Increasing use of EQUATOR guidelines in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases between 2020 and 2022: A SWiM review.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of EQUATOR guidelines in scientific articles published in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases between 2020 and 2022. The aim was also to translate the most widely used guidelines into French, in order to promote their dissemination and use in otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery. METHOD: The SWiM guidelines were used. Articles published in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2022 were retrieved from the PubMed bibliographic database. Editorials, Letters to the Editor and "What is your diagnosis" articles that did not meet any EQUATOR guidelines were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 149 eligible published articles, 21.5% (n=32/149) mentioned use of such a guideline. Guideline use by the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Diseases author community progressed from 0% in 2020 to 8% in 2021 and 63% in 2022. CONCLUSION: The analysis carried out in this article and the availability of the French version of the seven EQUATOR guidelines most widely used in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases could stimulate application and compliance by authors who submit their work to the journal of the French and international French-speaking societies of otorhinolaryngology.

Evaluation of the impact of large language learning models on articles submitted to Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (OTSR): A significant increase in the use of artificial intelligence in 2023.

INTRODUCTION: There has been an unprecedented rise is the use of artificial intelligence (AI) amongst medical fields. Recently, a dialogue agent called ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) has grown in popularity through its use of large language models (LLM) to clearly and precisely generate text on demand. However, the impact of AI on the creation of scientific articles is remains unknown. A retrospective study was carried out with the aim of answering the following questions: identify the presence of text generated by LLM before and after the increased usage of ChatGPT in articles submitted in OTSR; determine if the type of article, the year of submission, and the country of origin, influenced the proportion of text generated, at least in part by AI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 390 English articles were submitted to OTSR in January, February and March 2022 (n=204) and over the same months of 2023 (n=186) were analyzed. All articles were analyzed using the ZeroGPT tool, which provides an assumed rate of AI use expressed as a percentage. A comparison of the average rate of AI use was carried out between the articles submitted in 2022 and 2023. This comparison was repeated keeping only the articles with the highest percentage of suspected AI use (greater than 10 and 20%). A secondary analysis was carried out to identify risk factors for AI use. RESULTS: The average percentage of suspected LLM use in the entire cohort was 11%±6, with 160 articles (41.0%) having a suspected AI rate greater than 10% and 61 (15.6%) with an assumed AI rate greater than 20%. A comparison between articles submitted in 2022 and 2023 revealed a significant increase in the use of these tools after the launch of ChatGPT 3.5 (9.4% in 2022 and 12.6% in 2023 [p=0.004]). The number of articles with suspected AI rates of greater than 10 and 20% were significantly higher in 2023: >10%: 71 articles (34.8%) versus 89 articles (47.8%) (p=0.008) and >20%: 21 articles (10.3%) versus 40 articles (21.5%) (p=0.002). A risk factor analysis for LLLM use, demonstrated that authors of Asian geographic origin, and the submission year 2023 were associated with a higher rate of suspected AI use. An AI rate >20% was associated to Asian geographical origin with an odds ratio of 1.79 (95% CI: 1.03-3.11) (p=0.029), while the year of submission being 2023 had an odds ratio of 1.7 (95% CI: 1.1-2.5) (p=0.02). CONCLUSION: This study highlights a significant increase in the use of LLM in the writing of articles submitted to the OTSR journal after the launch of ChatGPT 3.5. The increasing use of these models raises questions about originality and plagiarism in scientific research. AI offers creative opportunities but also raises ethical and methodological challenges. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; case control study.

Using an explicit query and a topic model for scientific article recommendation.

The search for relevant scientific articles is a crucial step in any research project. However, the vast number of articles published and available online in digital databases (Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, etc.) can make this task tedious and negatively impact a researcher's productivity. This article proposes a new method of recommending scientific articles that takes advantage of content-based filtering. The challenge is to target relevant information that meets a researcher's needs, regardless of their research domain. Our recommendation method is based on semantic exploration using latent factors. Our goal is to achieve an optimal topic model that will serve as the basis for the recommendation process. Our experiences confirm our performance expectations, showing relevance and objectivity in the results.

The role of an open artificial intelligence platform in modern neurosurgical education: a preliminary study.

The use of artificial intelligence in neurosurgical education has been growing in recent times. ChatGPT, a free and easily accessible language model, has been gaining popularity as an alternative education method. It is necessary to explore the potential of this program in neurosurgery education and to evaluate its reliability. This study aimed to show the reliability of ChatGPT by asking various questions to the chat engine, how it can contribute to neurosurgery education by preparing case reports or questions, and its contributions when writing academic articles. The results of the study showed that while ChatGPT provided intriguing and interesting responses, it should not be considered a dependable source of information. The absence of citations for scientific queries raises doubts about the credibility of the answers provided. Therefore, it is not advisable to solely rely on ChatGPT as an educational resource. With further updates and more specific prompts, it may be possible to improve its accuracy. In conclusion, while ChatGPT has potential as an educational tool, its reliability needs to be further evaluated and improved before it can be widely adopted in neurosurgical education.

