Browsing by Author "Peters, Alexander W."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparative analysis of authorship trends in the Journal of Hand Surgery European and American volumes: A bibliometric analysis
    (Elsevier, 2020-05-24) Peters, Alexander W.; Savaglio, Michael K.; Gunderson, Zachary J.; Adam, Gremah; Milto, Anthony J.; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine
    Background The purpose of this study was to better understand the authorship publishing trends in the field of hand surgery. To accomplish this, a comparative analysis was completed between the European and American volumes of the Journal of Hand Surgery (JHSE and JHSA) over the past three decades. Well-established bibliometric methods were used to examine one representative year from each of the past three decades. The focus of the study was to examine changes in author gender over time as well as to compare authorship trends across the two volumes. Materials and methods All JHSA and JHSE publications from 1985, 1995, 2005, and 2015 were placed into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Data was collected for each publication including the gender of first and corresponding authors, corresponding author position, corresponding author country of origin, number of credited institutions, authors, printed pages, and references. Countries were grouped by regions. Results A total of 450 and 763 manuscripts from JHSE and JHSA, respectively, met inclusion criteria. JHSE and JHSA both showed increases in most variables analyzed over time. Both journals showed an increase in female first and corresponding authors. JHSE and JHSA displayed a rise in collaboration between institutions and countries. Conclusions Both JHSE and JHSA display increasing female inclusion in the hand surgery literature, which has traditionally been a male dominated field. The observed increase in collaboration between institutions and countries is likely linked to advances in technology that allow sharing of information more conveniently and reliably than was previously possible. As further advances are made socially and technologically, hopefully these trends will continue, leading to faster and higher quality research being generated in the field of hand surgery.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Next generation sequencing in patients with nephrolithiasis: how does it perform compared with standard urine and stone cultures?
    (Sage, 2021-02-22) Nottingham, Charles U.; Assmus, Mark A.; Peters, Alexander W.; Large, Tim; Agarwal, Deepak K.; Rivera, Marcelino E.; Krambeck, Amy E.; Urology, School of Medicine
    Background: Our aim was to compare microorganism detection between standard culture (Ctx) and next generation sequencing (NGS) in patients undergoing surgery for nephrolithiasis; we prospectively compared both urine and stone culture results using these two techniques. Methods: We prospectively compared microorganism detection of urine and stone cultures using Ctx versus NGS in patients undergoing surgery for nephrolithiasis. We analyzed preoperative voided urine (Voided) using both Ctx and NGS. Intraoperatively, renal stone (Stone) cultures were analyzed with Ctx and NGS. The primary outcome was concordance in microorganism detection between Voided Ctx and Stone NGS, as well as between Stone Ctx and Stone NGS. Results: We prospectively evaluated 84 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of Voided Ctx predicting Stone Ctx were 66.7%, 73.7%, 54.5%, and 82.4%, respectively. Concordance of Voided Ctx microorganisms to Stone microorganisms decreased when NGS was used for the Stone compared with Ctx. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of Voided NGS to predict Stone Ctx microorganisms were 85.2%, 24.6%, 34.8%, and 77.8%, respectively. The concordance of Voided NGS to Stone microorganisms improved when the Stone was analyzed via NGS compared with Ctx. Conclusion: NGS has a higher detection rate of microorganisms than standard culture for both preoperative urine and stone cultures. Voided NGS was the most sensitive in predicting a positive Stone sample, but the specificity and PPV were, overall, low. Further correlation of NGS microorganism detection with patient outcomes will determine which clinical situations may benefit most from NGS versus standard culture in patients with urinary-tract stones.