General Medical Journals Research Articles

The gender and geography of publishing: a review of sex/gender reporting and author representation in leading general medical and global health journals

IntroductionDiverse gender and geographical representation matters in research. We aimed to review medical and global health journals’ sex/gender reporting, and the gender and geography of authorship.Methods542 research and non-research articles...

Village boy moves to London

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Queerness and professional identity formation

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

The representation of women who have sex with women (WSW) in sexual health promotion in England: a frame analysis

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Health inequalities among LGBTQ+ communities

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Trans-formational? Why we need to do better for trans young people in the UK

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

The rainbow NHS badge

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

The importance of near-peer mentorship for LGBTQ+ medical students

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Should I come out at work?

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

It’s not alphabet soup – supporting the inclusion of inclusive queer curricula in medical education

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Trans ally, always: my commitment to patients, colleagues, and the community

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Editorial: Welcome to #BSDJPride

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Social barriers to pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake within sexual and gender minorities in the UK

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Guest Editorial: GLADD, The Association of LGBTQ+ Doctors and Dentists

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Is biomedicine compatible with contemporary understandings of queerness?

The British Student Doctor Journal is a high quality, open access, biannual, peer-reviewed, general medical journal, which publishes articles written primarily by medical students. In addition to publishing original research and systematic reviews, we also provide a platform to medical students to express original thought and reflections on clinical practice, student life and medical education.All of our content is fully open access, available without subscription and with no authorship charges. All articles published in The British Student Doctor Journal go through a rigorous peer-review process, led by our student editorial team. The governance of the journal is overseen by our faculty advisory board, and we are published by Cardiff University Press and funded by Cardiff University School of Medicine.For more information, please visit our homepage at www.bsdj.org.uk.

Association Between Lack of Blinding and Mortality Results in Critical Care Randomized Controlled Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.

To investigate whether intervention effect estimates for mortality differ between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials conducted in critical care. We used a meta-epidemiological approach, comparing effect estimates between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials for the same research question. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention on mortality in critical care, published between January 2009 and March 2019 in high impact factor general medical or critical care journals and by Cochrane. For each randomized controlled trial included in eligible meta-analyses, we evaluated whether the trial was blinded (i.e., double-blinded and/or reporting adequate methods) or not (i.e., open-label, single-blinded, or unclear). We collected risk of bias evaluated by the review authors and extracted trial results. Within each meta-analysis, we compared intervention effect estimates between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials by using a ratio of odds ratio (< 1 indicates larger estimates in nonblinded than blinded randomized controlled trials). We then combined ratio of odds ratios across meta-analyses to obtain the average relative difference between nonblinded and blinded trials. Among 467 randomized controlled trials included in 36 meta-analyses, 267 (57%) were considered blinded and 200 (43%) nonblinded. Intervention effect estimates were statistically significantly larger in nonblinded than blinded trials (combined ratio of odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99). We found no heterogeneity across meta-analyses (p = 0.72; I2 = 0%; τ2 = 0). Sensitivity analyses adjusting the main analysis on risk of bias items yielded consistent results. Intervention effect estimates of mortality were slightly larger in nonblinded than blinded randomized controlled trials conducted in critical care, but confounding cannot be excluded. Blinding of both patients and personnel is important to consider when possible in critical care trials, even when evaluating mortality.

A review of the use of controlled multiple imputation in randomised controlled trials with missing outcome data

BackgroundMissing data are common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and can bias results if not handled appropriately. A statistically valid analysis under the primary missing-data assumptions should be conducted, followed by sensitivity analysis under alternative justified assumptions to assess the robustness of results. Controlled Multiple Imputation (MI) procedures, including delta-based and reference-based approaches, have been developed for analysis under missing-not-at-random assumptions. However, it is unclear how often these methods are used, how they are reported, and what their impact is on trial results. This review evaluates the current use and reporting of MI and controlled MI in RCTs.MethodsA targeted review of phase II-IV RCTs (non-cluster randomised) published in two leading general medical journals (The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine) between January 2014 and December 2019 using MI. Data was extracted on imputation methods, analysis status, and reporting of results. Results of primary and sensitivity analyses for trials using controlled MI analyses were compared.ResultsA total of 118 RCTs (9% of published RCTs) used some form of MI. MI under missing-at-random was used in 110 trials; this was for primary analysis in 43/118 (36%), and in sensitivity analysis for 70/118 (59%) (3 used in both). Sixteen studies performed controlled MI (1.3% of published RCTs), either with a delta-based (n = 9) or reference-based approach (n = 7). Controlled MI was mostly used in sensitivity analysis (n = 14/16). Two trials used controlled MI for primary analysis, including one reporting no sensitivity analysis whilst the other reported similar results without imputation. Of the 14 trials using controlled MI in sensitivity analysis, 12 yielded comparable results to the primary analysis whereas 2 demonstrated contradicting results. Only 5/110 (5%) trials using missing-at-random MI and 5/16 (31%) trials using controlled MI reported complete details on MI methods.ConclusionsControlled MI enabled the impact of accessible contextually relevant missing data assumptions to be examined on trial results. The use of controlled MI is increasing but is still infrequent and poorly reported where used. There is a need for improved reporting on the implementation of MI analyses and choice of controlled MI parameters.

