observational studies is required on the part of investigators, reviewers, and journal editors. [Figure: see text][Figure: see text]


PEDIATRICS ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 137 (Supplement 3) ◽  
pp. 598A-598A
Author(s):  
Thao Nguyen ◽  
Xuyang Song ◽  
Xiaomao Zhu ◽  
Joshua M. Abzug

Author(s):  
Raman Mundi ◽  
Harman Chaudhry ◽  
Raj Sharma ◽  
Emil Schemitsch ◽  
Mohit Bhandari

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (23) ◽  
pp. e194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel P. Feghhi ◽  
Daniel Komlos ◽  
Nitin Agarwal ◽  
Sanjeev Sabharwal

Children ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 618
Author(s):  
Vito Pavone ◽  
Andrea Vescio ◽  
Annalisa Culmone ◽  
Alessia Caldaci ◽  
Piermario La Rosa ◽  
...  

Background: Dimeglio (DimS) and Pirani (PirS) scores are the most common scores used in congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV) clinical practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the interobserver reliability of these scores and how clinical practice can influence the clinical outcome of clubfoot through the DimS and Pirs. Methods: Fifty-four feet were assessed by six trained independent observers through the DimS and PirS: three consultants (OS), and three residents (RS) divided into three pediatric orthopaedic surgeons (PeO) and three non-pediatric orthopaedic surgeons (NPeO). Results: The PirS and DimS Scores were strongly correlated. In the same way, OS and RS, PirS, and DimS scores were strongly correlated, and the interobserver reliability ranked “good” in the comparison between PeO and NPeO. In fully trained paediatric orthopaedic surgeons, an “excellent” interobserver reliability was found but was only “good” in the NPeO cohort. Conclusions: In conclusion, after careful preparation, at least six months of observation of children with CTEV, PirS and DimS proved to be valid in terms of clinical evaluation. However, more experience with CTEV leads to a better clinical evaluation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document