Accuracy of data in abstracts of veterinary ophthalmology research articles published in peer-reviewed journals.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the accuracy of abstracts in published veterinary ophthalmology articles. PROCEDURES: Abstracts and contents of 204 original research articles in veterinary ophthalmology published in seven peer-reviewed journals between 2016-2020 were reviewed. Abstracts were considered inconsistent if they contained data that were either missing from or inconsistent with corresponding data in the article's body. Each abstract was graded between 0 (inaccurate) to 3 (accurate), and each inconsistency was subjectively classified as minor or major. The influence of selected variables was assessed: journal, impact factor, year of publication, number of words in abstract, study type (prospective/retrospective), and characteristics of the corresponding author [institution (academia/private practice), country of domicile (native/non-native English), number of publications]. RESULTS: Most abstracts were accurate, with 1%, 4%, 9% and 86% receiving a score of 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively. When detected, most inconsistencies were considered minor (77%). Although not statistically significant (p ≥ .130), the proportion of articles with a perfect score (=3) was higher in prospective (88%) vs. retrospective (81%) studies, academia (88%) vs. private practice (78%), and studies from corresponding authors domiciled in English (89%) vs. non-English (83%) speaking countries. A significant but very weak (r = -0.15 to -0.19; p ≤ .034) negative correlation was found between accuracy score and number of words, as well as 1-year and 5-year impact factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although relatively uncommon, data in abstracts that are inconsistent or missing from the article's body do occur in veterinary ophthalmology articles, and could adversely influence a reader's interpretation of study findings.

From Targeted Needs Assessment to Course Ready for Implementation-A Model for Curriculum Development and the Course Results.

This article contributes guidance on how to approach the development of a course curriculum in general and presents a specific example from medical research education. The purpose of this study is to discuss a model for translating needs assessments of targeted learners into a course curriculum. The model employs established methods for data collection, such as different interview approaches and surveys. The authors argue that there is value in going from exploratory in-depth qualitative data collection methods to more conclusive rigorous quantitative methods when developing a course curriculum. In this way, the model is especially sensitive to the needs of targeted learners in the initial phase and at the same time offers a systematic and practical approach to curriculum development. The model is presented step-by-step with the aid of an empirical example of how to assess the needs of medical doctors in the publication process and develop an introductory course in writing an initial manuscript for publication. The article concludes that the proposed model gives curriculum developers a unique opportunity to explore the needs of targeted learners in depth, while systematically aiming towards conclusive decisions on curriculum content ready for implementation.

Keys for successful publication in Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis: A STROBE analysis of peer reviews of articles submitted in 2020-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reviewing and editorial decision for articles submitted to the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was made of reviewers' comments on 1,133 scientific articles (700 original articles, 96 literature reviews, and 337 case reports), originating from 69 countries, consecutively submitted on-line between January 1st, 2020 and December 31st, 2021. The main objective was to document the acceptance rate and decision time. Accessory objectives were to synthesize the main comments and to screen for correlations between acceptance and the main characteristics of first authors, articles and reviewers' comments. RESULTS: In total, 4.1% of submitted articles were accepted. Median decision time differed significantly (P<0.0001), at 1 month in case of refusal and 4 months in case of acceptance. Reviewers mentioned failure to adhere to the journal's authors' guide, to use the appropriate EQUATOR guidelines and to adopt the recommended P<0.005 significance threshold in 94.8%, 54.2%, and 39.9% of cases, respectively. On multivariate analysis, 3 variables significantly impacted acceptance, which increased from 1.3% to 44.6% (P<0.0001) when an appropriate EQUATOR guideline was used and from 0.3% to 57.4% (P<0.0001) when the significance threshold was set at P<0.005, and decreased from 10.5% to 1.1% (P=0.0001) when the article did not originate from a French-speaking country (member of the Francophonie organization). CONCLUSION: Adhesion to modern scientific medical writing rules increased acceptance rates for articles in the European Annals of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Diseases. Teaching modern scientific medical writing needs to be enhanced in otorhinolaryngology.

