Search

Abstract A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to assess the prevalence of automatically listing (a) senior member(s) of a department as co-author(s) on all submitted articles in health sciences and the prevalence of degrees of support on a 5-point justification scale. Survey research was searched in PubMed, Lens.org, and Dimensions.ai. until January 5 2023. We assessed the methodological quality of studies and conducted quantitative syntheses. We identified 15 eligible surveys, that provided 67 results, all of which were rated as having low quality. A pooled estimate of 20% [95% CI 16–25] (10 surveys, 3619 respondents) of researchers in various health sciences reported that a senior member of their department was automatically listed as an author on all submitted articles. Furthermore, 28% [95% CI 22–34] of researchers (10 surveys, 2180 respondents) felt that this practice was ‘never’, 24% [95% CI 22–27] ‘rarely’, 25% [95% CI 23–28] ‘sometimes’, 13% [95% CI 9–17] ‘most of the time’, and 8% [95% CI 6–9] ‘always justified’. The practice of automatically assigning senior members of departments as co-authors on all submitted manuscripts may be common in the health sciences; with those admitting to this practice finding it unjustified in most cases. Registration of the protocol The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. Link: https://osf.io/4eywp/ .

Abstract A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey research was conducted to estimate honorary authorship prevalence in health sciences. We searched PubMed, Lens.org, and Dimensions.ai. until January 5 2023. Methodological quality was assessed and quantitative syntheses were conducted. Nineteen surveys were included and rated as having low methodological quality. We found a pooled prevalence of 26% [95% CI 21–31] (6 surveys, 2758 respondents) of researchers that perceived co-author(s) as honorary on the publication at issue (when they were not referred to any authorship criteria). That prevalence was 18% [95% CI 15–21] (11 surveys, 4272 respondents) when researchers were referred to Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria, and 51% [95% CI 47–56] (15 surveys, 5111 respondents) when researchers were asked to declare their co-author(s) contributions on the publication at issue (and these were then compared to ICMJE criteria). 10% of researchers [95% CI 9–12] (11 surveys, 3,663 respondents) reported being approached by others to include honorary author(s) on the publication at issue and 16% [95% CI 13–18] (2 surveys, 823 respondents) admitted adding (an) honorary author(s). Survey research consistently indicates that honorary authorship in the health sciences is highly prevalent, however the quality of the surveys’ methods and reporting needs improvement.

Abstract Background Rabbits are extremely sensitive to pain. There is evidence on whether non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory medication should be administered before or after surgery in rabbits. Objectives In this study, we compared the pain scores and behaviours of rabbits administered meloxicam before or after routine castration. Methods Forty‐two healthy rabbits undergoing castration were randomly assigned to receive meloxicam (1 mg/kg SC) 1 h before or upon recovery from anaesthesia. Several parameters were recorded, including the occurrence of eating, defecating and pain scores postoperatively and change in heart rate intraoperatively. Results At 4 h after surgery, eating was observed in 43% (9/21) of rabbits that received meloxicam before neutering and in 29% (6/21) of rabbits that received meloxicam after. The morning after the surgery, eating was observed in 62% (13/21) of rabbits that received meloxicam before neutering and in 57% (12/21) of rabbits that received meloxicam after. The odds of not eating increased by 1.16 times (1.03–1.29; p = 0.01) per month of age, whereas there was no significant association between eating and administration of meloxicam before or after surgery, body weight and time. Similarly, defecation, pain score and change in heart rate did not differ in animals receiving meloxicam before or after surgery. Conclusions Administration of meloxicam in rabbits undergoing castration before or after surgery does not have a relevant effect on eating, defecating or pain score. Younger rabbits show less obvious signs of pain and are more likely to resume eating habits sooner after surgery compared to older rabbits.

