Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (52)
Has Fulltext
- yes (52)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (52)
Keywords
- Density equalizing mapping (4)
- Gender (4)
- MSD (4)
- prevalence (4)
- Bibliometrics (3)
- bibliometry (3)
- dental profession (3)
- dentist (3)
- Access (2)
- Asphyxia (2)
Institute
- Medizin (51)
- Biochemie und Chemie (2)
- Sportwissenschaften (2)
- Biowissenschaften (1)
- Psychologie (1)
Background: In general, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) in dentistry is high, and dental assistants (DA) are even more affected than dentists (D). Furthermore, differentiations between the fields of dental specialization (e.g., general dentistry, endodontology, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or orthodontics) are rare. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk of the aforementioned four fields of dental specialization for D and DA on the one hand, and to compare the ergonomic risk of D and DA within each individual field of dental specialization. Methods: In total, 60 dentists (33 male/27 female) and 60 dental assistants (11 male/49 female) volunteered in this study. The sample was composed of 15 dentists and 15 dental assistants from each of the dental field, in order to represent the fields of dental specialization. In a laboratory setting, all tasks were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The kinematic data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA). Results: The results revealed significantly reduced ergonomic risks in endodontology and orthodontics compared to oral and maxillofacial surgery and general dentistry in DAs, while orthodontics showed a significantly reduced ergonomic risk compared to general dentistry in Ds. Further differences between the fields of dental specialization were found in the right wrist, right lower arm, and left lower arm in DAs and in the neck, right wrist, right lower arm, and left wrist in Ds. The differences between Ds and DAs within a specialist discipline were rather small. Discussion: Independent of whether one works as a D or DA, the percentage of time spent working in higher risk scores is reduced in endodontologists, and especially in orthodontics, compared to general dentists or oral and maxillofacial surgeons. In order to counteract the development of WMSD, early intervention should be made. Consequently, ergonomic training or strength training is recommended.
Background: Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the deadliest cancers worldwide. The contemporary strong increase of the adenocarcinomas in Western countries and the high mortality rates require the intensification of prospective multinational studies.
Methods: Therefore, this global health issue has been chosen for the bibliometric review of the global publication output. As source for meta and citation data, the Web of Science has been used and Density Equalizing Maps were applied for visualization.
Results: 17,387 articles on EC could be identified. The years with publication and citation maxima correspond to the appearance of the most prolific articles. China is the most publishing country, followed by Japan and the USA. Germany and the UK ranked 4th and 5th. The analysis of the ratios articles and socio-economic parameters emphasizes the leading position of the Scandinavian countries and Japan. Here, the high-income countries come out on top. The high incidence regions are mainly represented by Chinese and Japanese research. The association of the publication output and the overall research funding could be shown.
Conclusions: A strengthened international network increasingly consisting of the scientifically best positioned countries as well as more of the high incidence countries worldwide is mandatory for future research. The findings deliver scientists, clinicians and decision makers backgrounds for future decisions all over the world.
Systematic reviews represent the core and backbone of evidence-based medicine (EBM) strategies in all fields of medicine. In order to depict a first global sketch of the international efforts in the Cochrane database systematic reviews (CDSR), we analyzed the systematic reviews of the Cochrane database. Our global maps of systematic reviewing offer intriguing structural insights into the world of EBM strategies. They demonstrate that for the CDSR, the UK and Commonwealth countries take the lead position. Since patients, care providers and health systems all over the world benefit from systematic reviewing, institutions in other countries should increase their commitment.
Purpose: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses major challenges to health-care systems worldwide. This pandemic demonstrates the importance of timely access to intensive care and, therefore, this study aims to explore the accessibility of intensive care beds in 14 European countries and its impact on the COVID-19 case fatality ratio (CFR).
Methods: We examined access to intensive care beds by deriving (1) a regional ratio of intensive care beds to 100,000 population capita (accessibility index, AI) and (2) the distance to the closest intensive care unit. The cross-sectional analysis was performed at a 5-by-5 km spatial resolution and results were summarized nationally for 14 European countries. The relationship between AI and CFR was analyzed at the regional level.
Results: We found national-level differences in the levels of access to intensive care beds. The AI was highest in Germany (AI = 35.3), followed by Estonia (AI = 33.5) and Austria (AI = 26.4), and lowest in Sweden (AI = 5) and Denmark (AI = 6.4). The average travel distance to the closest hospital was highest in Croatia (25.3 min by car) and lowest in Luxembourg (9.1 min). Subnational results illustrate that capacity was associated with population density and national-level inventories. The correlation analysis revealed a negative correlation of ICU accessibility and COVID-19 CFR (r = − 0.57; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Geographical access to intensive care beds varies significantly across European countries and low ICU accessibility was associated with a higher proportion of COVID-19 deaths to cases (CFR). Important differences in access are due to the sizes of national resource inventories and the distribution of health-care facilities relative to the human population. Our findings provide a resource for officials planning public health responses beyond the current COVID-19 pandemic, such as identifying potential locations suitable for temporary facilities or establishing logistical plans for moving severely ill patients to facilities with available beds.