El artículo científico: de la recepción del manuscrito a su publicación

El trabajo editorial casi nunca es visible en la cadena de la transmisión del conocimiento; sin embargo, es una tarea ardua, exhaustiva y precisa, en la evaluación, selección, producción y distribución del material científico, además de su difusión y marketing. Es por ello que en los siguientes párrafos se explicará, de manera sencilla, cómo es que el saber científico se construye, difunde y crea un nuevo saber, gracias a las editoriales y sus profesionales. Todo esfuerzo creador en el área de la ciencia debe tener constancia mediante un escrito, por ende, el objetivo del trabajo fue resumir el proceso de la creación del artículo científico desde la recepción del manuscrito hasta su publicación. Para ello se utilizó el método de la revisión narrativa. El artículo científico, como procedimiento individual o gremial para la difusión del desarrollo e innovación, ha sido el más empleado para mostrar el conocimiento novedoso, conservar el más antiguo y lograr que la información llegue a sus destinatarios, los cuales no necesariamente son generadores del saber humano, pero sí difusores. La descripción, evaluación y divulgación de la ciencia (socialización de la ciencia) ha sido un aspecto esencial en el desarrollo tecno-científico, que cuenta con medios certificados (revistas científicas) para acreditar y validar el conocimiento que se ha generado, o está en proceso, en un campo determinado, período de tiempo y región específicos.

Editorial work is almost never visible in the knowledge transmission chain; however, it is an arduous, exhaustive and precise task, in evaluating, selecting, producing and distributing scientific material, as well as its dissemination and marketing. That is why the following paragraphs will explain, in a simple way, how scientific knowledge is built, disseminated and creates new knowledge, thanks to publishers and their professionals. Every creative effort in the area of science must be recorded in writing, therefore, the objective of the work was to summarize the process of creating the scientific article since the reception of the manuscript to its publication; to this end, the narrative review method was used. The scientific article, as an separate or union procedure for the dissemination of development and innovation, has been the most used to show new knowledge, to preserve the first and to ensure that the information reaches its recipients, who are not necessarily generators of human knowledge, but diffusers. The description, evaluation and dissemination of science (socialization of science) has been an essential aspect in the techno-scientific development, which has certified means (scientific journals) to accredit and validate the knowledge that has been generated, or it is in progress, in a certain field, a given period and a specific region.

Algunas recomendaciones para publicar un artículo científico en una revista de impacto / Some recommendations to publish a scientific article in an impact journal

RESUMEN El artículo científico se define como un informe escrito y publicado que describe resultados originales de una investigación. Al redactar cualquier texto científico es necesario tener en cuenta que es un reflejo de la actividad cognoscitiva del hombre. La forma más reconocida y considerada por muchos, así como la de mayor apoyo social, es la publicación en revistas académicas de alto prestigio. Para ello tiene que existir un constante perfeccionamiento del vocabulario científico y la manera de estructurar el conocimiento que se brinda. Todo experimento debe quedar escrito para que otros investigadores puedan contrastarlo y reproducirlo. De otra forma, los resultados serían imprecisos, efímeros y se terminarían perdiendo. Este artículo de revisión recopila información a partir de la base de datos de Medline/PubMed. Se describen herramientas metodológicas, así como un conjunto de recomendaciones que permitan escribir un artículo científico para que sea admitido en una revista científica de impacto.

ABSTRACT The scientific article is defined as a written and published report that describes original results of an investigation. When writing any scientific text it is necessary to bear in mind that it is a reflection of the cognitive activity of man. The most recognized and considered form by many, as well as the one with the greatest social support, is publication in highly prestigious academic journals. For this, there must be a constant improvement of the scientific vocabulary and the way of structuring the knowledge that is provided. Every experiment must be written down so that other researchers can compare it and reproduce it. Otherwise, the results would be imprecise, short-lived and would be lost. This review article collects information from the Medline / PubMed database. Methodological tools are described, as well as a set of recommendations that allow writing a scientific article to be admitted in a scientific journal of impact.

Practical Steps to Writing a Scientific Manuscript.

Writing a scientific manuscript can be a very intimidating process for new writers. However, writing a scientific research article can be broken down into discrete steps to make the process more digestible. Radiology manuscripts have common conventions that differ from research in technical and other medical fields. The practical steps summarized within describe what to do before you start writing, successful writing strategies, and common writing styles. Templates for producing an abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion are outlined, along with tips to collect references and produce high quality figures. All writers can benefit from an outside writing perspective, and the practical steps described should ease the transition from a blank page to a finished manuscript.

Creating Logical Flow When Writing Scientific Articles.

