Objective: Infodemic, a neologism characterizing an excess of fast-tracked low quality publications, has been employed to depict the scientific research response to the COVID19 crisis. The concept relies on the presumed exponential growth of research output. This study aimed to test the COVID19 infodemic claim by assessing publication rates and patterns of COVID19-related research and a control, a year prior. Design: A Reproduction Number of Publications (Rp) was conceived. It was conceptualized as a division of a week incidence of publications by the average of publications of the previous week. The publication growth rates of preprint and MEDLINE-indexed peer-reviewed literature on COVID19 were compared using the correspondent Influenza output, a year prior, as control. Rp for COVID19 and Influenza papers and preprints were generated and compared and then analyzed in light of the respective growth patterns of their papers and preprints. Main outcomes: Output growth rates and Reproduction Number of Publications (Rp). Results: COVID19 peer-reviewed papers showed a fourteen fold increase compared to Influenza papers. COVID19 papers and preprints displayed an exponential growth curve until the 20th week. COVID19 papers displayed Rp=3.17±0.72, while the control group presented Rp=0.97±0.12. Their preprints exhibited Rp=2.18±0.54 and Rp=0.97±0.27 respectively, with no evidence of exponential growth in the control group, as its Rp remained approximately one. Conclusions: COVID19 publications displayed an epidemic pattern. As the growth patterns of COVID19 peer-reviewed articles and preprints were similar, and the majority of the COVID19 output came from indexed journals, not only authors but also editors appear to had played a significant part on the infodemic. Review protocol: https://osf.io/q3zkw/?view_only=ff540dc4630b4c6e9a2639d732047324 Ethical aspects: No ethical clarence was required as all analyzed data were publicly available.
Background Beyond Rome IV Criteria, the assessment of functional constipation in clinical practice can also be obtained by the Constipation Scoring System (CSS). By accessing the CSS, health professionals are able to measure this dysfunction, guiding initial therapeutic approach and post-treatment response. In addition, the CSS enables the standardization of results concerning functional constipation research. Objective To promote translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the CSS for the Brazilian population. Methods To attain the score in Portuguese, the adaptation was accomplished in four steps (translation, back translation, application and adjustments). Afterward, the validation and adaptation to the Brazilian population was performed through test-retest. Results For adults, the convergent validity of the Brazilian version of the CSS showed a significant correlation to the Rome IV Criteria evinced by the positive Spearman correlation (r2) of 0.816 (P<0.001). Between the test-retest responses, the translated version of the score had a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.972. A high level of internal consistency was also obtained when each item of the questionnaire was assessed separately, revealing an adequate internal reliability Conclusion The CSS was well adapted and accepted by the Brazilian population, demonstrating the linguistic and psychometric validity of this Portuguese version of the score.
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.