Background: Health care accessibility is known to differ geographically. With this study we focused on analysing accessibility of general and specialized obstetric units in England and Germany with regard to urbanity, area deprivation and neonatal outcome using routine data.
Methods: We used a floating catchment area method to measure obstetric care accessibility, the degree of urbanization (DEGURBA) to measure urbanity and the index of multiple deprivation to measure area deprivation.
Results: Accessibility of general obstetric units was significantly higher in Germany compared to England (accessibility index of 16.2 vs. 11.6; p < 0.001), whereas accessibility of specialized obstetric units was higher in England (accessibility index for highest level of care of 0.235 vs. 0.002; p < 0.001). We further demonstrated higher obstetric accessibility for people living in less deprived areas in Germany (r = − 0.31; p < 0.001) whereas no correlation was present in England. There were also urban–rural disparities present, with higher accessibility in urban areas in both countries (r = 0.37–0.39; p < 0.001). The analysis did not show that accessibility affected neonatal outcomes. Finally, our computer generated model for obstetric care provider demand in terms of birth counts showed a very strong correlation with actual birth counts at obstetric units (r = 0.91–0.95; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: In Germany the focus of obstetric care seemed to be put on general obstetric units leading to higher accessibility compared to England. Regarding specialized obstetric care the focus in Germany was put on high level units whereas in England obstetric care seems to be more balanced between the different levels of care with larger units on average leading to higher accessibility.
Background: Imbalances in female career promotion are a key factor of gender disparities at the workplace. They may lead to stress and stress-related diseases including burnout, depression or cardiovascular diseases. Since this problem cannot be generalized and varies between different fields, new approaches are needed to assess and describe the magnitude of the problem in single fields of work.
Methods: To construct a new index, operating figures of female and male medical students were collected for Germany in a period over 15 years and their progression throughout their studies towards specialization and academic chair positions. By the use of different female to male ratios (f:m), we constructed an index that describes the extend by which women can ascent in their academic career by using the field of academic medicine as an example.
Results: A medical student f:m ratio of 1.54 (52,366 female vs. 34,010 male) was found for Germany in 2013. In 1998, this f:m ratio was 0.999. In the same year (2013), the OB/GYN hospital specialists’ f:m ratio was 1.566 (3347 female vs. 2137 male physicians) and 0.577 (516 female vs 894 male physicians) for ENT hospital specialists, respectively. The f:m ratios concerning chairs of OB/GYN and ENT were 0.105 and 0.1, respectively. Then an index was generated that incorporated these operating figures with the student f:m ratio as denominator and the chair f:m ratio as numerator while the hospital specialist f:m ratio served as a corrector in the numerator in order to adjust to the attraction of a given field to female physicians. As a result, the index was 0.044 for OB/GYN and 0.113 for ENT instead of ideally ~1 in a completely gender harmonized situation.
Conclusion: In summary, a new index to describe female career advancement was established for academic medicine. By the use of this index, different academic and medical fields can now be compared to each other and future benchmarks could be proposed. Also, country differences may be examined using the proposed index and the success of specific funding programs.
Background: Climate change is safe to be one of the biggest challenges of mankind. Human activities, especially the combustion of fossil fuels, contribute to the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and thus to the pace of climate change. The effects of climate change are already being felt, and the resulting damage will most likely be enormous worldwide. Because global impacts vary widely and will lead to very different national vulnerability to climate impacts, each country, depending on its economic background, has different options to ward off negative impacts. Decisions have to be made to mitigate climate consequences according to the preparedness and the vulnerability of countries against the presumed impacts. This requires a profound scientific basis. To provide sound background information, a bibliometric study was conducted to present global research on climate change using established and specific parameters. Bibliometric standard parameters, established socioeconomic values, and climate change specific indices were used for the analyses. This allowed us to provide an overall picture of the global research pattern not only in terms of general aspects, but also in terms of climate change impacts, its effects and regional differences. For this purpose, we choose representative indices, such as the CO2 emissions for the responsibility of countries, the global climate risk index as a combination value for the different types of damage that countries can expect, the increase in sea level as a specific parameter as a measure of the huge global environmental impacts, and the readiness and vulnerability index for the different circumstances of individual countries under which climate change will take place. We hope to have thus made a comprehensive and representative selection of specific parameters that is sufficient to map the global research landscape. We have supplemented the methodology accordingly.
