No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveRecently, group authorships have become more common. Group authorship describes a situation where the name of a group of people is included in the byline of an article. Historically, however, group authorships have been associated with citation errors and difficulties identifying who could be regarded as an author. Cochrane is a collaboration that publishes high‐quality systematic reviews and meta‐analyses and transparency in authorship should be high. Group authorships in Cochrane have not previously been examined. This study aimed to describe group authorships in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR).MethodsIn total, 8396 reviews from the CDSR were screened for group authorships from inception to 31 December 2019. Data from group authorships were extracted and analyzed.ResultsA total of 41 reviews with group authorships were included. Almost half of group authorships (46%, 19/41) were published from 2015 to 2019. Median number of group members was 32 (range 6–91). Median publication time (protocol to review) of group authorships was 3.1 years. Of all group authorships, 39% met ICMJE's first authorship criterion, 41% met the second, and 12% met the third criterion. For only two studies all authors met the three authorship criteria.ConclusionA low prevalence of group authorships existed in Cochrane reviews. Reviews with group authorships took median three years to publish, and very few of group authorships in Cochrane complied with the ICMJE authorship criteria.

No abstract

No abstract

In order to construct a catheter, capable of monitoring cardiac output, a specially designed double-conical hot-film anemometer probe was fastened at the tip of a Swan-Ganz thermodilution catheter. Common sources of error for most catheter velocity probes include difficult calibration, unknown velocity profile at the point of measurement and unknown position of the probe in this profile. By using mongrel dogs and in order to exclude these sources of error, the intermittent thermodilution method was used to in vitro calibrate the hot-film anemometer, which registered velocity continuously. A mean correlation coefficient between these two methods was found to be 0.886. A mean line of regression between thermodilution (abscissa) and anemometer (ordinate) had a slope of 0.796 ± 0.223 (±SD) and a y-intercept of 24 ± 14 ml/min/kg. The slope was significantly lower than one (t test, p < 0.05) and the y-intercept significantly larger than zero (t test, p < 0.02). As a control of the thermodilution method, electromagnetic flow in the ascending aorta was registered and a mean correlation coefficient of 0.967 found. The hot-film sensor itself can be used as thermodilution thermistor intermittently and this new catheter combines thus the advantages of the thermodilution method with the hot-film anemometer’s continuous registration of velocity.