Haemosuccus pancreaticus and seven episodes of recurrent unlocalised upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common medical condition that results in extensive morbidity and mortality, as well as substantial healthcare costs. While there is variation among society and consensus guidelines, the approaches to assessment and evaluation are generally consistent. Our case describes a man in his 40s who presented with seven episodes of recurrent upper GI bleeding over 2 years secondary to haemosuccus pancreaticus. While rare, this case study highlights key principles to the initial diagnostic approach that, in appropriate clinical contexts, should be applied to patients with unlocalised upper GI bleeding. We further perform a complete systematic review of similar cases available in PubMed (36 patients in 24 case reports) to further refine these diagnostic principles.

American Black Authorship Has Decreased Across All Clinical Specialties Despite an Increasing Number of Black Physicians Between 1990 and 2020 in the USA.

PURPOSE: Many diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives assume that attainment of a racially diverse healthcare workforce will translate to increased diversity elsewhere in the healthcare system (e.g., leadership roles or academic authorship). We sought to investigate these trends over time by examining the evolution of physician demographics in the USA, in concert with demographic changes in US authorship in US medical journals from 1990 to 2020 across 25 specialties. METHODS: We reviewed all articles indexed in PubMed, with a primary author affiliation located in the USA and limited to journals based in the USA, relative to the proportion of medical professionals in the CMS National Provider Registry. We employed a previously peer-reviewed/validated algorithm called "averaging-of-proportions" that probabilistically predicts racial identity from surname using the US Census to assess the relationship between diversity among medical professionals and diversity in medical journal authorship. RESULTS: Data reveals a sharp disconnect between the demographic breakdown of physicians and authors. Despite an increase in the number of Black physicians (from 8.5% in 2005 to 9.1% in 2020), there has been a decrease in Black early-career authorship from 7.2% in 1990 to 5.8% in 2020. The percentage of Black early-career authors across all specialties in 2020 is lower than the average per specialty in 1990. Similar trends were noted for Black senior authorship, decreasing from 7.6% in 1990 to 6.2% in 2020, as well as a plateau in Hispanic authorship over the same time interval despite an increasing number of Hispanic physicians. CONCLUSION: Modest advances in physician diversity have not translated to increased diversity in academic authorship. Increasing diversity requires initiatives focused beyond recruitment of underrepresented minorities to medical schools or residencies.

Modeling the Adoption of 5760 Clinical Studies Into Practice Across 5 Surgical Specialties.

INTRODUCTION: No studies exist that explore the factors that influence the process of synthesizing new knowledge into perioperative standards of care and the operating room. We sought to model the adoption of clinical research into surgical practice and identify modifiable factors influencing the latency of this translation. METHODS: We created a data set comprised of all UpToDate articles between 2011 and 2020, sampled at 3-mo intervals, to explore how research is incorporated at the point-of-care (POC)-studying 5760 new references from 204 journals across five surgical specialties, compared to all uncited articles published during the same interval. UpToDate authors serve as specialty curators of the vast surgical literature, with an audience of more than a million clinicians in over 180 countries across 3200 institutions. Unlike society guidelines, UpToDate also provides the necessary granularity to quantify the time in bringing research to the bedside. Our main outcomes are citation rates and time-to-citation, split by specialty, journal, article type, and topics. We also model the influence of impact factor, geography, and funding and, finally, propose new impact indices to help with prioritizing surgical literature. RESULTS: We highlight variation in adoption of clinical research by specialty. We show, despite representing a lower quality of evidence, surgical case reports are one of the most cited article types. Furthermore, most clinical trials (94%-100%) in surgical journals are never incorporated into POC reference lists. While few, pragmatic trials were the most likely to be cited of any article type in any surgical specialty (40%). Journal impact factor did not correlate with time-to-citation or proportion of articles cited in three of five surgical specialties, suggesting differences in how specialties synthesize/value research from specialty journals. Our two metrics, the Clinical Relevancy and Immediacy Indices, were defined to capture this impact/relevance to surgical practice. Of the five surgical subspecialties, gynecology references were >5-fold more likely to get cited, had a larger fraction of higher quality evidence incorporated, and demonstrated more success with POC adoption of practice guidelines. We also quantified the cost of translating research to surgical practice per specialty and generated maps that highlight institutions successful in translating research to the POC. The higher expenditure of National Institutes of Health funding in gynecology may reflect the cost of higher quality research per citation. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding translational latency is the first step to exposing blocks that slow the adoption of research into everyday surgical practice and to understanding why increasing research funding has not yielded comparative gains in surgical outcomes. Our approach reveals new methods to monitoring the efficiency of research investments and evaluating the efficacy of policies influencing the translation of research to surgical practice.

