Browsing by Author "Whipple, Elizabeth C."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 65
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item 184 Cross-institutional collaborations for health equity research at a CTSA(Cambridge University Press, 2022-04-19) Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Ramirez, Mirian; Dolan, Levi; Hunt, Joe D.; Ruth Lilly Medical Library, School of MedicineOBJECTIVES/GOALS: We were interested in health equity research for each CTSA-affiliated institution, specifically focusing on cross department and cross-campus co-authorship. We conducted a bibliometric analysis of our CTSA-funded papers relating to diversity and inclusion to identify cross department and cross-campus collaborations. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We worked with our CTSAs Racial Justice, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Task Force to conduct an environmental scan of diversity and inclusion research across our CTSA partner institutions. Using the Scopus database, searches were constructed to identify and retrieve the variety of affiliations for each of the CTSA authors, a health equity/health disparities search hedge, and all of our CTSA grant numbers. We limited the dates from the beginning of our CTSA in 2008-November 2021. We used PubMed to retrieve all MeSH terms for the articles. We used Excel to analyze the data, Python and NCBIs Entrez Programming Utilities to analyze MeSH terms, and VOSviewer to produce the visualizations. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The results of this search yielded 94 articles overall. We broke these up into subsets (not mutually exclusive) to represent five of the researcher groups across our CTSA. We analyzed the overall dataset for citation count, normalized citation count, CTSA average authors, gender trends, and co-term analysis. We also developed cross department co-authorship maps and cross-institutional/group co-authorship maps. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This poster will demonstrate both the current areas where cross-departmental and cross-institutional collaboration exists among our CTSA authors, as well as identify potential existing areas for collaboration to occur. These findings may determine areas our CTSA can support to improve institutional performance in addressing health equity.Item Association of Extubation Failure Rates With High-Flow Nasal Cannula, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, and Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy in Infants and Young Children: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis(American Medical Association, 2023-06-05) Iyer, Narayan Prabhu; Rotta, Alexandre T.; Essouri, Sandrine; Fioretto, Jose Roberto; Craven, Hannah J.; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Ramnarayan, Padmanabhan; Abu-Sultaneh, Samer; Khemani, Robinder G.IMPORTANCE: Extubation failure (EF) has been associated with worse outcomes in critically ill children. The relative efficacy of different modes of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) to prevent EF is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To study the reported relative efficacy of different modes of NRS (high-flow nasal cannula [HFNC], continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP], and bilevel positive airway pressure [BiPAP]) compared to conventional oxygen therapy (COT). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Complete through May 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials that enrolled critically ill children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours and compared the efficacy of different modes of postextubation NRS. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Random-effects models were fit using a bayesian network meta-analysis framework. Between-group comparisons were estimated using odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Treatment rankings were assessed by rank probabilities and the surface under the cumulative rank curve (SUCRA). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was EF (reintubation within 48 to 72 hours). Secondary outcomes were treatment failure (TF, reintubation plus NRS escalation or crossover to another NRS mode), pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) mortality, PICU and hospital length of stay, abdominal distension, and nasal injury. RESULTS: A total of 11 615 citations were screened, and 9 randomized clinical trials with a total of 1421 participants were included. Both CPAP and HFNC were found to be more effective than COT in reducing EF and TF (CPAP: OR for EF, 0.43; 95% CrI, 0.17-1.0 and OR for TF 0.27, 95% CrI 0.11-0.57 and HFNC: OR for EF, 0.64; 95% CrI, 0.24-1.0 and OR for TF, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.16- 0.65). CPAP had the highest likelihood of being the best intervention for both EF (SUCRA, 0.83) and TF (SUCRA, 0.91). Although not statistically significant, BiPAP was likely to be better than COT for preventing both EF and TF. Compared to COT, CPAP and BiPAP were reported as showing a modest increase (approximately 3%) in nasal injury and abdominal distension. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The studies included in this systematic review and network meta-analysis found that compared with COT, EF and TF rates were lower with modest increases in abdominal distension and nasal injury. Of the modes evaluated, CPAP was associated with the lowest rates of EF and TF.Item Authorship Trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research: A Bibliometric Analysis(Wiley, 2018) Seetharam, Abhijit; Ali, Mohammed T.; Wang, Christine Y.; Schultz, Katherine E.; Fischer, James P.; Lunsford, Shatoria; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicinePublications are an important tool to measure one's success and achievement in academia. They can help propel a career forward and move one into a position of leadership. The overall purpose of this study was to investigate changes in bibliometric variables, authorship, and collaboration trends in the Journal of Orthopaedic Research (JOR®), since its inception in 1983. A bibliometric analysis was completed for all manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria (638), which were published throughout the inaugural year plus one representative year of each decade. Several parameters were investigated including numbers of manuscripts, authors, collaborating institutions/countries, references, pages, and citations; region of origin and gender of authors over time and by region were main focuses. Significant increases over time were observed in all bibliometric variables analyzed except in the number of pages and citations. There was an approximate 27 percentage point increase for both female first and corresponding authors from 1983 to 2015. While this is most likely due to the increase in the number of women that have entered the field over time, similar increases in the percentage of women holding positions on the JOR editorial board or in leadership positions within in the field may have also contributed to improvements in gender parity. Understanding changes in publishing characteristics over time, by region, and by gender are critical, especially with the rising demands of publishing in academia. JOR has seen increase in most variables analyzed, including improvements in authorship by women in the field of orthopaedic research.Item Authorship Trends Over the Past 30-Years in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering(Springer, 2019-05) Aguilar, Izath Nizeet; Ganesh, Venkateswaran; Mannfeld, Rachel; Gorden, Riley; Hatch, Jennifer M.; Lunsford, Shatoria; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicineIn academia, manuscripts serve as an important component of career development. The past several years have seen heightened evaluation of the role of the gender gap in career advancement, as well as other bibliometric changes in publications. We therefore analyzed authorship and publication trends in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering over the past three decades (one complete year of manuscripts for each decade; 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016). The variables analyzed were number of authors per manuscript, numerical position of the corresponding author, number of collaborating institutions and countries, number of references, and number of citations per manuscript. The gender of both the first and corresponding authors was identified and analyzed over time and by region. Globally, the percentage of female first and corresponding authors significantly increased from 0% in 1986 to 28.6% (p = 0.003) and 20.4% (p = 0.0009), respectively, in 2016. Although there were significant differences regarding female first and corresponding author over time, they did not vary by region of origin (p = 0.5 and 0.2, respectively). Overall, these findings highlight the improvements made and the challenges that still exist related to publishing within the bioengineering field.Item Bibliometric analysis of authorship trends and collaboration dynamics over the past three decades of BONE's publication history(Elsevier, 2018-02) Khan, Faisal; Sandelski, Morgan M.; Rytlewski, Jeff; Lamb, Jennifer; Pedro, Christina; Adjei, Michael B. N.; Lunsford, Shatoria; Fischer, James P.; Wininger, Austin E.; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicineThe existence of a gender gap in academia has been a hotly debated topic over the past several decades. It has been argued that due to the gender gap, it is more difficult for women to obtain higher positions. Manuscripts serve as an important measurement of one's accomplishments within a particular field of academia. Here, we analyzed, over the past 3 decades, authorship and other trends in manuscripts published in BONE, one of the premier journals in the field of bone and mineral metabolism. For this study, one complete year of manuscripts was evaluated (e.g. 