Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the most robust and reliable forms of evidence to guide clinical practice. Previous research has demonstrated year-over-year increases in the number of published RCTs between 1950 and 2007 1 as well as increases in the number of published SRMAs through 2016. 2,3 The increase in SRMAs is needed to update cumulative evidence, 2 although some investigators speculate that SRMAs may also serve as "easily publishable units or marketing tools." 2,3 Given this context, we sought to compare publication trends overall and across clinical topic areas among SRMAs and RCTs over the past 22 years.Methods | We conducted a cross-sectional study of PubMedindexed SRMAs and RCTs published from 1995 to 2017 using the UNIX terminal window Entrez Direct (EDirect). EDirect is the primary text search and retrieval system of the National Center for Biotechnology Information. The inclusion start period was set to 1995 to account for previous systematic errors in PubMed's categorization of SRMAs prior to this time period. 3 Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were searched as a single category because PubMed indexes meta-analyses within systematic reviews, and up to 60% of systematic reviews include meta-analyses (Figure 1). 4 Medical subject headings (MeSH) were used to define clinical topic areas when the term was a major topic of an article using the following heuristic for MeSH categories: medical specialty, surgical specialty, surgical procedure, disease, and anatomic system where applicable. Searches for SRMAs used the terms Systematic Review[Ptyp] OR Meta-Analysis[Ptyp], whereas RCT searches used Randomized Controlled Trial [Ptyp]. The 18 medical and surgical topic areas included in this study are noted in

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine characteristics of the most cited publications in the history of the American Surgical Association (ASA). Summary Background Data: The Annals of Surgery has served as the journal of record for the ASA since 1928, with a special issue each year dedicated to papers presented before the ASA Annual Meeting. Methods: The top 100 most cited ASA publications in the Annals of Surgery were identified from the Scopus database and evaluated for key characteristics. Results: The 100 most cited papers from the ASA were published between 1955 and 2010 with an average of 609 citations (range: 333–2304) and are included among the 322 most cited papers in the Annals of Surgery. The most common subjects of study included clinical cancer (n = 43), gastrointestinal (n = 13), cardiothoracic/vascular (n = 9), and transplant (n = 9). Ninety-three institutions were included lead by Johns Hopkins University (n = 9), University of Pittsburgh (n = 8), Memorial Sloan-Kettering (n = 7), John Wayne Cancer Institute (n = 7), University of Texas (n = 7), and 5 each from Brigham and Women's Hospital, Mayo Clinic, and University of Chicago. The majority of manuscripts came from the United States (n = 85), followed by Canada (n = 7), Germany (n = 5), and Italy (n = 5). Study design included randomized controlled trials (n = 19), retrospective matched cohort studies (n = 11), retrospective nonmatched studies (n = 46), and other (n = 24). Conclusions: The top 100 most cited publications from the ASA are highly impactful, landmark studies representing a diverse array of subject matter, investigators, study design, institutions, and countries. These influential publications have immensely advanced surgical science over the decades and should serve as inspiration for all surgeons and surgical investigators.

Contextual metadata: faceted schemas in virtual library communities Matt Weaver Article information:To cite this document: Matt Weaver, (2007),"Contextual metadata: faceted schemas in virtual library communities", Library Hi Tech, Vol. 25 Iss 4 pp. 579 -594 Permanent link to this document: http://dx. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this paper is to explore the information needs of one user group, public library fiction readers, in order to reveal a design of an online community at the local level. Examination of user-generated metadata can reveal new approaches to information architecture. Design/methodology/approach -A literature review into behaviors of virtual communities; surveying public library readers regarding search behavior characteristics -the survey included a sample "tagging" exercise to determine whether public library communities could create meaningful metadata for retrieval purposes. Findings -The use of relevance as an indicator of tag quality is flawed: in a survey, public library readers "tagged" the novel The Da Vinci Code. The resulting collection of tags provided a richer description of the book than did the social book-related web site www.librarything.com. Tag collections can be broken down into different categories, each reflecting a different "facet" of the novel: character, plot, subject/topic, setting, and genre. Faceted structure to tags enables users to choose the context of the tag to the novel. Research limitations/implications -This research is relevant in the world of social networking sites, online communities, or any other such system where users generate descriptive metadata. Examination of such metadata can reveal facets, which can guide the architect/librarian in the design of a versatile architecture. Originality/value -This research resulted in a manifold design for a public-library-based online community that allowed for the full expression of users' information needs. This research introduces a faceted structure to current approaches for user-generated metadata, adding versatility to search terms.

No abstract

No abstract