| 1. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : from credit to accountability. Reflections from the Editors' Network.
- 2019
-
In: Clinical Research in Cardiology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1861-0684 .- 1861-0692. ; 108:7, s. 723-729
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 2. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : From credit to accountability - Reflections from the Editors' network.
- 2019
-
In: Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico. - 1665-1731. ; 89:1, s. 93-99
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new -(fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 3. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : From credit to accountability. Reflections from the Editors' Network.
- 2019
-
In: Revista portuguesa de cardiologia : orgao oficial da Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia = Portuguese journal of cardiology : an official journal of the Portuguese Society of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 2174-2030. ; 38:7, s. 519-525
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 4. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : From credit to accountability - Reflections from the Editors' network.
- 2019
-
In: Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico. - 1665-1731. ; 89:2, s. 105-111
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new -(fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 5. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : from credit to accountability. Reflections from the Editors' Network.
- 2019
-
In: Basic Research in Cardiology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0300-8428 .- 1435-1803. ; 114:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors' Network of the European Society of Cardiology provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 6. |
- Alfonso, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Authorship : From Credit to Accountability Reflections From the Editors´ Network.
- 2019
-
In: Anatolian journal of cardiology. - 2149-2263 .- 2149-2271. ; 21:5, s. 281-286
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Editors´ Network of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) provides a dynamic forum for editorial discussions and endorses the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) to improve the scientific quality of biomedical journals. Authorship confers credit and important academic rewards. Recently, however, the ICMJE emphasized that authorship also requires responsibility and accountability. These issues are now covered by the new (fourth) criterion for authorship. Authors should agree to be accountable and ensure that questions regarding the accuracy and integrity of the entire work will be appropriately addressed. This review discusses the implications of this paradigm shift on authorship requirements with the aim of increasing awareness on good scientific and editorial practices.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Bajraktari, Gani, et al.
(author)
-
Comparison of drug-eluting balloon versus drug-eluting stent treatment of drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis : A meta-analysis of available evidence
- 2016
-
In: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 218, s. 126-135
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains an important concern despite the recent advances in the drug-eluting stent (DES) technology. The introduction of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) offers a good solution to such problem.OBJECTIVES: We performed a meta-analysis to assess the clinical efficiency and safety of DEB compared with DES in patients with DES-ISR.METHODS: A systematic search was conducted and all randomized and observational studies which compared DEB with DES in patients with DES-ISR were included. The primary outcome measure-major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-as well as individual events as target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death (CD) and all-cause mortality, were analyzed.RESULTS: Three randomized and 4 observational studies were included with a total of 2052 patients. MACE (relative risk [RR]=1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.46, P=0.99), TLR (RR=1.15 [CI 0.79 to 1.68], P=0.44), ST (RR=0.37[0.10 to 1.34], P=0.13), MI (RR=0.97 [0.49 to 1.91], P=0.93) and CD (RR=0.73 [0.22 to 2.45], P=0.61) were not different between patients treated with DEB and with DES. However, all-cause mortality was lower in patients treated with DEB (RR=0.45 [0.23 to 0.87, P=0.019) and in particular when compared to only first generation DES (RR 0.33 [0.15-0.74], P=0.007). There was no statistical evidence for publication bias.CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis showed that DEB and DES have similar efficacy and safety for the treatment of DES-ISR.
|
|
| 10. |
- Bajraktari, Gani, et al.
(author)
-
Complete revascularization for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction after the COMPLETE trial : a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- 2020
-
In: IJC Heart & Vasculature. - : Elsevier. - 2352-9067. ; 29
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The recently published COMPLETE trial has demonstrated that patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD), who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of both culprit and non-culprit (vs. culprit-only) lesions had a reduced risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), but not of cardiovascular or total mortality. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of complete revascularization on cardiovascular or total mortality reduction using available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including the COMPLETE trial, in hemodynamically stable STEMI patients with MVD. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov databases search identified 10 RCTs of 7033 patients with STEMI and MVD which compared complete (n = 3420) vs. only culprit lesion (n = 3613) PCI for a median 27.7 months follow-up. Random effect risk ratios were used to estimate for efficacy and safety outcomes. Results: Complete revascularization reduced the risk of MACE (10.4% vs.16.6%; RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.74, p < 0.0001), CV mortality (2.87% vs. 3.72%; RR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.95, p = 0.02), reinfarction (5.1% vs. 7.1%; RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.86, p = 0.002), urgent revascularization (7.92% vs.17.4%; RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.73, p < 0.001), and CV hospitalization (8.68% vs.11.4%; RR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44to 0.96, p = 0.03) compared with culprit only revascularization. All-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding events, or contrast induced nephropathy were not affected by the revascularization strategy. Conclusion: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that in patients with STEMI and MVD, complete revascularization is superior to culprit-only PCI in reducing the risk of MACE outcomes, including cardiovascular mortality, without increasing the risk of adverse safety outcomes.
|
|
