首页 > 最新文献

JAMA Network Open最新文献

英文 中文
Error in Funding. 资金错误。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59711
{"title":"Error in Funding.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59711","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59711","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2459711"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724336/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142948830","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Estimating Visual Acuity With Spectacle Correction From Fundus Photos Using Artificial Intelligence. 基于人工智能眼底照片的眼镜矫正视力评估。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53770
Ashley Zhou, Zhuolin Li, William Paul, Philippe Burlina, Rohita Mocharla, Neil Joshi, Sophie Gu, Onnisa Nanegrungsunk, Susan Bressler, Cindy X Cai, T Y Alvin Liu, Hadi Moini, Farshid Sepehrband, Neil M Bressler, Jun Kong

Importance: Determining spectacle-corrected visual acuity (VA) is essential when managing many ophthalmic diseases. If artificial intelligence (AI) evaluations of macular images estimated this VA from a fundus image, AI might provide spectacle-corrected VA without technician costs, reduce visit time, or facilitate home monitoring of VA from fundus images obtained outside of the clinic.

Objective: To estimate spectacle-corrected VA measured on a standard eye chart among patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in clinical practice settings using previously validated AI algorithms evaluating best-corrected VA from fundus photographs in eyes with DME.

Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of deidentified fundus photographs matched to spectacle-corrected VA determined by technicians on eye charts among patients with a history of DME based on optical coherence tomography and at least 2 visits within 1 to 6 months of each other at a university-based clinic between January 2014 and December 2022. Data were analyzed from January 2023 to October 2024.

Exposure: Previously validated AI algorithm evaluation of fundus photographs.

Main outcomes and measures: AI-determined VA mean absolute error (MAE) compared with actual spectacle-corrected VA.

Results: Among 141 patients, the mean (SD) age was 63 (13) years, 71 (50%) were male, 2 (1%) were Asian, 42 (30%) were Black or African American, and 88 (63%) were White. Among 282 eyes at visit 1, 66 had nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and DME, 38 had proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and DME, 101 had NPDR and no DME, and 77 had PDR and no DME. Among 564 images (282 eyes) at both initial and follow-up visits, MAE (SD) among eyes with NPDR, with or without center-involved DME (CI-DME), was 1.16 (1.00) lines on the eye chart for VA between 20/10 and 20/20 (67 images), and 1.44 (1.15) lines for between VA 20/25 and 20/80 (231 images). MAE (SD) among eyes with PDR, with or without CI-DME, was 1.92 (1.08) lines for VA between 20/10 and 20/20 (50 images), and 1.42 (0.97) lines for spectacle-corrected VA between 20/25 and 20/80 (150 images). Only 65 images had VA 20/100 or worse, precluding meaningful analyses.

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, AI evaluation of fundus photographs among patients with DME and VA 20/80 or better estimated spectacle-corrected VA within approximately 1 to 1.5 lines of actual spectacle-corrected VA. These results support use of AI evaluation of fundus photographs to determine spectacle-corrected VA among patients with DME globally, beyond ophthalmology offices.

