1,721,085 research outputs found
The so-called “migraine personality”: a comparative study of headache and recurrent abdominal pain.
Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: it's time to think about it. (I.F.2.298)
Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) is a rare benign rectal disorder characterized by a combination of symptoms, endoscopic findings, and histological abnormalities (1,2). It usually affects young adults with a slight predominance in women and an estimated prevalence of 1 in 100,000 people annually (3). Although its description in paediatrics is largely limited to case reports (4–12), in an Iranian series including 256 children who had undergone colonoscopy for rectal bleeding during a 2.5-year period, 12 (4.7%) children were diagnosed as having SRUS (11)
Gastro-esophageal reflux in children
Gastro-esophageal reflux (GER) is common in infants and children and has a varied clinical presentation: from infants with innocent regurgitation to infants and children with severe esophageal and extra-esophageal complications that define pathological gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). Although the pathophysiology is similar to that of adults, symptoms of GERD in infants and children are often distinct from classic ones such as heartburn. The passage of gastric contents into the esophagus is a normal phenomenon occurring many times a day both in adults and children, but, in infants, several factors contribute to exacerbate this phenomenon, including a liquid milk-based diet, recumbent position and both structural and functional immaturity of the gastro-esophageal junction. This article focuses on the presentation, diagnosis and treatment of GERD that occurs in infants and children, based on available and current guidelines
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The 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
- …