The principles of presenting statistical results: Table.

General medical journals such as the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology (KJA) receive numerous manuscripts every year. However, reviewers have noticed that the tables presented in various manuscripts have great diversity in their appearance, resulting in difficulties in the review and publication process. It might be due to the lack of clear written instructions regarding reporting of statistical results for authors. Therefore, the present article aims to briefly outline reporting methods for several table types, which are commonly used to present statistical results. We hope this article will serve as a guideline for reviewers as well as for authors, who wish to submit a manuscript to the KJA.

How prevalent are financial conflicts of interest in dermatology randomized controlled trials? A cross‐sectional study

Several countries have introduced transparency databases since the last assessment of conflicts of interest (COIs) in dermatology randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in 2004. We assessed the prevalence of financial COIs in dermatology RCTs and quantified payments from study sponsors to academic/clinical authors using transparency databases. Transparency databases are available in the US, France, Australia, Belgium, and the Netherlands. The UK has a non-compulsory database. We included RCTs from the top seven general medical journals and top ten dermatology journals published in 2019. The study included 83 RCTs, and COIs were identified in 69%. The highest prevalence was in exclusively industry-funded trials (46/47, 98%), which consisted of personal payments to an academic/clinical author (96% of trials) and employees/stockholders as authors (96%). Payments were identified for 31/56 (55%) academic/clinical first/final authors (median payment $28 746 US dollars, maximum $597 299, interquartile range $128 570), and 24/31 payments (77%) payments totalled >$10 000.

Quality criteria for randomized controlled studies: obstetrical journal guidelines

Most retractions of obstetrics and gynecology manuscripts are because of scientific misconduct. It would be preferable to prevent randomized controlled trials with scientific misconduct from ever appearing in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, rather than to have to retract them later. This study aimed to evaluate the policies of obstetrics and gynecology and top medical journals in their author guidelines and electronic submission systems regarding prospective randomized controlled trial registration, ethics committee approval, research protocols, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guidelines, and data sharing and to detect the most common quality criteria requested for randomized controlled trials in these journals. Author guidelines were identified via online Google searches from the websites of selected peer-reviewed medical journals. Journals in obstetrics and gynecology were selected from the list of journals with impact factors based on the Journal Citation Report released by Clarivate Analytics on June 29, 2020, focusing on those publishing original clinical research in obstetrics, in particular randomized controlled trials. In addition, 4 of the top impact factor peer-reviewed general medical journals publishing randomized controlled trials were included. The requirements for selected quality criteria for randomized controlled trials analyzed in the author guidelines for each journal were details of 5 general issues: prospective randomized controlled trial registration (4 subcategories), ethics committee approval (4 subcategories), research protocol (3 subcategories), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines (3 subcategories), and data sharing (3 subcategories). To evaluate the requirements within the electronic submission system, a mock submission of a randomized controlled trial was also done for each journal, and the same criteria were assessed on the online software for submission. The primary outcome was the overall percentage for each of the quality criteria that were listed as required within the author guidelines or required in the submission system among all journals. Planned subgroup analyses were top general medicine vs obstetrics and gynecology journals and top 4 obstetrics and gynecology vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals. Most studied peer-reviewed journals listed in their author guidelines 7 specific criteria for submission of randomized controlled trials: prospective registration and registration number, statement of ethical approval with name of approving committee and statement of informed consent, statement of adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines, and data sharing statement. For most journals, the submission software did not require these or any other criteria for submission. There were minimal differences in criteria listed for top medical journals vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals and among top vs other obstetrics and gynecology journals. Prospective registration and registration number, statement of ethical approval with name of approving committee and statement of informed consent, statement of adherence to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines, and data sharing statement are the randomized controlled trial quality criteria requested by leading medical and obstetrics and gynecology journals. These obstetrics and gynecology journals agree to make, as much as possible, these criteria uniform and mandatory in author guidelines and also through improved submission software.