Abstract Background Systematic reviews that assess the benefits of interventions often do not completely capture all dimensions of the adverse effects. This cross-sectional study (part 1 of 2 studies) assessed whether adverse effects were sought, whether the findings on these effects were reported, and what types of adverse effects were identified in systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions. Methods Systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions on human patients of any health status, sex, age, and demographics, and socio-economic status, in any type of setting assessing any type of adverse effect scored at any endpoint or timing were eligible. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and 5 leading orthodontic journals were manually searched for eligible reviews between August 1 2009 and July 31 2021. Study selection and data extraction was conducted by two researchers independently. Prevalence proportions were calculated for four outcomes on seeking and reporting of adverse effects of orthodontic interventions. Univariable logistic regression models were used to determine the association between each one of these outcomes and the journal in which the systematic review was published using the eligible Cochrane reviews as reference. Results Ninety-eight eligible systematic reviews were identified. 35.7% (35/98) of reviews defined seeking of adverse effects as a research objective, 85.7% (84/98) sought adverse effects, 84.7% (83/98) reported findings related to adverse effects, and 90.8% (89/98) considered or discussed potential adverse effects in the review. Reviews in the journal Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research compared with Cochrane reviews had approximately 7 times the odds (OR 7.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 47.96) to define seeking of adverse effects in the research objectives. Five of the 12 categories of adverse effects accounted for 83.1% (162/195) of all adverse effects sought and reported. Conclusions Although the majority of included reviews sought and reported adverse effects of orthodontic interventions, end-users of these reviews should beware that these findings do not give the complete spectrum on these effects and that they could be jeopardized by the risk of non-systematically assessing and reporting of adverse effects in these reviews and in the primary studies that feed them. Much research is ahead such as developing core outcome sets on adverse effects of interventions for both primary studies and systematic reviews.

Abstract Background It is critical that abstracts of systematic reviews transparently report both the beneficial and adverse effects of interventions without misleading the readers. This cross-sectional study assessed whether adverse effects of interventions were reported or considered in abstracts of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions and whether spin on adverse effects was identified when comparing the abstracts with what was sought and reported in these reviews. Methods This cross-sectional study (part 2 of 2) used the same sample of 98 systematic reviews orthodontic interventions as used in part 1. Eligible reviews were retrieved from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the 5 leading orthodontic journals between August 1 2009 and July 31 2021. Prevalence proportions were sought for 3 outcomes as defined in the published protocol. Univariable logistic regression models were built to explore associations between the presence of spin in the abstract and a series of predictors. Odds ratios (OR) 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to quantify the strength of associations and their precision. Results 76.5% (75/98) of eligible reviews reported or considered (i.e., discussed, weighted etc.) potential adverse effects of orthodontic interventions in the abstract and the proportion of spin on adverse effects was 40.8% (40/98) in the abstract of these reviews. Misleading reporting was the predominant category of spin, i.e., 90% (36/40). Our explorative analyses found that compared to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews all 5 orthodontic journals had similar odds of the presence of spin on adverse effects in abstracts of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions. The odds of the presence of spin did not change over the sampled years (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.16) and did not depend on the number of authors (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.21), or on the type of orthodontic intervention (OR: 1.1, 95% CI: 0.45 to 2.67), or whether conflicts of interests were reported (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.68). Conclusion End users of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions have to be careful when interpreting results on adverse effects in the abstracts of these reviews, because they could be jeopardized by uncertainties such as not being reported and misleading reporting as a result of spin.

