Citation classics in anesthetic journals

The number of citations an article receives after its publication reflects its recognition in the scientific community. In the present study, therefore, we identified and examined the characteristics of the top 100 most frequently cited articles published in anesthetic journals. These articles were identified using the database of the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED, 1945 to present) and the Web of SCIENCE(R). The most-cited article received 707 citations and the least cited article received 197 citations, with a mean of 283 citations per article. These citation classics were published between 1954 and 1997 in 5 high-impact anesthetic journals, led by Anesthesiology (73 articles) followed by Anesthesia & Analgesia (10), British Journal of Anesthesia (10), Anesthesia (6), and Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica (2). Seventy-eight articles were original publications, 22 were review articles, and one was an editorial. They originated from nine countries, with the United States contributing 70 articles. Within the United States, California leads the list of citation classics with 25 articles. Twenty-nine persons authored two or more of the top-cited articles. The main topics covered by the top-cited articles are pharmacology, volatile anesthetics, circulation, regional anesthesia, and lung physiology. This analysis of citation rates allows for the recognition of seminal advances in anesthesia and gives a historic perspective on the scientific progress of this specialty. IMPLICATIONS: We performed a citation analysis to identify important contributions and contributors to the anesthetic literature. These classic articles have influenced many people and have brought to our attention the many important advances in anesthesia made during the last 50 yr.     

Methodologic quality of cost-effectiveness analyses of surgical procedures

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the methodologic quality of economic analyses of surgical procedures and to compare quality across publications. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: With healthcare resources limited and technologies rapidly advancing across specialties, including surgery, there is increasing demand for evidence of cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A MEDLINE search identified English-language articles published from 1995 to 2004 that included economic analyses of surgical procedures. Two of the authors reviewed 110 studies and scored each based on compliance with 10 methodologic criteria. Data analyses used Cohen's kappa statistic, regression models, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: The 110 articles appeared in 79 different journals, including 57 articles in 37 surgical journals. Most journals (75%) had only 1 article eligible for inclusion. The average number of criteria met was 4.1, with 10 articles meeting all 10 methodologic standards. Compliance rates for the 5 methodologic criteria most frequently neglected ranged from 34% to 45% in nonsurgical journals and 9% to 14% in surgical journals (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While methodologic guidelines for cost-effectiveness analyses have appeared in the medical literature, studies of cost-effectiveness in surgery often do not meet these criteria. As healthcare policy seeks to incorporate information from economic evaluations, it is increasingly important that surgical journals adhere to accepted guidelines and perform quality assurance on these studies. This may be aided by wider promulgation of the methodologic criteria in surgical journals or at surgical meetings.     

Cross correlation of heart rate and respiration versus deep breathing. Assessment of new test of cardiac autonomic function in diabetes

Cross correlation is a mathematical function whereby spectral analysis is used to describe the relationship between heart-rate fluctuations (256 R-R intervals) and respiration (simultaneously obtained by pneumotacograph). To assess its usefulness for testing autonomic integrity, cross correlation and deep breathing were compared in 141 diabetic subjects (aged 39 +/- 14 yr) and in 77 control subjects (aged 33 +/- 13 yr). To characterize patients, Valsalva maneuver, 30:15 ratio, tilt, and handgrip tests were performed in 96 of these patients; 23 had two or more abnormal tests (group A), 28 had one (group B), and 45 had none (group C). Sensitivity to parasympathetic withdrawal was compared in 9 control subjects (aged 26 +/- 4 yr) by four sequential 0.01-mg/kg i.v. atropine administrations. Reproducibility was compared in 11 control subjects (aged 25 +/- 2 yr) by repeating the tests four times for 2 consecutive days. Considering all 141 patients, cross correlation and deep breathing were less than 2SD of the mean of control subjects in 64 and 36 subjects, respectively. Considering patients who also performed other tests of autonomic function, cross correlation and deep breathing were less than 2SD of the mean of controls in 42 and 30 subjects, respectively (group A, 20 and 15; group B, 12 and 9; group C, 10 and 6). Cross correlation had better reproducibility than deep breathing (C.V. 10.3 vs. 30.6% at 6 breaths/min) and greater sensitivity to atropine (after the 1st injection, cross correlation and deep breathing decreased to 34.6 and 48.2% of baseline values, respectively; P less than .05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Unrealistic expectations arising from mortality data reported in the cardiothoracic journals.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to ascertain whether mortality data in the cardiac surgical literature mirror data reported in national databases. METHODS: This was a review of articles with 50 or more subjects reporting single-center mortality data for coronary artery bypass or aortic or mitral valve replacement published in the three major cardiothoracic surgical journals from 1997 through 2000. Mortality data and trends were examined. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine articles were found (coronary artery bypass, n = 119; aortic valve replacement, n = 34; mitral valve replacement, n = 16). Articles were predominantly case series (N = 95), with smaller numbers of comparative retrospective studies (n = 34), randomized trials (n = 29), and prospective noncomparative studies (n = 11). The median mortality figures for these studies were 1.5% (interquartile range, 0.3%-2.6%) for coronary artery bypass, 3.4% (interquartile range, 2.0%-5.3%) for aortic valve replacement, and 4.7% (interquartile range, 2.1%-6.9%) for mitral valve replacement. In contrast, the national registry mortality figures were 2.9%, 4.0%, and 6.0%, respectively, in the United States and 2.6%, 4.5% and 6.3%, respectively, in the United Kingdom. Coronary bypass studies with samples smaller than 100 patients reported lower mortality figures (median 0%) than did those with more than 100 patients (1.8%). Exploration with graphical plots suggested a bias toward reporting and publication of studies with below average mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Particularly for coronary artery bypass, published data tend to underrepresent the risk of death as seen in most centers. Outcomes and magnitudes of effects as reported in these research studies may not be replicable to the same degree in most centers. In particular, extreme caution should be taken in extrapolating results from studies with fewer than 100 patients to larger surgical populations.     

