Objective To evaluate the risk of preterm delivery in patients with adenomyosis.Design A 1:2 nested case-control study.Setting Tertiary-care institution.Population A base cohort population of 2138 pregnant women who attended routine prenatal check-up between July 1999 and June 2005.Methods From this base cohort population, gravid women with singleton pregnancy who delivered prior to the completion of 37 weeks of gestation were identified and formed the study group. Singleton gravid women who had term delivery and who matched with age, body mass index, smoking, and status of previous preterm delivery were recruited concurrently and served as control group. Preterm delivery cases were further divided into spontaneous preterm delivery and preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) cases.Main outcome measures Risk analysis of preterm delivery between gravid women with and without adenomyosis.Results One-hundred and four preterm delivery case subjects and 208 control subjects were assessed. Overall, gravid women with adenomyosis were associated with significantly increased risk of preterm delivery (adjusted odds ratio 1.96, 95% CI 1.23-4.47, P = 0.022). For subgroup analysis, gravid women with adenomyosis had an adjusted 1.84-fold risk of spontaneous preterm delivery (95% CI 1.32-4.31, P = 0.012) and an adjusted 1.98-fold risk of PPROM (95% CI 1.39-3.15, P = 0.017).Conclusions Gravid women with adenomyosis were associated with increased risk of both spontaneous preterm delivery and PPROM. A common pathophysiological pathway may exist in these two disorders. Further in-depth biochemical and molecular studies are necessary to explore this phenomenon.
Background Many previous papers have investigated most-cited articles or most productive authors in academics, but few have studied most-cited authors. Two challenges are faced in doing so, one of which is that some different authors will have the same name in the bibliometric data, and the second is that coauthors’ contributions are different in the article byline. No study has dealt with the matter of duplicate names in bibliometric data. Although betweenness centrality (BC) is one of the most popular degrees of density in social network analysis (SNA), few have applied the BC algorithm to interpret a network’s characteristics. A quantitative scheme must be used for calculating weighted author credits and then applying the metrics in comparison. Objective This study aimed to apply the BC algorithm to examine possible identical names in a network and report the most-cited authors for a journal related to international mobile health (mHealth) research. Methods We obtained 676 abstracts from Medline based on the keywords “JMIR mHealth and uHealth” (Journal) on June 30, 2018. The author names, countries/areas, and author-defined keywords were recorded. The BCs were then calculated for the following: (1) the most-cited authors displayed on Google Maps; (2) the geographical distribution of countries/areas for the first author; and (3) the keywords dispersed by BC and related to article topics in comparison on citation indices. Pajek software was used to yield the BC for each entity (or node). Bibliometric indices, including h-, g-, and x-indexes, the mean of core articles on g(Ag)=sum (citations on g-core/publications on g-core), and author impact factor (AIF), were applied. Results We found that the most-cited author was Sherif M Badawy (from the United States), who had published six articles on JMIR mHealth and uHealth with high bibliometric indices (h=3; AIF=8.47; x=4.68; Ag=5.26). We also found that the two countries with the highest BC were the United States and the United Kingdom and that the two keyword clusters of mHealth and telemedicine earned the highest indices in comparison to other counterparts. All visual representations were successfully displayed on Google Maps. Conclusions The most cited authors were selected using the authorship-weighted scheme (AWS), and the keywords of mHealth and telemedicine were more highly cited than other counterparts. The results on Google Maps are novel and unique as knowledge concept maps for understanding the feature of a journal. The research approaches used in this study (ie, BC and AWS) can be applied to other bibliometric analyses in the future.
Controversy remains over whether anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) or posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is superior for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. We therefore performed a systematic review including three prospective randomized controlled trails (RCT) and seven retrospective comparative studies (RCoS) by searching PubMed and EMBASE. These studies were assessed on risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and the quality of evidence and level of recommendation were evaluated according to the GRADE approach. Clinical outcomes, complications, reoperation rates, radiological parameters, and cost/cost-utility were evaluated. The mean complication rate was 7% in the ACDF group and 4% in the PCF group, and the mean reoperation rate was 4% in the ACDF group and 6% in the PCF group within 2 years of the initial surgery. There was a strong level of recommendation that no difference existed in clinical outcome, complication rate and reoperation rate between the ACDF and the PCF group. There was conflicting evidence that the ACDF group had better clinical outcomes than the PCF group (one study with weak level of recommendation). PCF could preserve the range of motion (ROM) of the operated segment but did not increase the ROM of the adjacent segment (weak level of recommendation). Meanwhile, the average cost or cost-utility of the PCF group was significantly lower than that of the ACDF group (weak level of recommendation). In conclusion, the PCF was just as safe and effective as the ACDF in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Meanwhile, PCF might have lower medical cost than ACDF and decrease the incidence of adjacent segment disease. Based on the available evidence, PCF appears to be another good surgical approach in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.
Background: Studies of the 100 most-cited articles are reported for many subjects. However, none has analyzed the article characteristics associated with high citation frequency. This study aims to (1) graphically depict characteristics of the 100 top-cited articles addressing adult spinal deformity (ASD), (2) diagram the association between articles according to subject and major topic medical subject headings (MeSHs), and (3) investigate whether major topic MeSH correlates with article citation frequency. Methods: The 100 top-cited ASD publications since 2011 were retrieved using a PubMed Central search on May 6, 2020. Using titles and abstracts, eight subject categories were identified: surgery, conservative treatment, normal values in spinopelvic alignment, review, cervical alignment, classification, compensatory mechanism, and spine-hip relationship. Sankey diagrams were used to organize the information. Network analysis was performed according to article subject and major topic MeSHs. Pearson’s r was used to determine whether the weighted number of citations correlates with major topic MeSHs and the number of citations. Results: The average number of citations per article was 34.8 (range, 19–156). The most represented country was USA (n = 51). The most productive and highly cited journal was Spine (Phila Pa 1976) (n = 34; average, 38.2 citations per article). The most frequent subject categories and major topic MeSHs were “surgery” (n = 53) and “scoliosis” (weighted count, 9.8), while articles with the subject “compensatory” had the highest average number of citations (64.7). The most highly cited article, by Dr. F. Schwab in 2012, had 156 citations. Network analysis revealed the relationships between these articles according to major topic MeSHs. The weighted number of citations according to major topic MeSHs correlated significantly with article citation frequency (Pearson’s r, 0.57; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Multiple characteristics of the 100 top-cited ASD articles are presented in diagrams to guide evidence-based clinical decision-making in ASD.
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.