Dear Editor, Computer vision syndrome (CVS) is defined as complex eye discomfort and vision problems associated with prolonged exposure to  digital screens.1 Symptoms include headache, dry eyes, eye strain, blurring of vision, and ocular discomfort after prolonged exposure to light from computers.2,3 Blue light filtering lenses can be used to minimize CVS.2 Globally, around 70 million workers are at risk for computer vision syndrome which reduces the quality of life and work productivity.1 In the western world, use of computers, for both vocational and non-vocational activities, is almost mandatory.1 In today's COVID-19 (Corona-Virus Disease - 2019) era, use of computers and other digital screen devices is surging in Nepal as well, especially for online study and work from home  to control the further spread of coronavirus. Moreover, the lockdown and shutdown done for the virus control by minimizing human gathering increase the demand for virtual learning and working through the online medium.

Fibrocalculous pancreatic diabetes is a unique variant of diabetes mellitus and also known as type 3c diabetes mellitus. It is related to the patient who is young, non-alcoholic and belonging predominantly from the tropical region. It is a severe form of diabetes which can also be linked to the fact that it predisposes to malignancy.1 Among the variants of diabetes that we commonly encounter, fibrocalculous pancreatic diabetes has been rarely diagnosed in the developing countries. With the advancement of diagnostic capacity, it can be identified clinically and managed efficiently. It should be considered in patients with typical features of diabetes, abdominal pain, and pancreatic calculi. There is limited reporting of this case in Nepal because of misdiagnosis, so we are reporting a 40 years male who presented with recurrent episodes of abdominal pain with mucus mixed stool for the last 28 years and was diagnosed as fibrocalculous pancreatic diabetes.Keywords: Blood glucose; eastern Nepal; fibrocalculous pancreatic diabetes; pancreas.

Introduction: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a common procedure is not without complications, and bile spillage can cause surgical site infection (SSI). There is no local evidence in our hospital setting. Objective: The objective of this study was to find the prevalence of surgical site infection among bile spillage and non-spillage patients following laparoscopic cholecystectomy at BMCTH Methodology: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 25 February 2021 to 25 August 2021 at the surgery department of BMCTH. We enrolled 120 patients through the total enumeration technique who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We enrolled all the eligible study participants who were more than 18 years excluding patients having age >75 years, acute calculous cholecystitis, evidence of cholangitis and/or obstructive jaundice, previous biliary tract surgery, or previous Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, evidence of uncontrolled diabetes mellitus and patients taking immunosuppressive drugs and immunosuppressed conditions like HIV/AIDS. The surgical site infection was assessed on the 7th postoperative day. Results: Among 120 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the majority were female 92(76.7%) and 40-50 years age group 65(54.2%). Bile spillage was found in 27(22.5%) and non-spillage in 93(77.5%).  The prevalence of surgical site infection (SSI) was found to be 7.5% which was more in the bile spillage group 25.9% than the non-spillage group 2.2%. The odds of having SSI among the spillage group was 15.9 times more than the non-spillage group and was statistically significant (p <0.05).  The pus culture of SSI found the predominant organism as Staphylococcus aureus 6(66.7%) followed by Escherichia coli 3(33.3%). The common indications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy were symptomatic cholelithiasis 95(79.1%) followed by chronic calculus cholecystitis 15(12.5%), gall bladder polyp 8(6.7%) and gall stone pancreatitis 2(1.7%). Conclusion: More than two and almost one out of ten had bile spillage and surgical site infection (SSI) respectively.  A significantly higher number of SSI among the spillage group should be a concern of surgeons. We need to be extra careful with the spillage group for surgical site infection.

Jaffrey Beall defined predatory journals and created Beall’s list of predatory journals. Predatory journals exploit the open-access model - they are dishonest and lack transparency. Predatory journals fully developed in the years 2013 and 2014. Developing countries like South Asian and African countries with emerging research fields have the majority of authors published in predatory journals. Predatory journals are even found in reputed databases like PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) database, Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), and EMBASE (Excerpta Medica dataBASE). There are numerous fake profiles in Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, WhatsApp, and Google; although they have been timely deleting such fake profiles. Journals must use institutional email addresses to maintain professionalism and quality. Focusing on quantity over quality of research papers, and lack of proper knowledge about predatory journals make new researchers victimized by such journals. This paper aims to provide proper knowledge about predatory journals and deliver useful tips to prevent genuine researchers from getting victimized by such journals. This paper also intends to provide thorough knowledge about fake social media accounts and email addresses used by such journals, and the importance of institutional email addresses.