Ethnicity and gender trends of UK authors in The British Medical Journal and the Lancet over the past two decades: a comprehensive longitudinal analysis.

Background: While gender equity among academic authors has been extensively investigated, there is a significant gap in our understanding of racial/ethnic authorship trends, despite the recognition of barriers to authorship along both ethnic and gender lines. Leveraging the meta-data for all articles published in The British Medical Journal (The BMJ) and the Lancet and between 2002 and 2022 (inclusive), we explore demographic trends among UK academic medicine authors in two of the world's leading British medical journals. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed's MEDLINE for all articles published in The BMJ and Lancet between January 1st 2002 and December 31st 2022. Filtering for articles with a UK affiliation, we predicted gender using a publicly-validated name-to-gender dictionary, while data was analysed to explore and investigate ethnicity using the Consumer Data Research Centre's (CDRC) Ethnicity Estimator. Data was analysed to explore and investigate: (a) the proportion of female/male author publications, (b) the proportion of the various UK author ethnicity groups, and (c) the overlap/intersection between gender and ethnic identities among first and last authors. This comprehensive longitudinal analysis was conducted on 82,143 articles (51,209 from The BMJ and 30,934 from the Lancet) which represents >97% of all published articles between 2002 and 2022. As we sought to understand how academic authorship reflects the diversity of the UK population, we limited our analysis to first and last authors who had a UK affiliation and excluded "news" and "comments" pieces (16,736 articles for The BMJ and 4678 articles from the Lancet). The main outcome measures were the trends in first and last authorship demographics of academic medicine, focusing on the proportion of female/male authors, ethnicity and their intersectionality. Findings: Our findings show that, while women have made substantial headway towards equity among first and last authorship in The BMJ (peaking at 42% and 43%), they remain under-represented in the Lancet (35% and 27%). In both The BMJ and Lancet, Black authors have remained severely under-represented as both first and last authors (below 1% for most of the two decades), while Asian authors have increased proportionally to match their fraction in the general population (ranging from 2 to 10%). Interpretation: Analysis over the past two decades has shown that the gender author gap is decreasing quickly in The BMJ and Lancet. However, despite the two journals' growing focus on structural inequalities in medical academia, little progress has been made in rectifying the large gap between White British authors and other ethnic groups, especially Black authors. Without more awareness, diversity initiatives which have resulted in positive gains for White women do not seem to translate well for authors of colour. Funding: None.

Tracing the path of 37,050 studies into practice across 18 specialties of the 2.4 million published between 2011 and 2020.

The absence of evidence to assess treatment efficacy partially underpins the unsustainable expenditure of the US healthcare system, a challenge exacerbated by a limited understanding of the factors influencing the translation of clinical research into practice. Leveraging a dataset of >10,000 UpToDate articles, sampled every 3 months between 2011 and 2020, we trace the path of research (37,050 newly added articles from 887 journals) from initial publication to the point-of-care, compared to the 2.4 million uncited studies published during the same time window across 18 medical specialties. Our analysis reveals substantial variation in how specialties prioritize/adopt research, with regards to a fraction of literature cited (0.4-2.4%) and quality-of-evidence incorporated. In 9 of 18 specialties, less than 1 in 10 clinical trials are ever cited. Furthermore, case reports represent one of the most cited article types in 12 of 18 specialties, comprising nearly a third of newly added references for some specialties (e.g. dermatology). Anesthesiology, cardiology, critical care, geriatrics, internal medicine, and oncology tended to favor higher-quality evidence. By modeling citations as a function of National Institutes of Health (NIH) department-specific funding, we estimate the cost of bringing one new clinical citation to the point-of-care as ranging from thousands to tens of thousands of dollars depending on specialty. The success of a subset of specialties in incorporating a larger proportion of published research, as well as high(er) quality of evidence, demonstrates the existence of translational strategies that should be applied more broadly. In addition to providing a baseline for monitoring the efficiency of research investments, we also describe new 'impact' indices to assess the efficacy of reforms to the clinical scientific enterprise.