Assessing the quality of reporting of studies using Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) data

ObjectiveThe Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) has become an increasingly popular data source for retrospective observational vascular surgery studies. There are published guidelines on the reporting of data in such studies to promote transparency and rigor, but these have not been used to evaluate studies using VQI data. Our objective was to appraise the methodological reporting quality of studies using VQI data by evaluating their adherence to these guidelines.MethodsThe Society for Vascular Surgery VQI publication repository was queried for all articles published in 2020. The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Health Data (RECORD) statement and the Journal of American Medical Association-Surgical Section (JAMA-Surgery) checklist were utilized to assess the quality of each article's reporting. Five and three items from the RECORD statement and JAMA-Surgery checklist were excluded, respectively, because they were either inapplicable or nonassessable. Journal impact factor (IF) was queried for each article to elucidate any difference in reporting standards between high and low IF journals.ResultsNinety studies were identified and analyzed. The median score on the RECORD checklist was 6 (of 8). The most commonly missed item was discussing data cleaning methods (93% missed). The median score on the JAMA-Surgery checklist was 3 (of 7). The most commonly missed items were the identification of competing risks (98% missed), the use of a flow chart to clearly define sample exclusion and inclusion criteria (84% missed), and the inclusion of a solid research question and hypothesis (81% missed). There were no differences in JAMA-Surgery checklist or RECORD statement median scores among studies published in low vs high IF journals.ConclusionsStudies using VQI data demonstrate a poor to moderate adherence to reporting standards. Key areas for improvement in research reporting include articulating a clear hypothesis, using flow charts to clearly define inclusion and exclusion criteria, identifying competing risks, and discussing data cleaning methods. Additionally, future efforts should center on creating tailored instruments to better guide reporting in studies using VQI data.     

Islet cell antibodies as predictive markers for IDDM in children with high background incidence of disease

To determine the prevalence and predictive value of islet cell antibodies (ICAs) for the development of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) in 1212 Finnish children aged 3-18 yr, samples for ICA determination were taken in 1980, and subsequent analyses were performed in originally ICA+ children and in 296 initially ICA- children in 1983 and 1986. All 1212 subjects were followed for 8 yr for the development of IDDM. Fifty children (4.1%) were positive for conventional ICAs (IF-ICAs) in 1980 (range 3-80 Juvenile Diabetes Foundation units [JDF U]; median 30 JDF U), of which 12 (1.0%) had complement-fixing ICAs (CF-ICAs) in their serums (range 3-30 JDF U; median 8 JDF U). None were exclusively CF-ICA+. Boys were CF-ICA+ more often than girls (9 of 563 [1.6%] vs. 3 of 649 [0.5%], respectively; P less than 0.05). Over the next 6 yr, 4 of 39 subjects lost their IF-ICAs, and 4 of 12 lost their CF-ICAs without progressing to diabetes. The initial IF-ICA levels in these subjects were lower (range 3-8 JDF U; median 7 JDF U; P less than 0.05) than those in the persistent cases. In the initially ICA- subgroup (n = 296), 7 subjects (2.4%) later became IF-ICA+, and 4 (1.4%) became CF-ICA+. The levels of ICA in these subjects were lower than in the originally ICA+ ones (P less than 0.05), and 3 IF-ICA+ and 2 CF-ICA+ subjects again became ICA- before 1986.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Reporting of ethical approval and informed consent in clinical research published in leading anesthesia journals