Numerous guidelines on how to write a scientific article have been published. Many books and articles giving detailed instructions on how to develop a research question, perform a literature search, or design a study protocol are widely available. However, there are few guidelines on how to create logical flow when writing a scientific article. Logical flow is the key to achieving a smooth and orderly progression of ideas, sentences, paragraphs, and content towards a convincing conclusion. This article provides guidelines for creating logical flow when writing the text and main sections of a scientific article. The first step is creating a draft outline of the whole article. Once completed, the draft outline is developed into a single, coherent article that logically explains the study. Logical flow in the text is created by using precise and concise words, composing clear sentences, and connecting well-structured paragraphs. The use of transitions connects sentences and paragraphs, ensuring clarity and coherence when presenting academic arguments and conclusions. Logical flow in the main sections of a scientific article is achieved by presenting the whole story of the article sequentially in the introduction, methods, results, and discussion, focusing attention on the most important points in each section, and connecting all of these to the main purpose of the study.

Facilitators and Barriers for Young Medical Doctors Writing Their First Manuscript for Publication.

Although scientific publication is often mandatory in medical professions, writing the first research article for publication is challenging, especially as medical curricula have only a minor focus on scientific writing. The aim was therefore to identify facilitators and barriers experienced by medical doctors writing their first scientific article for publication. An explorative inductive approach made use of semi-structured interviews for collecting data until saturation. Data were analyzed with systematic text condensation. Several barriers were identified: (a) writing in general; (b) writing in English; (c) dealing with content, structure, and presentation; and (d) navigating in the author group. Good supervision in the initial writing phase was a facilitating factor. Medical doctors requested a course in which they could work on their own articles and give feedback to fellow students. They valued skilled lecturers and individual supervision, and they wanted to learn about author instructions, how to present text correctly, and how to sell their core message. Their goal was to create a useful end product and to obtain European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) points. The facilitators and barriers that medical doctors experience when writing their first scientific article for publication and their course requests should be reflected in the learning objectives and content of future courses.

What is a scientific article? A principal-agent explanation.

What is a scientific article? This paper proposes that the scientific article can be understood the main unit in a piece-rate system that solves research patrons' problems of fairly evaluating and paying scientists. It is a solution for the evaluation of science given information asymmetries between lay people and scientists. To elucidate a definition in keeping with the principal-agent approach, this paper extends both former explanations of the research article and proposals of publications as attestations to science patrons.

[Federating a research culture by a bibliographical group]. / Fédérer une culture recherche par un groupe de bibliographie.

The advent of nurse-initiated research is increasingly impacting patient care management. However, this positive observation may seem far removed from the daily stressful lives of many carers. It is therefore interesting to look at initiatives that bring together the knowledge gained from research and the day-to-day practice of carers who are still too little aware of the issue. A team from Lyon recounts its experience, describes the initial objectives, the setting up and organisation of a bibliographical reading group for non-medical carers.

How to write a manuscript for peer review.

Writing a manuscript for peer review is an art for which little formal preparation is provided during the education of physicians, scientists, and allied health professionals. At the same time, publishing their work may be central to their career ambitions. This article provides an explanation of the purpose and expected content of the components of a peer review manuscript and advice regarding how to go about writing one. It aims to somewhat demystify the process of scientific writing and render it accessible to more members of the American Society for Apheresis.

[How to write and publish a scientific article in stomatology].

The general principles and key points in writing of a scientific article in stomatology were interpreted based on the national guideline and the author's personal experiences in the present article. Efforts should be made by the authors focusing on core information, refinement and description of their papers. In the second half of the article, the general process of paper review was introduced. The article also gave suggestions on how to response to the reviewers' questions. It is well recognized that a good scientific journal was created by good authors, good reviewers and good editors. The author proposed that efforts by above mentioned three parties should be gathered to make more valuable, delicately designed and well performed clinical research articles be published.

The ranking of scientists based on scientific publications assessment.

It is generally accepted that the scientific impact factor (Web of Science) and the total number of citations of the articles published in a journal, are the most relevant parameters of the journal's significance. However, the significance of scientists is much more complicated to establish and the value of their scientific production cannot be directly reflected by the importance of the journals in which their articles are published. Evaluating the significance of scientists' accomplishments involves more complicated metrics than just their publication records. Based on a long term of academic experience, the author proposes objective criteria to estimate the scientific merit of an individual's publication record. This metric can serve as a pragmatic tool and the nidus for discussion within the readership of this journal.

How to write and publish a scientific article in stomatology / 中华口腔医学杂志

The general principles and key points in writing of a scientific article in stomatology were interpreted based on the national guideline and the author's personal experiences in the present article. Efforts should be made by the authors focusing on core information, refinement and description of their papers. In the second half of the article, the general process of paper review was introduced. The article also gave suggestions on how to response to the reviewers' questions. It is well recognized that a good scientific journal was created by good authors, good reviewers and good editors. The author proposed that efforts by above mentioned three parties should be gathered to make more valuable, delicately designed and well performed clinical research articles be published.