Attitudes of editors of core clinical journals about whether systematic reviews are original research: a mixed-methods study.

In 2009, not all journal editors considered systematic reviews (SRs) to be original research studies, and not all PubMed Core Clinical Journals published SRs. The aim of this study was to conduct a new analysis about editors' opinion regarding SRs as original research. We conducted a survey and qualitative interview study of journal editors. All editors listed as editor-in chief of 118 PubMed Core Clinical Journals. We contacted editors via email and asked them whether they considered SRs original research, whether they published SRs in the journal and, if yes, in which section. We searched PubMed for any SRs (or meta-analyses) published in the included journals in 2017; if we did not find any, we hand-searched these journals. Editors were invited to participate in a follow-up qualitative interview study. We received responses from 73 editors representing 72 (62%) journals. Fifty-two (80%) editors considered SRs original research, either for any type of SR (65%) or only for SRs with a meta-analysis (15%) and almost all (91%) of editors published SRs. Compared with the results of the 2009 study of Core Clinical Journals, a similar proportion of editors considered SRs to be original studies (71%), accepted SRs as original on certain condition such as presence of meta-analysis (14%) or published SRs (94%). Interviews with editors showed that they used various criteria to decide whether a SR is original research, including methodology, reproducibility, originality of idea and level of novelty. The majority of editors of core clinical journals consider that SRs are original research. Among editors, there was no uniform approach to defining what makes a SR, or any study, original. This indicates that the concepts of originality of SRs and research are evolving and that this would be a relevant topic for further discussion

Portal vein thrombosis following laparoscopic cholecystectomy complicated by dengue viral infection: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Portal vein thrombosis is an uncommon post-operative complication following abdominal surgery. Although therapeutic anticoagulation is recommended, this treatment may be questionable when the patient has an associated bleeding diathesis.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report a case of a 63-year-old woman of Asian Indian ethnicity who developed portal vein thrombosis following an uneventful laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. Her condition was further complicated by dengue viral infection in the post-operative period, with thrombocytopenia immediately preceding the diagnosis of portal vein thrombosis. The etiological connections between dengue viral infection with thrombocytopenia, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, portal vein thrombosis as well as the treatment dilemmas posed in treating a patient with portal vein thrombosis with a bleeding diathesis are discussed.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>When portal vein thrombosis occurs in patients with contraindications to anticoagulation, there is a role for initial conservative management without aggressive anticoagulation therapy and such patients must be approached on an individualized basis.</p

The association between treatment modality, lipid profile, ,metabolic control in children with type 1 diabetes and celiac disease—data from the international sweet registry

Background and Aims: A higher frequency of dyslipidemia is reported in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and celiac disease (CD). Recently, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) has been associated with better lipid profiles in patients with T1D. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between treatment modality and lipid profile, metabolic control, and body mass index (BMI)-SDS in children with both T1D and CD. Methods: Cross-sectional study in children registered in the international SWEET database in November 2020. Inclusion criteria were children (2–18 years) with T1D and CD with available data on treatment modality (CSII and injections therapy, IT), triglyceride, total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, dyslipidemia, HbA1c, and BMI-SDS. Overweight/obesity was defined as > +1 BMI-SDS for age. Data were analyzed by linear and logistical regression models with adjustment for age, gender, and diabetes duration. Results: In total 1009 children with T1D and CD (female 54%, CSII 54%, age 13.9 years ±3.6, diabetes duration 7.2 years ±4.1, HbA1c 7.9% ±1.4) were included. Significant differences between children treated with CSII vs. IT were respectively found; HDL 60.0 mg/dL vs. 57.8 mg/dL, LDL 89.4 mg/dL vs. 94.2 mg/dL, HbA1c 7.7 vs. 8.1%, BMI-SDS 0.4 vs. 0.6, overweight and obesity 17% vs. 26% (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: CSII is associated with higher HDL and lower LDL, HbA1c, BMI-SDS, and percentage of overweight and obesity compared with IT in this study. Further prospective studies are required to determine whether CSII improves lipid profile, metabolic control and normalize body weight in children with both T1D and CD