BACKGROUND: Ethical conduct in human research in anesthesia includes approval by an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee and informed consent. Evidence of these is sometimes lacking in journal publications. METHODS: The authors reviewed all publications involving human subjects in six leading anesthesia journals for the year 2001 (n = 1189). Rates of IRB approval and informed consent were examined and compared with potential predictors that included journal, type of publication, and patient demographics (age, sex, elective or emergency status). Rates were compared by use of chi-square and logistic regression. RESULTS: The authors found that IRB approval was documented in 71% of publications and consent was obtained in 66% of publications. Significant variation in IRB approval and consent was found among journals (P < 0.0005) and according to type of publication (P < 0.0005). Because publication type affected rates of IRB approval and consent (trials > mechanistic studies > observational studies > case reports), an analysis restricted to prospective studies also found a significant difference in IRB approval and consent among journals (P < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that rates of IRB approval and informed consent vary among publications in anesthesia journals. Clearer guidelines (and author adherence) for all types of publication are needed, both as a protection for research subjects and to maintain public trust in the process.     

Comparing methods of clinical measurement: reporting standards for bland and altman analysis

In this era of medical technology assessment and evidence-based medicine, evaluating new methods to measure physiologic variables is facilitated by standardization of reporting results. It has been proposed that assessing repeatability be followed by assessing agreement with an established technique. If the "limits of agreement" (mean bias +/- 2SD) are not clinically important, then one could use two measurements interchangeably. Generalizability to larger populations is facilitated by reporting confidence intervals. We identified 44 studies that compared methods of clinical measurement published during 1996 to 1998 in seven anesthesia journals. Although 42 of 44 (95.4%) used the limits of agreement methodology for analysis, several inadequacies and inconsistencies in reporting the results were noted. Limits of agreement were defined a priori in 7.1%, repeatability was evaluated in 21.4%, and relationship (pattern) between difference and average was evaluated in 7.1%. Only one of the articles reported confidence intervals. A computer macro for the Minitab statistical package (State College, PA) is described to facilitate reporting of Bland and Altman analysis with confidence intervals. We propose standardization of nomenclature in clinical measurement comparison studies. IMPLICATIONS: A literature review of anesthesia journals revealed several inadequacies and inconsistencies in statistical reports of results of comparison studies with regard to interchangeability of measurement methods. We encourage journal editors to evaluate submissions on this subject carefully to ensure that their readers can draw valid conclusions about the value of new technologies.     

Recommendations for the Assessment and Reporting of Multivariable Logistic Regression in Transplantation Literature

Multivariable logistic regression is an important method to evaluate risk factors and prognosis in solid organ transplant literature. We aimed to assess the quality of this method in six major transplantation journals. Eleven analytical criteria and four documentation criteria were analyzed for each selected article that used logistic regression. A total of 106 studies (6%) out of 1,701 original articles used logistic regression analyses from January 1, 2005 to January 1, 2006. The analytical criteria and their respective reporting percentage among the six journals were: Linearity (25%); Beta coefficient (48%); Interaction tests (19%); Main estimates (98%); Ovefitting prevention (84%); Goodness‐of‐fit (3.8%); Multicolinearity (4.7%); Internal validation (3.8%); External validation (8.5%). The documentation criteria were reported as follows: Selection of independent variables (73%); Coding of variables (9%); Fitting procedures (49%); Statistical program (65%). No significant differences were found among different journals or between general versus subspecialty journals with respect to reporting quality. We found that the report of logistic regression is unsatisfactory in transplantation journals. Because our findings may have major consequences for the care of transplant patients and for the design of transplant clinical trials, we recommend a practical solution for the use and reporting of logistic regression in transplantation journals.     

