No abstract

Original Article introductionOpen access (OA) to science is a model for publishing scholarly peer-reviewed journals made possible by the Internet. [1] The full text of OA journals and articles can be freely read, as the publishing is funded through means other than subscriptions. [1,2] They seem to have been through three distinct periods: The Pioneering years, the innovation years, and the consolidation years. [2] Indeed, OA journals do represent a recent revolution in scientific communication. It is now required by an increasing number of major funders and institutions. [2] They attract authors who wish to give their work prompt and unfettered access. [3] The proliferation of online OA journals has included major journal "brands" targeting articles that could not make it to the conventional publishing.Unfortunately, OA movement also included journals and publishers that lack a legitimate foundation and use online publishing solely for financial gain, and hence, the name "predatory" was coined. [4][5][6] With the advancing information technology and website designing software, predatory journals (PJ) may present a seemingly legitimate face for an illegitimate publication process that lacks basic industry standards, sound peer-review practices, or any commitment to scholarly publication ethics. [4][5][6] Recent editorials in this journal sent wake-up calls to editors and authors in the Middle East and Africa on false academia, Objectives: There is a recent proliferation of predatory journals (PJ) targeting unwary authors and unsuspecting institutions. We evaluated the awareness, attitude, and practices related to predatory publishing among physicians from the Middle East and Africa. Subjects and Methods: An online survey of a convenience sample of physicians was conducted. One hundred and forty responses were received. Of these 76 were complete and they formed the basis of this study. Results: Respondents hold a specialty board or equivalent (46.1%), doctorate (26.3%) or Master (13.2%). Half of the respondents published between 1 and 10 articles and less than a fifth had no prior authorship experience. Respondents are reportedly fully aware (30.3%) or fairly familiar but were not confident with details (43.4%), whereas 26.3% have no clear idea about models of publishing (open access [OA] vs. subscription-only). Nearly one third have never heard about predatory publishing and one in six of the respondents may have heard about it, but they were not sure. 69.7% reported no knowledge of Jeffery Beall and his list. The majority thought it might be somewhat difficult (51.4%) or difficult (24.3%) to distinguish between predatory and legitimate OA journals and 40%-60% affirmed knowledge of features of predatory publishing practices. 50%-60% recognized that PJ target authors in the developing nations. Respondents reported a variable frequency of unsolicited E-mails inviting them to submit articles to suspected PJ or act as reviewers or editors. Only a minority would take further action to protest against such invitations....

Ramadan fasting is one of the five Pillars of Islam. While there are several exemptions from fasting, many Muslims with medical conditions still choose to fast. This may adversely affect their health if not addressed properly. Recently, there has been an increased interest in the health implications of Ramadan fasting. The authors performed a narrative, nonsystematic review of the literature including case reports, case series, and review articles indexed in PubMed and Google Scholar in a full calendar year. All records were reviewed by two coauthors at least. Studies were reviewed, summarized, and represented to provide a readily comprehensible concise account of the contributions made to research and clinical practice in 1 year (January–December 2017). The publications spanned physiological and clinical aspects and crossed conventional disciplinary lines in various languages, locations, and systems of journal access. A total of 92 and 82 were found in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases, respectively. Diabetes, hypoglycemia, insulin, and body composition were among the most relevant issues addressed this year. Discipline wise, diabetes, physiology, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, eyes, respiratory, nephrology, neuropsychiatry, and endocrinology were most prominent. Other articles have considered professional competence, education, ethics, culture, and organization of care. Many of the research groups are based in emerging countries with Muslim-majority, but the publications are still widely distributed in internationally recognized journals. Several workers seem to have Ramadan fast at the center of their academic interest inferred from the number of publications to which they have contributed. The authors hope this review will help direct further research and should inform clinical practice guidance.

No abstract

Aim of the Study:To test if changing the Iftar insulin to a 50:50 mixed analog insulin from a 30:70 human insulin at the same total dose leads to improvement in the postprandial blood glucose (taken as after the main meal). Since the intermediate acting insulin dose is effectively lowered, the pre-Suhur blood glucose is also tested to see if this rises. Methods:The Iftar human 30:70 mixed insulin is substituted for a 50:50 one using insulin lispro protamine suspension and 50% insulin lispro (Humalog ® Mix50/50™), whilst maintaining the same total dose. The participants were also changed to 75% insulin lispro protamine suspension and 25% insulin lispro (Humalog ® Mix75/25™) at the same pre-Ramadan dose for their Suhur injection (Experimental group). A similar number of controls continued their 30:70 mixed human insulin at the same dose during Ramadan (Control group). Pre-Ramadan and during Ramadan fasting and postprandial (3 hours) and pre-Suhur blood glucose (BG) are tested in 20 subjects and 20 controls by the patients using home glucose meters. Hypoglycaemia, defined as a BG of ≤ 70 mg%, was tested for by the patients and noted if they experience symptoms of it. Severe hypoglycaemia occurred if the patient needed assistance for recovery. No insulin dose adjustments are made in either group and any other anti-diabetic treatment was continued. Pre-and post-Ramadan HbA 1 c and body weight are measured. The numberof days fasted and baseline characteristics are age, gender, and duration of diabetes are also noted. Differences between groups in parameters were assessed using ANCOVA to adjust for pre-Ramadan values of age, gender, and duration of diabetes.Results: All the participants fasted for at least 29 days. The 2 groups were not significantly different at baseline. During Ramadan, mean postprandial BG in the Experimental group was lower by 21.1 mg% (1.2 mmol/l) (95% CI 12.6, 29.7; P < 0.001). Similarly, after Ramadan mean HbA 1 c in the Experimental group was lower by 0.4% (95% CI 0.1%, 0.8%; P = 0.01). No significant differences between the groups were detected in mean bodyweight after Ramadan (P = 0.86) or mean fasting BG during Ramadan (P = 0.07). There was no difference in incidence of hypoglycaemia. Conclusions: Switching from human insulin mix 30:70 to analog insulin mix 50:50 results in better post main meal control in Ramadan, without affecting HbA1c, or increasing the incidence of hypoglycaemia. How to cite this article: Hajjaji IM, Eshwihdi N, Barrowman N. Comparison of analog insulin mix 50:50 with human insulin mix 30:70 in persons with type 2 diabetes during Ramadan. Int J Clin Pract. 2019;73:e13348. https://doi.