Editor’s Choice Articles for March

Editor’s Choice Articles for February

“…Mills KI, Albert BD, Bechard LJ, et al: Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis Versus Placebo–A Blinded Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Two Strategies in Critically Ill Infants With Congenital Heart Disease (SUPPRESS-CHD ) (2).…”

“…My second editor’s choice and late breaker article is a report of a prospective pilot RCT in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) population carried out 2019-2022 (2). In the COVID-19 era, the authors were able to screen over 1,400 CICU admissions and recruited 58 patients to their pilot RCT about stress ulcer prophylaxis (i.e., histamine-2 receptor antagonist versus placebo) during CICU management in infants with congenital heart disease.…”

“…First, read the Foreword about “fair use of augmented intelligence and artificial intelligence in the preparation and review of submissions” to all three Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) journals (i.e., Critical Care Medicine , PCCM , and Critical Care Explorations ) (1). For PCCM authors, readers, and reviewers, this position statement adds to PCCM ’s 2023 recommendations for engaging with citation to references in the Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer era (2).…”

Editor’s Choice Articles for May

“…Finally, this month there is another Editorial Notes, Methods, and Statistics article in the series about writing for PCCM (27)(28)(29)(30). The new addition gives details about the variety of formats for PCCM's Editorials and Commentaries (31).…”

Pediatric Critical Care Medicine and Cardiac Critical Care Research

“…We have adapted to the increased volume of competitive research submissions and, by necessity, developed a more stringent acceptance rate of 7% to 11% (19, 20). Our readers demand structure to the academic clinical writing that they are presented, and the journal has responded with detailed outlines for authors (21, 22), as well as a new approach to engaging with citations to references in the Chatbot Generative Pre-Trained Transformer era (23). Finally, we have also had to prepare for the future with a robust system of high-quality, peer review that–ultimately–is there to elevate the quality of our research efforts and the quality of reading material.…”