How many patients? How many limbs? Analysis of patients or limbs in the orthopaedic literature: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies assessing orthopaedic interventions often include data from two limbs or multiple joints within single individuals. Without appropriate design or statistical approaches to address within-individual correlations, this practice may contribute to false precision and possible bias in estimates of treatment effect. We conducted a systematic review of the orthopaedic literature to determine the frequency of inappropriate inclusion of nonindependent limb or joint observations in clinical studies. METHODS: We identified seven orthopaedic journals with high Science Citation Index impact factors and retrieved all clinical studies for 2003 for any intervention on any limb or joint. RESULTS: We identified 288 clinical studies, 143 of which involved two limbs or multiple joint observations from single individuals. These studies included nineteen randomized clinical trials (13%) fifty-eight two-group cohort studies (41%), and sixty-six one-group cohort studies (46%). Seventy-six (53%) of the 143 studies involved statistical comparisons between patient groups with use of tests of association, and an additional sixty studies (42%) presented estimates of proportions without statistical comparisons. Only sixteen of the seventy-six studies involving statistical comparisons involved the use of any technique or methodological approach to account for multiple, nonindependent observations. A median of approximately 13% of the patients in these studies contributed more than one observation. The median proportion of nonindependent observations to total observations (the unit of analysis) was approximately 23%. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a high proportion (42%) of clinical studies in high-impact-factor orthopaedic journals involve the inappropriate use of multiple observations from single individuals, potentially biasing results. Orthopaedic researchers should attend to this issue when reporting results.     

Investigation of implicit memory during isoflurane anesthesia for elective surgery using the process dissociation procedure

BACKGROUND: This prospective study evaluated memory function during general anesthesia for elective surgery and its relation to depth of hypnotic state. The authors also compared memory function in anesthetized and nonanesthetized subjects. METHODS: Words were played for 70 min via headphones to 48 patients (aged 18-70 yr) after induction of general anesthesia for elective surgery. Patients were unpremedicated, and the anesthetic regimen was free. The Bispectral Index (BIS) was recorded throughout the study. Within 36 h after the word presentation, memory was assessed using an auditory word stem completion test with inclusion and exclusion instructions. Memory performance and the contribution of explicit and implicit memory were calculated using the process dissociation procedure. The authors applied the same memory task to a control group of nonanesthetized subjects. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients received isoflurane, and one patient received propofol for anesthesia. The mean (+/- SD) BIS was 49 +/- 9. There was evidence of memory for words presented during light (BIS 61-80) and adequate anesthesia (BIS 41-60) but not during deep anesthesia (BIS 21-40). The process dissociation procedure showed a significant implicit memory contribution but not reliable explicit memory contribution (mean explicit memory scores 0.05 +/- 0.14, 0.04 +/- 0.09, and 0.05 +/- 0.14; mean automatic influence scores 0.14 +/- 0.12, 0.17 +/- 0.17, and 0.18 +/- 0.21 at BIS 21-40, 41-60, and 61-80, respectively). Compared with anesthetized patients, the memory performance of nonanesthetized subjects was better, with a higher contribution by explicit memory and a comparable contribution by implicit memory. CONCLUSION: During general anesthesia for elective surgery, implicit memory persists even in adequate hypnotic states, to a comparable degree as in nonanesthetized subjects.     

Quality of clinical studies in neurosurgical journals: signs of improvement over three decades

OBJECT: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of clinical studies appearing in neurosurgical journals during three decades. METHODS: Clinical studies published in 1982, 1992, and 2002 in Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS), and British Journal of Neurosurgery (BJN) were evaluated. The feature study types were categorized as follows: Type 1, prospective randomized controlled trials (PRCTs); Type 2, other prospective studies; Type 3, retrospective case-controlled and cross-sectional studies; and Type 4, case reports. Among a total of 786 articles, the following study types were identified: Type 1, eight (1%); Type 2, 46 (6%); Type 3, 81 (10%); and Type 4, 651 (83%). Overall, the proportion of study types did not differ among journals. Between 1982 and 2002, increases in the proportion of study Types 1 (0 compared with 2%, respectively), 2 (4 compared with 10%, respectively), and 3 (5 compared with 13%, respectively) and decreases in the proportion of study Type 4 (92 compared with 75%, respectively; p < 0.001) were apparent only in JNS and Neurosurgery (p < 0.01). Between 1982 and 2002, the median number of patients (two compared with 14, respectively) and the mean number of authors per study (3.4 compared with 4.8, respectively) increased (p < 0.001). The JNS had a greater mean number of authors per study than the other journals (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During the three decades evaluated, case reports remained the predominant study design in these prominent neurosurgical journals, notwithstanding the modest increases in study Types 1 and 2 and the associated escalations in author and patient numbers in the same period.     

