BackgroundRoad traffic injuries (RTIs) are the eighth leading cause of death worldwide, with an estimated 90% of RTIs occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) like Brazil. There has been minimal research in evaluation of delays in transport of RTI patients to trauma centers in LMICs. The objective of this study is to determine specific causes of delays in prehospital transport of road traffic injury patients to designated trauma centers in Maringá, Brazil.MethodsA qualitative method was used based on the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) approach. Eleven health care providers employed at prehospital or hospital settings were interviewed with questions specific to delays in care for RTI patients. A thematic analysis was conducted.ResultsResponses to primary causes of delay in treatment to RTI patients fell into the following categories: 1) lack of public education, 2) traffic, 3) insufficient personnel/ambulances, 4) bureaucracy, and 5) poor location of stations. Suggestions for improvement in delays fell into the categories of 1) need for centralized station/avoid traffic, 2) improving public education, 3) Increase personnel, 4) increase ambulances, 5) proper extrication/rapid treatment.ConclusionOur study found varied responses between hospital and SAMU providers regarding specific causes of delay for RTI patients; SAMU providers cited primarily traffic, bureaucracy, and poor location as primary factors while hospital employees focused more on public health aspects. These results mirror prehospital system challenges in other developing countries, but also provide solutions for improvement with better infrastructure and public health campaigns.

Background: Quantity, quality, and impact of scientific publications are used to assess national, institutional, and individual levels of research productivity. While the importance of quality research is stressed among the medical research community, minimal research has been conducted on analyzing which factors affect research productivity. Current literature assesses the quality of research institutions rather than that of individual researchers; there is also no research on the difference between high-impact researchers and other researchers. This study, conducted in 2015, sought to investigate the underlying reason for high-throughput authors' success by understanding their similar habits and motivations leading to high productivity. Methods: The authors conducted a qualitative study via interviews of high-throughput researchers from around the world. Semi-structured interview scripts guided the interviews in accordance to the grounded theory method for qualitative studies. Broad themes from preliminary interviews were identified and explored in subsequent interviews. Results: Qualitative analysis of participant interviews identified eight major themes: “Writing habits,” “Writing strategy,” “Previous training and writing experience,” “Major driver,” “Balancing volume and impact of publications,” “Ideal and non-ideal conditions,” “Timelines,” and “Role of networking on high-throughput productivity.” These themes are not exclusive nor required qualities of high-throughput researchers but highlight similarities and broadly unifying characteristics of these researchers. Conclusion:This study identified the common qualities and attitudes of high-throughput researchers. We found common factors in most individuals that can be considered markers of high productivity.

Background: Previous research has corroborated a high burden of alcohol-related injury in Brazil and the presence of socioeconomic disparities among the injured. Yet, individual-level data is scarce. To fill this gap, we examined the association between demographic and socioeconomic characteristics with non-fatal alcohol-related injury in Maringá, Brazil. Methods: We used household survey data collected during a 2015 cross-sectional study. We conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to evaluate associations of demographic (age, gender, race) and socioeconomic characteristics (employment, education, income) with non-fatal alcohol-related injury. Results: Of the 995 participants who reported injuries, 62 (6.26%) were alcohol-related. Fifty-three (85%) alcohol-related injuries were reported by males. Multivariate analysis indicated being male (OR = 5.98 95% CI = 3.02, 13.28), 15-29 years of age (OR = 3.62 95% CI = 1.72, 7.71), and identifying as Black (OR = 2.38 95% CI = 1.09, 4.95) were all significantly associated with increased likelihood of reporting an alcohol-related injury, whereas unemployment was significantly associated with decreased likelihood of reporting an alcohol-related injury (OR = 0.41 95% CI = 0.18, 0.88). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that in Maringá, being male, between the ages of 15 and 29, employed, or identifying as Black were characteristics associated with a higher risk for non-fatal alcohol-related injury. Individual level data, such as ours, should be considered in combination with area-level and country-level data when developing evidence-based public-health policies.