1,720,975 research outputs found
Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy in Benign or Premalignant Pancreatic Lesions: Is It Really More Cost-Effective than Open Approach?
No full textBACKGROUND:
Data regarding the quality of life in patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are lacking and no studies have reported a real cost-effectiveness analysis of this surgical procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the quality of life and the cost-effectiveness of a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with respect to an open distal pancreatectomy.
METHODS:
Forty-one patients who underwent a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and 40 patients who underwent an open distal pancreatectomy were retrospectively studied as regards postoperative results, quality of life and cost-effectiveness analysis. The Italian neutral version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire C-30, version 3.0, was used to rate the quality of life.
RESULTS:
Postoperative results were similar in the two groups; the only difference was that the first oral intake took place significantly earlier in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (P < 0.001). Regarding quality of life, the laparoscopic approach was able to ameliorate physical functioning (P = 0.049), role functioning (P = 0.044) and cognitive functioning (P = 0.030) and reduce the sleep disturbance scale (P = 0.050). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the acceptability curve for a laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than an open distal pancreatectomy when a willingness to pay above 5400 Euros/quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was accepted.
CONCLUSION:
Despite the limitations of the study, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy can be considered not only safe and feasible but also permits a better quality of life and is acceptable in terms of cost-effectiveness to Italian and European health care services
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
No full textBACKGROUND:
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was proposed as an oncologically safe approach for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
METHODS:
A systematic review of the studies comparing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy was conducted. The primary endpoint was an R0 resection rate. The secondary endpoints were intra- and postoperative results, tumour size, mean harvested lymph node, number of patients eligible for adjuvant therapy and overall survival.
RESULTS:
Five comparative case control studies involving 261 patients (30.7% laparoscopic and 69.3% open) who underwent a distal pancreatectomy were included. The R0 resection rate was similar between the two groups (P = 0.53). The laparoscopic group had longer operative times (P = 0.04), lesser blood loss (P = 0.01), a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001) and smaller tumour size (P = 0.04) as compared with the laparotomic group. Overall morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula, reoperation, mortality and number of patients eligible for adjuvant therapy were similar. The mean harvested lymph nodes were comparable in the two groups (P = 0.33). The laparoscopic approach did not affect the overall survival rate (P = 0.32).
CONCLUSION:
Even if the number of patients compared is underpowered, the laparoscopic approach in the treatment of PDAC seems to be safe and efficacious. However, additional prospective, randomised, multicentric trials are needed to correctly evaluate the laparoscopic approach in PDAC
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Chyle leak after pancreatic surgery: validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery classification
No full textBackground: Chyle leak is an uncommon complication after pancreatic surgery. The chyle leak incidence, definition, diagnosis, and treatment had been reported heterogeneously so far. Recently a consensus definition and grading system was published by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. This study aims to evaluate the differences in the clinical and economic burden of chyle leak applying the new definition. Methods: All data from patients who underwent pancreatic surgery for any disease from January 2014 to December 2016 were retrieved from the institutional prospective database. The 2017 International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery definition and classification were applied. The classification was validated analyzing the differences in major complications, length of stay, and hospitalization costs. Results: A total of 945 patients was the final population. A chyle leak was reported in 43 patients (4.5%). Grade A chyle leak occurred in 10 patients (23.3%), Grade B chyle leak in 31 patients (72.1%), and Grade C chyle leak in 2 patients (4.6%). Chyle leak occurred as unique postoperative complication in 29 cases (67.4%). The economic analysis showed that the average costs of the 3 grades were 2,806, 7,150 and 15,684 euros respectively (P <.001). Furthermore, the length of stay, the rates of septic events, and major complications were significantly different among the 3 grades (P =.008, P =.004, and P <.001, respectively). Of note, we did not find any intraoperative factor associated with chyle leak. Conclusion: The present study confirms the validity of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery classification of chyle leak. The 3 grades of chyle leak proposed identify reliably clinical and economical differences among the chyle leak cases
- …