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015) for each decade. A bibliometric analysis was then performed of authorship trends for those manuscripts. Analyzed fields included: average number of authors per manuscript, numerical position of the corresponding author, number of institutions collaborating on each manuscript, number of countries involved with each manuscript, number of references, and number of citations per manuscript. Each of these fields increased significantly over the 30-year time frame (p < 10− 6). The gender of both the first and corresponding authors was identified and analyzed over time and by region. There was a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors from 23.4% in 1985 to 47.8% in 2015 (p = 0.001). The percentage of female corresponding authors also increased from 21.2% in 1985 to 35.4% in 2015 although it was not significant (p = 0.07). With such a substantial emphasis being placed on publishing in academic medicine, it is crucial to comprehend the changes in publishing characteristics over time and geographical region. These findings highlight authorship trends in BONE over time as well as by region. Importantly, these findings also highlight where challenges still exist.Item Bibliometric Analysis of Female Authorship Trends and Collaboration Dynamics Over JBMR's 30-Year History(Wiley, 2017) Wininger, Austin E.; Fischer, James P.; Likine, Elive F.; Gudeman, Andrew S.; Brinker, Alexander R.; Ryu, Jonathan; Maupin, Kevin A.; Lunsford, Shatoria; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicineIn academia, authorship is considered a currency and is important for career advancement. As the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (JBMR) is the highest-ranked journal in the field of bone, muscle, and mineral metabolism and is the official publication of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, we sought to examine authorship changes over JBMR's 30-year history. Two bibliometric methods were used to collect the data. The “decade method” included all published manuscripts throughout 1 year in each decade over the past 30 years starting with the inaugural year, yielding 746 manuscripts for analysis. The “random method” examined 10% of published manuscripts from each of the 30 years, yielding 652 manuscripts for analysis. Using both methods, the average number of authors per manuscript, numerical location of the corresponding author, number of collaborating institutions, number of collaborating countries, number of printed manuscript pages, and the number of times each manuscript was cited all significantly increased between 1986 and 2015 (p < 10−4). Using the decade method, there was a significant increase in the percentage of female first authors over time from 35.8% in 1986 to 47.7% in 2015 (p = 0.02), and this trend was confirmed using the random method. The highest percentage of female first authors in 2015 was in Europe (60.0%), and Europe also had the most dramatic increase in female first authors over time (more than double in 2015 compared with 1986). Likewise, the overall number of female corresponding authors significantly increased during the past 30 years. With the increasing demands of publishing in academic medicine, understanding changes in publishing characteristics over time and by geographical region is important. These findings highlight JBMR's authorship trends over the past 30 years and demonstrate those countries having the most changes and where challenges still exist.Item Bibliometric Analysis of Gender Authorship Trends and Collaboration Dynamics over 30 Years of Spine 1985 to 2015(Wolters Kluwer, 2018-02) Brinker, Alexander R.; Liao, Jane L.; Kraus, Kent R.; Young, Jocelyn; Sandelski, Morgan; Mikesell, Carter; Robinson, Daniel; Adjei, Michael; Lunsford, Shatoria D.; Fischer, James; Kacena, Melissa A.; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Loder, Randall T.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicineStudy Design. A bibliometric analysis. Objective. The aim of this article was to study bibliometric changes over the last 30 years of Spine. These trends are important regarding academic publication productivity. Summary of Background Data. Inflation in authorship number and other bibliometric variables has been described in the scientific literature. The issue of author gender is taking on increasing importance, as efforts are being made to close the gender gap. Methods. From 1985 to 2015, 10-year incremental data for several bibliometric variables were collected, including author gender. Standard bivariate statistical analyses were performed. Trends over time were assessed by the Cochran linear trend. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results. Inclusion criteria were met for 1566 manuscripts. The majority of the manuscripts were from North America (51.2%), Europe (25.2%), and Asia (20.8%). The number of manuscripts, authors, countries, pages, and references all increased from 1985 to 2015. There was a slight increase in female first authors over time (17.5% to 18.4%, P = 0.048). There was no gender change over time for corresponding authors (14.3% to 14.0%, P = 0.29). There was an 88% increase in the percentage of female first authors having male corresponding authors (P = 0.00004), and a 123% increase in male first authors having female corresponding authors (P = 0.0002). The 14% to 18% of female authors in Spine is higher than the ∼5% female membership of the Scoliosis Research Society and North American Spine Society. Conclusion. Manuscripts in Spine over the past 30 years have shown a significant increase in the number of authors, collaborating institutions and countries, printed pages, references, and number of times each manuscript was cited. There has been a mild increase in female first authorship, but none in corresponding authorship. Increases in female authorship will likely require recruitment of more females into the discipline rather than providing females in the discipline with authorship opportunities. Level of Evidence: N/AItem Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years(Hindawi, 2021) Loder, Randall T.