The Under-representation and Stagnation of Female, Black, and Hispanic Authorship in the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine.

Publication in leading medical journals is critical to knowledge dissemination and academic advancement alike. Leveraging a novel dataset comprised of nearly all articles published in JAMA and NEJM from 1990 to 2020, along with established reference works for name identification, we explore changing authorship demographics in two of the world's leading medical journals. Our main outcomes are the annual proportion of male and female authors and the proportion of racial/ethnic identities in junior and senior authorship positions for articles published in JAMA and NEJM since 1990. We found that women remain under-represented in research authorship in both JAMA (at its peak, 38.1% of articles had a female first author in 2011) and NEJM (peaking at 28.2% in 2002). The rate of increase is so slow that it will take more than a century for both journals to reach gender parity. Black and Hispanic researchers have likewise remained under-represented as first and last authors in both journals, even using the best-case scenario. Their appearance as authors has remained stagnant for three decades, despite attention to structural inequalities in medical academia. Thus, analysis of authorship demographics in JAMA and NEJM over the past three decades reveals the existence of inequalities in high-impact medical journal authorship. Gender and racial/ethnic disparities in authorship may both reflect and further contribute to disparities in academic advancement.

Acaricide resistance and novel photosensitizing approach as alternative acaricides against the camel tick, Hyalomma dromedarii.

The control of the camel tick, Hyalomma dromedarii is very crucial. This study evaluated the novel toxicity of photosensitizers and Phoxim insecticide against H. dromedarii males using the adult immersion tests. Ticks were subjected to sunlight for 10 min post-treatment (PT). The optical characters of the applied materials were determined by UV-Vis spectroscopy (250-900 nm wavelengths). The intensity of spectra decreased as dye concentration decreased. The optical bandgap energies of the dyes at different concentrations were not changed as the concentration changed and decreased as the absorption peak of individual dyes red-shifted. The mortalities 72 h PT reached 42.2%, 44.4%, 51.1%, 71.1%, 46.7%, 48.9%, 44.4%, and 55.6% for chlorophyllin, echinochrome, field stain, methylene blue, phthalocyanine, rhodamine 6G, riboflavin, and safranin, respectively. Methylene blue recorded the highest median lethal concentration (LC50 = 127 ppm) followed by safranin, field stain, rhodamine 6G, phthalocyanine, echinochrome riboflavin, and chlorophyllin (LC50 = 209, 251, 271, 303, 324, 332, and 362 ppm, respectively, 72 h PT). Their median lethal time, LT50, values PT with 240 ppm were 45, 87, 96, 72, 129, 115, 131, and 137 h, respectively. The relative toxicities of the LC50 values 72 h PT showed that chlorophyllin, echinochrome, field stain, methylene blue, phthalocyanine, rhodamine 6G, riboflavin, and safranin were 3.2, 3.6, 4.6, 9.1, 3.8, 4.3, 3.5, and 5.6 times, respectively, more effective than Phoxim. Methylene blue, safranin, and field stain showed a broad absorbance area indicating a large photoactivity and better phototoxicity and could be used as alternative agents to synthetic acaricides.

Insights from full-text analyses of the Journal of the American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine.

Analysis of the content of medical journals enables us to frame the shifting scientific, material, ethical, and epistemic underpinnings of medicine over time, including today. Leveraging a dataset comprised of nearly half-a-million articles published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) over the past 200 years, we (a) highlight the evolution of medical language, and its manifestations in shifts of usage and meaning, (b) examine traces of the medical profession's changing self-identity over time, reflected in its shifting ethical and epistemic underpinnings, (c) analyze medicine's material underpinnings and how we describe where medicine is practiced, (d) demonstrate how the occurrence of specific disease terms within the journals reflects the changing burden of disease itself over time and the interests and perspectives of authors and editors, and (e) showcase how this dataset can allow us to explore the evolution of modern medical ideas and further our understanding of how modern disease concepts came to be, and of the retained legacies of prior embedded values.