METHODS: An electronic search was conducted on the Clarivate Analytics Web of Science "All Databases" to identify and analyze the top 50 most frequently cited scientific articles. After ranking the articles in a descending order based on their citation counts, each article was then crossmatched with the citation counts in Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed.
RESULTS: The citation counts of the 50 selected most cited articles ranged between 218 and 731 (Clarivate Analytics Web of Science). The years in which most top 50 articles were published were 2004 and 2008 (n = 5). Among 131 authors, the greatest contribution was made by M. Torabinejad (n = 14). Most of the articles originated from the United States (n = 38) with the greatest contributions from the School of Dentistry, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA (n = 15). Basic research-technology was the most frequent study design (n = 18). A negative, significant correlation occurred between citation density and publication age (correlation coefficient = -0.708, P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Several interesting differences were found between the main characteristics of the most cited articles and the most downloaded articles.
Methods: We adapted the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) methodology to identify global COPD research priorities.
Results: 62 experts contributed 230 research ideas, which were scored by 34 researchers according to six pre-defined criteria: answerability, effectiveness, feasibility, deliverability, burden reduction, and equity. The top-ranked research priority was the need for new effective strategies to support smoking cessation. Of the top 20 overall research priorities, six were focused on feasible and cost-effective pulmonary rehabilitation delivery and access, particularly in primary/community care and low-resource settings. Three of the top 10 overall priorities called for research on improved screening and accurate diagnostic methods for COPD in low-resource primary care settings. Further ideas that drew support involved a better understanding of risk factors for COPD, development of effective training programmes for health workers and physicians in low resource settings, and evaluation of novel interventions to encourage physical activity.
Conclusions: The experts agreed that the most pressing feasible research questions to address in the next decade for COPD reduction were on prevention, diagnosis and rehabilitation of COPD, especially in low resource settings. The largest gains should be expected in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) settings, as the large majority of COPD deaths occur in those settings. Research priorities identified by this systematic international process should inform and motivate policymakers, funders, and researchers to support and conduct research to reduce the global burden of COPD.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A living systematic review will be conducted which includes an initial systematic review and bimonthly review updates. Searching and screening for the review and subsequent updates will be done in four streams: a systematic search of six databases, grey literature review, preprint review and citizen sourcing. The screening will be done by a minimum of two reviewers at title/abstract and full-text in Covidence, a systematic review management software. Data will be extracted across predefined fields in an excel spreadsheet that includes information about article characteristics, context and population, community engagement approaches, and outcomes. Synthesis will occur using the convergent integrated approach. We will explore the potential to quantitatively synthesise primary outcomes depending on heterogeneity of the studies.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The initial review and subsequent bimonthly searches and their results will be disseminated transparently via open-access methods. Quarterly briefs will be shared on the reviews' social media platforms and across other interested networks and repositories. A dedicated web link will be created on the Community Health-Community of Practice site for sharing findings and obtaining feedback. A mailing list will be developed and interested parties can subscribe for updates.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022301996.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The validated exam developed by the BEST collaborative group was used to assess TM knowledge of doctors, from junior residents up to senior specialists. Scores of 42%, 62%, and 82%, corresponding to basic, intermediate, and expert levels of knowledge, respectively. Convenience sampling was done from eight blood-using departments at University Malaya Medical Centre. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the candidates' exam scores between different variables.
RESULTS: A total of 184 doctors were assessed. The overall mean score was 40.1% (SD 12.7%). The most senior doctors had a significantly lower mean score compared with resident trainees and specialists. Doctors from haematology, anesthesiology, and internal medicine had significantly higher scores (51%, 47.4%, and 46.4% respectively, p<0.05). No correlations were found between the exam scores and the self-reported amount, or quality of prior TM teaching, nor with the year of postgraduate training. Participants did poorly on questions related to transfusion reactions, especially the question on transfusion-related acute lung injury.
CONCLUSION: Inadequate transfusion medicine knowledge was found across all the departments and levels of appointment. It is concerning that the most senior decision-making doctors had especially poor knowledge. TM training is needed by all residents, and regular updates should be given to established specialists.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and grey literature. Descriptive statistics will be used to report the characteristics of included studies. The facilitators and barriers to DHTs implementation, gathered from both quantitative and qualitative data, will be synthesised using a parallel-results convergent synthesis design. A thematic analysis, employing an inductive approach, will be conducted to categorise these facilitators and barriers into coherent themes. Additionally, we will identify and categorise all available DHTs based on their equipment types and methods of operation to develop an innovative classification framework.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required, as primary data collection is not involved in this study. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and meetings with key stakeholders and partners in the field of digital health.