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Ogbemudia, Blessing; Ngwe, Hervé Nonga; Aasar, Abdul; Ninad, Nehal; Mufti, Osama; Gunderson, Zachary; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Ruth Lilly Medical Library, School of MedicinePublication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985–1987 to 23.7% in 2015–2016. There were more female 1st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.Item Bibliometric and authorship trends over a 30 year publication history in two representative US sports medicine journals(Elsevier, 2020-03-31) Dynako, Joseph; Owens, Garrett W.; Loder, Randall T.; Frimpong, Tony; Gerena, Rolando Gabriel; Hasnain, Fawaz; Snyder, Dayton; Freiman, Serena; Hart, Kyle; Kacena, Melissa A.; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Orthopaedic Surgery, School of MedicineBibliometric studies are important to understand changes and improvement opportunities in academia. This study compared bibliometric trends for two major sports medicine/arthroscopy journals, the American Journal of Sports Medicine® (AJSM®) and Arthroscopy® over the past 30 years. Trends over time and comparisons between both journals were noted for common bibliometric variables (number of authors, references, pages, citations, and corresponding author position) as well as author gender and continental origin. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed. A p < 0.001 was considered statistically significant. One representative year per decade was used. There were 814 manuscripts from AJSM® and 650 from Arthroscopy®. For AJSM® the number of manuscripts steadily increased from 86 in 1986 to 350 in 2016; for Arthroscopy® the number of manuscripts increased from 73 in 1985/1986, to 267 in 2006, but then dropped to 229 in 2016. There were significant increases in all bibliometric variables, except for the number of citations which decreased in Arthroscopy®. There were significant differences in manuscript region of origin by journal (p = 0.000002). Arthroscopy® had a greater percentage of manuscripts from Asia than AJSM® (19.3% vs 11.5%) while AJSM® had a greater percentage from North America (70.3% vs 59.2%); both journals had similar percentages from Europe (18.2% for AJSM® and 21.6% for Arthroscopy®). For AJSM® the average percentage of female first authors was 13.3%, increasing from 4.7% in 1986 to 19.3% in 2016; the average percentage of female corresponding authors was 7.3%. For Arthroscopy®, the average percentage of female first authors was 8.1%, increasing from 2.8% in 1985/1986 to 15.7% in 2016 (p = 0.00007). In conclusion, AJSM® and Arthroscopy® showed an increase in most variables analyzed. Although Arthroscopy® is climbing at a higher rate than AJSM® for female authors, AJSM® has an overall greater percentage of female authors.Item A Bibliometric Study of Authorship and Collaboration Trends Over the Past 30 Years in Four Major Musculoskeletal Science Journals(Springer, 2019-03) Russell, Arielle F.; Loder, Randall T.; Gudeman, Andrew S.; Bolaji, Peter; Virtanen, Piiamaria; Whipple, Elizabeth C.; Kacena, Melissa A.; Ruth Lilly Medical Library, School of MedicineThis study explored changes in bibliometric variables over the last 30 years for four major musculoskeletal science journals (BONE®), Calcified Tissue International® (CTI®), Journal of Bone and Mineral Research® (JBMR®), and Journal of Orthopaedic Research® (JOR®), with a specific focus on author gender. Bibliometric data were collected for all manuscripts in 1985 (BONE®, CTI®, JOR®), 1986 (JBMR®), 1995, 2005, and 2015; 2776 manuscripts met inclusion criteria. Manuscripts from Europe were more often published in BONE® or CTI®, while those from North America in JBMR® or JOR®. All journals demonstrated an increase over time in the number of authors (3.67–7.3), number of countries (1.1–1.4), number of institutions (1.4–3.1), and number of references (25.1–45.4). The number of manuscript pages increased (6.6–8.9) except for JOR® which showed a decline. CTI® had the lowest number of authors (4.9 vs. 5.6–6.8). There was a change in the corresponding author position from first to last for all journals; this change was highest for CTI® (35%) and lowest for BONE® (14.0%). All journals demonstrated an increase over time in female authors; however, CTI® was the highest amongst these four journals. The percentage of female first authors rose from 24.6 to 44.3% (CTI® 29.1–52.3%). The percentage of corresponding female authors rose from 17.5 to 33.6% (CTI® 22.9–40.0%). The proportion of female authors is increasing, likely reflecting the increasing number of women obtaining doctorates in science, medicine, and engineering.