Abstract Background Honorary authorship refers to the practice of naming an individual who has made little or no contribution to a publication as an author. Honorary authorship inflates the output estimates of honorary authors and deflates the value of the work by authors who truly merit authorship. This manuscript presents the protocol for a systematic review that will assess the prevalence of five honorary authorship issues in health sciences. Methods Surveys of authors of scientific publications in health sciences that assess prevalence estimates will be eligible. No selection criteria will be set for the time point for measuring outcomes, the setting, the language of the publication, and the publication status. Eligible manuscripts are searched from inception onwards in PubMed, Lens.org , and Dimensions.ai. Two calibrated authors will independently search, determine eligibility of manuscripts, and conduct data extraction. The quality of each review outcome for each eligible manuscript will be assessed with a 14-item checklist developed and piloted for this review. Data will be qualitatively synthesized and quantitative syntheses will be performed where feasible. Criteria for precluding quantitative syntheses were defined a priori. The pooled random effects double arcsine transformed summary event rates of five outcomes on honorary authorship issues with the pertinent 95% confidence intervals will be calculated if these criteria are met. Summary estimates will be displayed after back-transformation. Stata software (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA) version 16 will be used for all statistical analyses. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using Tau2 and Chi2 tests and I 2 to quantify inconsistency. Discussion The outcomes of the planned systematic review will give insights in the magnitude of honorary authorship in health sciences and could direct new research studies to develop and implement strategies to address this problem. However, the validity of the outcomes could be influenced by low response rates, inadequate research design, weighting issues, and recall bias in the eligible surveys. Systematic review registration This protocol was registered a priori in the Open Science Framework (OSF) link: https://osf.io/5nvar/ .

Abstract Understanding marine animal stranding patterns can aid rehabilitation efforts and evaluations of ecosystem health. The goal of this retrospective study was to identify factors associated with outcome of marine animals presented to a rehabilitation facility in Brigantine, New Jersey, USA. Records of 4819 phocids, cetaceans, and sea turtles were reviewed. Taxa, age, sex, season, and outcome (natural death, euthanasia, transfer to another facility, and successful release) were recorded for each case. Binary logistic regression was employed to identify predictors associated with release, and a multivariate logistic regression model was developed to evaluate whether the association between taxa and chance of release persisted after adjustment for the other variables. Phocids were most likely to strand during winter. Phocids and sea turtles that stranded alive were more likely to be released than to die under care or be euthanized. Taxa, age, and season were all significantly associated with the probability of release. These results provide a reference for phocid, cetacean, and sea turtle stranding and rehabilitation in part of the mid-Atlantic region. Critical evaluation of wildlife rehabilitation is indicated to audit the success of efforts and to assess threats to free-ranging populations.

Mycoplasmopsis agassizii causes the Upper Respiratory Tract Disease (URTD) in tortoises. The severity of the disease usually ranges from mild to severe respiratory signs. Animals can recover, die, or become asymptomatic carriers and are source of infection for other tortoises. This study describes (i) the clinical history and the results obtained in ten years of diagnostic PCR activity for detecting M. agassizii in different species of captive tortoises in Italy, and (ii) the phylogenetic analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences of M. agassizii. A total of 26.0% out of 169 samples resulted positive by PCR and 32 out of 75 (42.7%) animals with symptoms were positive. Sequences ob-tained from the PCR products were conserved, differed from the sequence of the M. agassizii type strain PS6, and were identical to many M. agassizii sequences deposited in databases. In particular, the sequences were identical or very similar to sequences obtained previously from tortoises in It-aly. Since samples collected from different anatomical sites resulted positive, it is suggested that pools of conjunctival, nasal and oral swabs are tested for diagnostic purpose in both symptomatic and asymptomatic animals.