Results: In terms of absolute publication numbers, the USA was the leading country, followed by the UK, and China in 3rd place. The steep rise in Chinese publication numbers over time came into view, while their citation numbers are relatively low. Scandinavian countries were leading regarding their publication numbers related to CO2 emission and socioeconomic indices. Only three developing countries stand out in all analyses: Costa Rica, the Fiji Atoll, and Zimbabwe, although it is here that the climate impact will be greatest. A positive correlation between countries’ preparedness for the impacts of climate change and their publication numbers could be shown, while the correlation between countries’ vulnerability and their publication numbers was negative.
Conclusions: We could show that there exists an inequity between national research efforts according to the publication output and the demands and necessities of countries related to their socioeconomic status. This inequity calls for a rethink, a different approach, and a different policy to improve countries' preparedness and mitigation capacity, which requires the inclusion of the most affected regions of the world in a strengthened international cooperation network.
Traditional ergonomic risk assessment tools such as the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) are often not sensitive enough to evaluate well-optimized work routines. An implementation of kinematic data captured by inertial sensors is applied to compare two work routines in dentistry. The surgical dental treatment was performed in two different conditions, which were recorded by means of inertial sensors (Xsens MVN Link). For this purpose, 15 (12 males/3 females) oral and maxillofacial surgeons took part in the study. Data were post processed with costume written MATLAB® routines, including a full implementation of RULA (slightly adjusted to dentistry). For an in-depth comparison, five newly introduced levels of complexity of the RULA analysis were applied, i.e., from lowest complexity to highest: (1) RULA score, (2) relative RULA score distribution, (3) RULA steps score, (4) relative RULA steps score occurrence, and (5) relative angle distribution. With increasing complexity, the number of variables times (the number of resolvable units per variable) increased. In our example, only significant differences between the treatment concepts were observed at levels that are more complex: the relative RULA step score occurrence and the relative angle distribution (level 4 + 5). With the presented approach, an objective and detailed ergonomic analysis is possible. The data-driven approach adds significant additional context to the RULA score evaluation. The presented method captures data, evaluates the full task cycle, and allows different levels of analysis. These points are a clear benefit to a standard, manual assessment of one main body position during a working task.
BACKGROUND: Toxoplasmosis endangers the unborn child if its infectious agent--toxoplasma gondii--is transmitted transplacentally during pregnancy. Although this condition occurs in all parts of the world and represents a major public health burden, no detailed knowledge on the global research architecture of congenital toxoplasmosis is available thus far. Hence, it was the aim of this study to assess the related global research activity over the past 110 years.
METHODS: We employed the NewQIS platform, which combines established scientometric and socioeconomic analysis tools with novel visualizing techniques such as density equalizing mapping projections.
RESULTS: In the Web of Science, 13,044 congenital toxoplasmosis-related items published between 1900 and 2012 were identified. These were issued by 26,483 authors originating from 125 countries. The US was the dominating nation (38.7 % of total scientific output), followed by France (10.9 %) and Great Britain (9.2 %). The US also led the ranking in regards to semi-qualitative parameters (total citations, country-specific h-indices and citation rates). When research activity was related to economic figures, the ratio of total toxoplasmosis publications to the total GDP listed Switzerland first with an average of 589.35 toxoplasmosis-related publications per GDP in 1000 Bio US-$, followed by France (545.16), the UK (486.13) and Brazil (431.84) and the US (311.11). The relation of toxoplasmosis-specific publications to the economic power indicator GDP per capita in 1000 US-$ revealed that the US was ranked first with 97.65 toxoplasmosis-related publications/GDP per capita in 1000 US-$, followed by Brazil (85.95). Subject area analysis indicated a relative shortage of studies that addressed pharmacological or public health aspects of congenital toxoplasmosis.
CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first in-depth approach to sketch a global picture of the congenital toxoplasmosis research architecture. In contrast to other fields of biomedical research, not only high-income countries play a major role regarding congenital toxoplasmosis research but also countries such as Brazil that have a high incidence of congenital toxoplasmosis.
Background: The currently prevailing global threat of COVID-19 caused the publication numbers on coronaviruses to explode. The awareness of the scientific and public community is enormous. But what about the sense of all these undertakings and what can be learned about the future for a better understanding? These questions were answered with established bibliometric analyses of the time until the avalanche of publications unfolded.
Methods: Chronological, geographical aspects of publication output on coronavirus were also evaluated under the influence of epidemiological and socio-economic parameters.
Results: The trend in publication and citation numbers shows the strong influence of the past pandemics SARS and MERS with an untypical decline afterward. Research is becoming increasingly multidisciplinary over time. The USA and China, as the countries with the highest number of publications, are being displaced by other countries in the consideration of socio-economic and epidemiological aspects, which shows the effect of regional interest in corona research. A significant correlation was found between the number of SARS cases per country and related publications, while no correlation was found for MERS cases and articles.
Conclusions: The results underline the need for sustainable and forward-looking approaches that should not end with the containment of COVID-19.