1,721,031 research outputs found

    Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis in the Post-CORAL Trial Era. A Narrative Review

    Full text link
    Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS) represents a common manifestation of systemic atherosclerosis and remains an underrecognized cause of secondary hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular morbidity. Although often clinically silent, progressive narrowing of the renal artery may result in renovascular hypertension, ischemic nephropathy, or cardiac destabilization syndromes such as recurrent pulmonary edema. The pathophysiology of ARAS extends beyond simple flow limitation, involving renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation, oxidative stress, microvascular rarefaction, and parenchymal fibrosis, thereby explaining the limited reversibility of renal damage after revascularization. Over the past decades, management strategies have evolved considerably. While initial enthusiasm for surgical or endovascular revascularization was supported by observational reports of improved blood pressure and renal function, randomized controlled trials-including ASTRAL and CORAL-failed to demonstrate a consistent benefit of stenting over optimal medical therapy in unselected patients. These findings have shifted current practice toward medical therapy as the cornerstone of management, integrating renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, statins, antiplatelet agents, and, more recently, SGLT2 inhibitors. Nevertheless, accumulating evidence indicates that specific high-risk subsets-patients with resistant hypertension, recurrent pulmonary edema, or progressive ischemic nephropathy-may derive meaningful clinical benefit from timely revascularization. In the post-CORAL era, the central challenge is therefore accurate patient selection to identify the small group in whom revascularization remains appropriate, leveraging advanced imaging, physiological indices, and risk stratification

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    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

    Variations on the Author

    Full text link
    “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

    Full text link
    We 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
    corecore