Cost of analgesic and adjuvant medications used by rural patients with cancer cared for by 29 nurses participating in an in-depth education program were evaluated before and after the program. Across all time periods, the median daily cost was $5.16 across all medications. Average daily cost and maximum and median cost of all medications were $5.36, $74.38 and $3.58, respectively. Average daily cost did not change over time. Average pain intensity did not change over time and was not related to prescribing patterns or daily costs. While professional education was demonstrated to produce change in prescribing practices, further research is needed to evaluate patterns of medication administration and effectiveness patterns using reliable outcome measures other than self report of pain intensity.
Background Publication bias is the tendency of investigators, reviewers, and editors to submit or accept manuscripts for publication based on their direction or strength of findings. In this study, we investigated if publication bias was present in gastroenterological research by evaluating abstracts at Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Congresses from 2011 to 2013. Methods We searched Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed to locate the published reports of research described in these abstracts. If a publication was not found, a second investigator searched to verify nonpublication. If abstract publication status remained undetermined, authors were contacted regarding reasons for nonpublication. For articles reaching publication, the P value, study design, time to publication, citation count, and journals in which the published report appeared were recorded. Results Our study found that of 569 abstracts presented, 297 (52.2%) reported a P value. Of these, 254 (85.5%) contained P values supporting statistical significance. The abstracts reporting a statistically significant outcome were twice as likely to reach publication than abstracts with no significant findings (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.06-4.14). Overall, 243 (42.7%) abstracts reached publication. The mean time to publication was 14 months and a median time of 9 months. Conclusion In conclusion, we found evidence for publication bias in gastroenterological research. Abstracts with significant P values had a higher probability of reaching publication. More than half of abstracts presented from 2011 to 2013 failed to reached publication. Readers should take these finding into consideration when reviewing medical literature.
Sketches the history of CPE in the Philippines from its experimental beginnings at St. Luke's Hospital in 1964 to ACPE accreditation of the first program in 1966.
Congresses from 2011 to 2013. Methods We searched Google, Google Scholar, andPubMed to locate the published reports of research described in these abstracts. If a publication was not found, a second investigator searched to verify nonpublication. If abstract publication status remained undetermined, authors were contacted regarding reasons for nonpublication. For articles reaching publication, the P value, study design, time to publication, citation count, and journals in which the published report appeared were recorded. Results Our study found that of 569 abstracts presented, 297 (52.2%) reported a P value. Of these, 254 (85.5%) contained P values supporting statistical significance. The abstracts reporting a statistically significant outcome were twice as likely to reach publication than abstracts with no significant findings (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1. 06-4.14). Overall, 243 (42.7%) abstracts reached publication. The mean time to publication was 14 months and a median time of 9 months. Conclusion In conclusion, we found evidence for publication bias in gastroenterological research. Abstracts with significant P values had a higher probability of reaching publication. More than half of abstracts presented from 2011 to 2013 failed to reached publication. Readers should take these finding into consideration when reviewing medical literature. PeerJ reviewing PDF | AbstractPeerJ reviewing PDF | Manuscript to be reviewed 25 26 Background 27 Publication bias is the tendency of investigators, reviewers, and editors to submit or accept 28 manuscripts for publication based on their direction or strength of findings. In this study, we 29 investigated if publication bias was present in gastroenterological research by evaluating 30 abstracts at Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Congresses from 2011 to 2013. 31 32 Methods 33 We searched Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed to locate the published reports of research 34 described in these abstracts. If a publication was not found, a second investigator searched to 35 verify nonpublication. If abstract publication status remained undetermined, authors were 36 contacted regarding reasons for nonpublication. For articles reaching publication, the P value, 37 study design, time to publication, citation count, and journals in which the published report 38 appeared were recorded. 39 40 Results 41 Our study found that of 569 abstracts presented, 297 (52.2%) reported a P value. Of these, 254 42 (85.5%) contained P values supporting statistical significance. The abstracts reporting a 43 statistically significant outcome were twice as likely to reach publication than abstracts with no 44 significant findings (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1. 06-4.14). Overall, 243 (42.7%) abstracts reached 45 publication. The mean time to publication was 14 months and a median time of 9 months. 46 47 Conclusion PeerJ reviewing PDF |Manuscript to be reviewed 48 In conclusion, we found evidence for publication bias in gastroenterological research. Abstracts 49 with significant P values were more frequently published than th...
Background Publication bias is the tendency of investigators, reviewers, and editors to submit or accept manuscripts for publication based on their direction or strength of findings. In this study, we investigated if publication bias was present in gastroenterological research by evaluating abstracts at Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Congresses from 2011 to 2013. Methods We searched Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed to locate the published reports of research described in these abstracts. If a publication was not found, a second investigator searched to verify nonpublication. If abstract publication status remained undetermined, authors were contacted regarding reasons for nonpublication. For articles reaching publication, the P value, study design, time to publication, citation count, and journals in which the published report appeared were recorded. Results Our study found that of 569 abstracts presented, 297 (52.2%) reported a P value. Of these, 254 (85.5%) contained P values supporting statistical significance. The abstracts reporting a statistically significant outcome were twice as likely to reach publication than abstracts with no significant findings (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.06-4.14). Overall, 243 (42.7%) abstracts reached publication. The mean time to publication was 14 months and a median time of 9 months. Conclusion In conclusion, we found evidence for publication bias in gastroenterological research. Abstracts with significant P values had a higher probability of reaching publication. More than half of abstracts presented from 2011 to 2013 failed to reached publication. Readers should take these finding into consideration when reviewing medical literature.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.