Abstract Background Titles and abstracts are the most read sections of biomedical papers. It is therefore important that abstracts transparently report both the beneficial and adverse effects of health care interventions and do not mislead the reader. Misleading reporting, interpretation, or extrapolation of study results is called “spin”. In this study, we will assess whether adverse effects of orthodontic interventions were reported or considered in the abstracts of both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews and whether spin was identified and what type of spin. Methods Eligibility criteria were defined for the type of study designs, participants, interventions, outcomes, and settings. We will include systematic reviews of clinical orthodontic interventions published in the five leading orthodontic journals and in the Cochrane Database. Empty reviews will be excluded. We will manually search eligible reviews published between 1 August 2009 and 31 July 2019. Data collection forms were developed a priori. All study selection and data extraction procedures will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Our main outcomes will be the prevalence of reported or considered adverse effects of orthodontic interventions in the abstract of systematic reviews and the prevalence of “spin” related to these adverse effects. We will also record the prevalence of three subtypes of spin, i.e., misleading reporting, misleading interpretation, and misleading extrapolation-related spin. All statistics will be calculated for the following groups: (1) all journals individually, (2) all journals together, and (3) the five leading orthodontic journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews separately. Generalized linear models will be developed to compare the various groups. Discussion We expect that our results will raise the awareness of the importance of reporting and considering of adverse effects and the presence of the phenomenon of spin related to these effects in abstracts of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions. This is important, because an incomplete and inadequate reporting, interpretation, or extrapolation of findings on adverse effects in abstracts of systematic reviews can mislead readers and could lead to inadequate clinical practice. Our findings could result in policy implications for making judgments about the acceptance for publication of systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions.

Abstract Background Synthesizing outcomes of underreported primary studies can pose a serious threat to the validity of outcomes and conclusions of systematic reviews. To address this problem, the Cochrane Collaboration recommends reviewers to contact authors of eligible primary studies to obtain additional information on poorly reported items. In this protocol, we present a cross-sectional study and a survey to assess (1) how reviewers of new Cochrane intervention reviews report on procedures and outcomes of contacting of authors of primary studies to obtain additional data, (2) how authors reply, and (3) the consequences of these additional data on the outcomes and quality scores in the review. All research questions and methods were pilot tested on 2 months of Cochrane reviews and were subsequently fine-tuned. Methods for the cross-sectional study Eligibility criteria are (1) all new (not-updates) Cochrane intervention reviews published in 2016, (2) reviews that included one or more primary studies, and (3) eligible interventions refer to contacting of authors of the eligible primary studies included in the review to obtain additional research data (e.g., information on unreported or missing data, individual patient data, research methods, and bias issues). Searching for eligible reviews and data extraction will be conducted by two authors independently. The cross-sectional study will primarily focus on how contacting of authors is conducted and reported, how contacted authors reply, and how reviewers report on obtained additional data and their consequences for the review. Methods for the survey The same eligible reviews for the cross-sectional study will also be eligible for the survey. Surveys will be sent to the contact addresses of these reviews according to a pre-defined protocol. We will use Google Forms as our survey platform. Surveyees are asked to answer eight questions. The survey will primarily focus on the consequences of contacting authors of eligible primary studies for the risk of bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation scores and the primary and secondary outcomes of the review. Discussion The findings of this study could help improve methods of contacting authors and reporting of these procedures and their outcomes. Patients, clinicians, researchers, guideline developers, research sponsors, and the general public will all be beneficiaries.

A 1-year-old male meerkat was found dead by the owner. The animal was clinically healthy and was regularly vaccinated for distemper virus. Necropsy revealed multifocal to confluent dry white areas in the myocardium, pneumonia and congestive hepatopathy. All the other organs, including gross vessels, were macroscopically normal. The heart showed histologically large, multifocal to confluent areas of mineralization of the myocardium and the wall of small coronary artery. Vascular calcifications were also observed in the hepatic portal tracts and kidneys arteries of small/medium sizes. The arterial lumen appeared narrowed and the wall thickened due to the calcification of the tunica media. In veterinary medicine, arterial mineralization is regarded as a metastatic calcification, as the result of hypercalcemia and/or hyperphosphatemia. However, today, the pathogenesis of medial artery calcification in humans seems to be the results of an active process resembling embryonic osteogenesis, rather than a mere passive process.