Predictors of citations in the urological literature

To assess the factors associated with increased citation rates in the urological literature by reviewing articles published in the four major urological journals to help authors improve the impact of their work. A random sample of 200 original research articles published between January and June 2004 was analysed from The Journal of Urology, Urology, European Urology and BJU International. Study information was abstracted by two independent reviewers and citation counts within 4 years of publication were collected using Web of Science(TM) . Study characteristics and citation rates were analysed using median and interquartile ranges (IQRs), and logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate which factors predicted greater citation rates. The overall median number of citations per published article was 6.0 (IQR 3-12). After univariate analysis, we found that study design, study topic, continent of origin and sample size were associated with greater median citation rates. In a multivariate linear regression model, study design and study topic (oncology) predicted increased citation rates. Randomized controlled trials were cited a median of 13.5 times and were the strongest predictor of citation rates with an odds ratio of 115.5 (95% confidence interval 9.4-1419.6). Citation rates are associated with study design and study topic in the urological literature. Authors may improve the impact of their work by designing clinical studies with greater methodological safeguards against bias.     

The fragility of statistically significant findings in randomised controlled anaesthesiology trials: systematic review of the medical literature

The fragility index (FI), the number of events the statistical significance a result depends on, and the number of patients lost to follow-up are important parameters for interpreting randomised clinical trial results. We evaluated these two parameters in randomised controlled trials in anaesthesiology. For this, we performed a systematic search of the medical literature, seeking articles reporting on anaesthesiology trials with a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome and published in the top five general medicine journals, or the top 15 anaesthesiology journals. We restricted the analysis to trials reporting clinically important primary outcome measures. The search identified 139 articles, 35 published in general medicine journals and 104 in anaesthesiology journals. The median (inter-quartile range) sample size was 150 (70–300) patients. The FI was 4 (2–17) and 3 (2–7), and the number of patients lost to follow-up was 0 (0–18) and 0 (0–6) patients in trials published in general medicine and anaesthesiology journals, respectively. The number of patients lost to follow-up exceeded the FI in 41 and 27% in trials in general medicine journals and anaesthesiology journals, respectively. The FI positively correlated with sample size and number of primary outcome events, and negatively correlated with the reported P-values. The results of this systematic review suggest that statistically significant differences in randomised controlled anaesthesiology trials are regularly fragile, implying that the primary outcome status of patients lost to follow-up could possibly have changed the reported effect.     

Trends in the most cited articles in shoulder surgery, 1900–2019

BackgroundOur purpose was to identify the 100 most cited articles in the shoulder surgery literature published in past decade and to compare them with the 100 most cited “classic” shoulder surgery articles to identify trends in the topics of shoulder research.MethodsUsing the term “shoulder,” we searched the Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science Core Collection database for 2 periods: 2010 through 2019 (“contemporary group,” n = 12,394) and 1900 through 2009 (“classic group,” n = 8790). We used the database sort function to order articles by number of citations. Titles, abstracts, and, when necessary, full text were screened to determine relevance to orthopedic shoulder topics until the 100 most cited articles were determined for each group. We analyzed the following article characteristics: title, author(s), publication year, journal, geographic origin, article type (clinical vs basic research), study design, and level of evidence (for clinical articles). P < .05 was considered significant.ResultsThe 3 journals with the most articles in the contemporary group were the American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) (28%), the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) (28%), and the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American volume (JBJS Am) (23%). The top 3 journals in the classic group were JBJS Am (45%), AJSM (16%), and JSES (15%). The 3 most frequent topics in the contemporary group were rotator cuff tear (43%), instability (14%), and fractures (10%); those in the classic group were pathoanatomy (29%), rotator cuff (28%), and instability (17%). Compared with the classic group, the contemporary group had more articles on outcomes of common shoulder procedures, including rotator cuff repair (25% vs. 17%), arthroplasty (21% vs. 15%), arthroscopy (17% vs. 11%), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (13% vs. 7%), and the Latarjet procedure (7% vs. 2%). More articles reporting complications were found in the contemporary (9%) than in the classic (2%) group (P = .03). The contemporary group contained articles on topics not found in the classic group, such as platelet-rich plasma (8%), scaffolds (3%), infection (3%), Cutibacterium acnes (2%), stem cells (2%), superior capsular reconstruction (2%), bony increased offset reversed shoulder arthroplasty (2%), opioid issues (1%), and tendon transfer (1%).ConclusionThe most cited studies from 1900 to 2009 and 2010 to 2019 reported on the rotator cuff and shoulder instability. The most cited articles from 2010 to 2019 reflect the development of shoulder arthroscopy, shoulder arthroplasty, treatment of surgical complications, and augmentation or biologic interventions for rotator cuff repair.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Review Article     

Renal cell carcinoma in adults 40 years old or less: young age is an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival

OBJECTIVES: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is uncommon in young adults. Based on the few studies published to date, it is difficult to determine whether this tumour has a particular progression pattern. This retrospective, multicentre study analysed RCC in young patients, defined as 相似文献