12 research outputs found

    Avoiding mistakes while writing scientific manuscripts in health sciences

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: This article is part of a special series designed to help authors in the process of scientific writing. OBJECTIVE: To address common mistakes that researchers commit while writing a manuscript, in order to understand and optimize the process of writing a new research paper. METHODS: The authors made a nonsystematic search in the current literature (PubMed) to retrieve papers that address the most frequent mistakes found by editors, peer reviewers, journals and authors. RESULTS: According to the search results, key findings about the most common mistakes for each section of a manuscript were described (introduction section, methods section, results section, discussion section, conclusion section, references, title and abstract). CONCLUSION: There is a great amount of avoidable mistakes in each section of a scientific manuscript. Overall, among the most common mistakes are missing data, incomplete sections, excessive report of current literature or reporting data in an inadequate section.</p

    Impact of Covid-19 on Stroke Code Activations, Process Metrics, and Diagnostic Error

    No full text
    Background and Purpose: In a comprehensive stroke center, we analyzed the stroke code activations (SCA), assessed the impact of Covid-19, and the measures taken by the local government to lessen the spread of the disease. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed SCA and classified them into 2 groups: pre-pandemic activations (February 15 to March 10) and Covid-19 pandemic activations (March II to April 30). The primary outcome was the ratio of true positive diagnoses of stroke relative to the total number of SCA in the 2 time periods. Results: Among the 212 SCA, 83 (39.2%) were from the pre-pandemic period, whereas 129 (60.8%) were from the pandemic period, 147 (69.3%) in the Emergency Department (ED) versus 65 (30.7%) in the inpatient service. In the ED cohort, a rapid decrease in the number of SCA at the beginning of the pandemic was followed by a gradual increase to pre-pandemic levels and a significant increase in the number of true positive strokes over time (44.2% vs 61.1%, p = 0.037). An increase in door-to-CT time (p = 0.001) and an increase in the rate of diagnostic error in patients admitted from the ED (p = 0.016) were also seen. The in-hospital cohort had a sustained decrease in the number of SCA following the pandemic declaration, with no difference in the rate of true positive stroke. Conclusions: We observed a rapid decline and slow recovery in ED SCA with a shift toward increased true positive cases following the Covid-19 pandemic. Also, delays in obtaining CT and diagnostic error was increased, however, no difference in early clinical outcomes were seen between groups
    corecore