RESUMO
to analyse the reliability of 6 age intervals of Spanish web-based Ages and Stages Questionnaires Third Edition (WB-ASQ-3) and parents' acceptability, in a clinical practice context, during COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown in Chile. Cross-sectional study with a longitudinal component. Internal consistency was analysed by Cronbach's alpha and Pearson product-moment correlation, Pearson's correlations between intervals questionnaires were analysed. Acceptability was determined using a parental satisfaction survey. 1061 children completed 2318 validated questionnaires. Scores were compared with normative sample, except for Gross motor at 8 and 12 months, and Communication at 12, 18 and 24 months, without differences to the previous Chileans sample. In domain analysis, Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.36 to 0.80 and reached 0.74 to 0.81 for the overall test. Strong positive correlation between the domain and overall score was obtained. Correlation between most questionnaires at different ages was positive and significant. Parental surveys show high satisfaction;parents were thankful for being able to monitor children's development. WB-ASQ-3 is a reliable and feasible screening system, particularly when the test is taken as a whole, rather than by domains. It is remarkably high acceptability among parents, especially in complex times such as the lockdown and the COVID-19 pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) AD -, Paula Schonhaut, Luisa: lschonhaut@alemana.cl Schonhaut, Luisa: Clinica Alemana, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Armijo, Ivan: Faculty of Psychology, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Rojas B., Paula: Clinica Alemana, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Cabrera, Leonardo: Clinica Alemana, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile Boisier, Roberto: Clinica Alemana, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
RESUMO
Objective: To describe the editorial processing time of published COVID-19 research articles and compare this with a similar topic, human influenza, and analyze the number of publications, withdrawals, and retractions. Methods: A descriptive-analytical study using PubMed on research articles with the MeSH terms human influenza and COVID-19. Time to acceptance (from submission to acceptance) and time to publication (from acceptance to publication) were compared. Retractions and withdrawals were reviewed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Results: There were 31 319 research articles on COVID-19 and 4 287 on human influenza published during 2020. The median time to acceptance for COVID-19 was lower than that for human influenza (8 vs. 92 days). The median time to publication for COVID-19 articles was shorter than those on human influenza (12 vs. 16 days); 47.0% of COVID-19 research articles were accepted within the first week of submission, and 19.5% within one day. There were 82 retractions and withdrawals for COVID-19 articles, 1 for human influenza, and 5 for articles that contain both terms; these were mainly related to ethical misconduct, and 27 (31.0%) were published by the same group of authors in one highest-quartile journal. Conclusions: The conundrum between fast publishing and adequate standards is shown in this analysis of COVID-19 research articles. The speed of acceptance for COVID-19 manuscripts was 11.5 times faster than for human influenza. The high number of acceptances within a day or week of submission and the number of retractions and withdrawals of COVID-19 papers might be a warning sign about the possible lack of a quality control process in scientific publishing and the peer review process.