The royal python (Python regius) is commonly bred in captivity. To have a successful breeding season, accurate monitoring of the reproductive activity is necessary. The use of non-invasive monitoring methods in exotics is important in order to minimize stress. For this purpose ultrasound has been anecdotally used to monitor royal python reproductive activity. However, there is limited information regarding the reproductive cycle of this species. The aim of the present study is to monitor the female reproductive cycle of the royal python using ultrasonography and gonadal steroid metabolite measurements in the faeces. The reproductive activity of one hundred twenty-nine adult female P. regius was examined during two consecutive years. We performed brief scans on non-anaesthetized snakes using a portable ultrasound system and a 10-12 MHz linear array transducer (MyLab™ 30 Gold, Esaote). Ultrasound features, dimension and echogenicity of the reproductive structures were determined. During the second reproductive cycle, the hormonal profiles of 30 animals were also evaluated, with a monthly collection of faecal samples. These samples were classified according to reproductive stage, as identified by ultrasonographic examination, and the mean faecal progesterone and 17β-estradiol levels were calculated using the results from an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Progesterone levels increased during the reproductive cycle. Estradiol levels showed greater variability, although they appeared to increase before coupling when compared to the levels between coupling and egg laying. The present study suggests that it is possible to identify different phases in the female royal python reproductive cycle: anovulatory phase, transition, folliculogenesis and embryogenesis. Ultrasound is also useful for identifying follicular regression or slugs. Gonadal steroid metabolite measurements from the faeces could help integrate reproductive information. The use of ultrasonography in addition to the steroid metabolite measurement in the faeces gives an accurate picture of ovarian activity in captive adult female royal pythons.

The validity of studies that assess the effectiveness of an intervention (EoI) depends on variables such as the type of study design, the quality of their methodology, and the participants enrolled. Five leading veterinary journals and 5 leading human medical journals were hand-searched for EoI studies for the year 2013. We assessed (1) the prevalence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) among EoI studies, (2) the type of participants enrolled, and (3) the methodological quality of the selected studies. Of 1707 eligible articles, 590 were EoI articles and 435 RCTs. Random allocation to the intervention was performed in 52% (114/219; 95%CI:45.2–58.8%) of veterinary EoI articles, against 87% (321/371; 82.5–89.7%) of human EoI articles (adjusted OR:9.2; 3.4–24.8). Veterinary RCTs were smaller (median: 26 animals versus 465 humans) and less likely to enroll real patients, compared with human RCTs (OR:331; 45–2441). Only 2% of the veterinary RCTs, versus 77% of the human RCTs, reported power calculations, primary outcomes, random sequence generation, allocation concealment and estimation methods. Currently, internal and external validity of veterinary EoI studies is limited compared to human medical ones. To address these issues, veterinary interventional research needs to improve its methodology, increase the number of published RCTs and enroll real clinical patients.

Asian palm civets ( Paradoxurus hermaphroditus ), or toddy cats, belong to the family Viverridae. Little is known about the pathology of these animals and few articles have been published, mainly concerning their important role as wild reservoir hosts for severe infectious diseases of domestic animals and human beings. A 4-year-old, female Asian palm civet was found dead by the owner. At necropsy, large amount of adipose tissue was found in the subcutis and in the peritoneal cavity. Most of the pancreas appeared red, translucent. Hepatomegaly, discoloration of the liver were evident, with multifocal areas of degeneration, characterized by white nodular lesions. Histologically, the pancreas showed severe interstitial and perilobular necrosis and extensive haemorrhages, with separation of the interstitium, mild reactive inflammation at the periphery of the pancreatic lobules. Liver showed multifocal foci of vacuolar degeneration, lipidic accumulation, sometimes associated to hepatocyte necrosis. A diagnosis of acute severe hemorrhagic-necrotizing pancreatitis (or acute pancreatic necrosis) associated with pancreatic and hepatic lipidosis was made. To the best of our knowledge, this represents the first case report of acute lethal pancreatitis in an Asian palm civet. Although the exact cause of the disease remains undetermined, a hypothesis of the cause and pathogenesis is discussed, pointing out dietary indiscretion and consequent overweight as possible important risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]