重要性:在处理许多眼科疾病时,确定眼镜矫正视力(VA)是必不可少的。如果黄斑图像的人工智能(AI)评估可以从眼底图像中估计出这种VA, AI可能会提供眼镜矫正的VA,而无需技术成本,减少就诊时间,或方便家庭监控从诊所外获得的眼底图像中的VA。目的:在临床实践中,使用先前验证的人工智能算法评估糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)患者眼底照片中最佳矫正的视力,评估标准视力表上测量的眼镜矫正视力。设计、设置和参与者:在2014年1月至2022年12月期间,有DME病史且在1至6个月内至少两次在大学诊所就诊的患者中,对未经识别的眼底照片进行回顾性横断面评估,这些照片与技术人员在视力表上确定的眼镜矫正后的VA相匹配。数据分析时间为2023年1月至2024年10月。曝光:先前验证的人工智能算法评估眼底照片。结果:141例患者中,平均(SD)年龄为63(13)岁,男性71人(50%),亚洲人2人(1%),黑人或非裔美国人42人(30%),白人88人(63%)。在282只眼中,66只眼存在非增殖性糖尿病视网膜病变(NPDR)和DME, 38只眼存在增殖性糖尿病视网膜病变(PDR)和DME, 101只眼存在NPDR但不存在DME, 77只眼存在PDR但不存在DME。在最初和随访的564张图像(282只眼睛)中,NPDR患者的MAE (SD)在视力表上为1.16(1.00)线,在20/10和20/20(67张图像)之间,在20/25和20/80(231张图像)之间,MAE (SD)为1.44(1.15)线。在有或没有CI-DME的PDR眼睛中,20/10至20/20(50幅图像)的VA为1.92(1.08)线,眼镜矫正后的20/25至20/80(150幅图像)的VA为1.42(0.97)线。只有65张图像的VA为20/100或更低,因此无法进行有意义的分析。结论及相关性:在本横断面研究中,人工智能对DME患者眼底照片进行了评估,并对v20 /80或更好的预估眼镜矫正VA进行了评估,评估范围为实际眼镜矫正VA约1至1.5线。这些结果支持使用人工智能对眼底照片进行评估,以确定全球范围内DME患者的眼镜矫正VA。
{"title":"Estimating Visual Acuity With Spectacle Correction From Fundus Photos Using Artificial Intelligence.","authors":"Ashley Zhou, Zhuolin Li, William Paul, Philippe Burlina, Rohita Mocharla, Neil Joshi, Sophie Gu, Onnisa Nanegrungsunk, Susan Bressler, Cindy X Cai, T Y Alvin Liu, Hadi Moini, Farshid Sepehrband, Neil M Bressler, Jun Kong","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53770","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53770","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Determining spectacle-corrected visual acuity (VA) is essential when managing many ophthalmic diseases. If artificial intelligence (AI) evaluations of macular images estimated this VA from a fundus image, AI might provide spectacle-corrected VA without technician costs, reduce visit time, or facilitate home monitoring of VA from fundus images obtained outside of the clinic.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To estimate spectacle-corrected VA measured on a standard eye chart among patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) in clinical practice settings using previously validated AI algorithms evaluating best-corrected VA from fundus photographs in eyes with DME.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Retrospective cross-sectional evaluation of deidentified fundus photographs matched to spectacle-corrected VA determined by technicians on eye charts among patients with a history of DME based on optical coherence tomography and at least 2 visits within 1 to 6 months of each other at a university-based clinic between January 2014 and December 2022. Data were analyzed from January 2023 to October 2024.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Previously validated AI algorithm evaluation of fundus photographs.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>AI-determined VA mean absolute error (MAE) compared with actual spectacle-corrected VA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 141 patients, the mean (SD) age was 63 (13) years, 71 (50%) were male, 2 (1%) were Asian, 42 (30%) were Black or African American, and 88 (63%) were White. Among 282 eyes at visit 1, 66 had nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and DME, 38 had proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and DME, 101 had NPDR and no DME, and 77 had PDR and no DME. Among 564 images (282 eyes) at both initial and follow-up visits, MAE (SD) among eyes with NPDR, with or without center-involved DME (CI-DME), was 1.16 (1.00) lines on the eye chart for VA between 20/10 and 20/20 (67 images), and 1.44 (1.15) lines for between VA 20/25 and 20/80 (231 images). MAE (SD) among eyes with PDR, with or without CI-DME, was 1.92 (1.08) lines for VA between 20/10 and 20/20 (50 images), and 1.42 (0.97) lines for spectacle-corrected VA between 20/25 and 20/80 (150 images). Only 65 images had VA 20/100 or worse, precluding meaningful analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, AI evaluation of fundus photographs among patients with DME and VA 20/80 or better estimated spectacle-corrected VA within approximately 1 to 1.5 lines of actual spectacle-corrected VA. These results support use of AI evaluation of fundus photographs to determine spectacle-corrected VA among patients with DME globally, beyond ophthalmology offices.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2453770"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11724343/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142948848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Irritability and Social Media Use in US Adults. 美国成年人易怒与社交媒体使用
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.52807
Roy H Perlis, Ata Uslu, Jonathan Schulman, Faith M Gunning, Mauricio Santillana, Matthew A Baum, James N Druckman, Katherine Ognyanova, David Lazer

Importance: Efforts to understand the complex association between social media use and mental health have focused on depression, with little investigation of other forms of negative affect, such as irritability and anxiety.

Objective: To characterize the association between self-reported use of individual social media platforms and irritability among US adults.

Design, setting, and participants: This survey study analyzed data from 2 waves of the COVID States Project, a nonprobability web-based survey conducted between November 2, 2023, and January 8, 2024, and applied multiple linear regression models to estimate associations with irritability. Survey respondents were aged 18 years and older.

Exposure: Self-reported social media use.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was score on the Brief Irritability Test (range, 5-30), with higher scores indicating greater irritability.

Results: Across the 2 survey waves, there were 42 597 unique participants, with mean (SD) age 46.0 (17.0) years; 24 919 (58.5%) identified as women, 17 222 (40.4%) as men, and 456 (1.1%) as nonbinary. In the full sample, 1216 (2.9%) identified as Asian American, 5939 (13.9%) as Black, 5322 (12.5%) as Hispanic, 624 (1.5%) as Native American, 515 (1.2%) as Pacific Islander, 28 354 (66.6%) as White, and 627 (1.5%) as other (ie, selecting the other option prompted the opportunity to provide a free-text self-description). In total, 33 325 (78.2%) of the survey respondents reported daily use of at least 1 social media platform, including 6037 (14.2%) using once a day, 16 678 (39.2%) using multiple times a day, and 10 610 (24.9%) using most of the day. Frequent use of social media was associated with significantly greater irritability in univariate regression models (for more than once a day vs never, 1.43 points [95% CI, 1.22-1.63 points]; for most of the day vs never, 3.37 points [95% CI, 3.15-3.60 points]) and adjusted models (for more than once a day, 0.38 points [95% CI, 0.18-0.58 points]; for most of the day, 1.55 points [95% CI, 1.32-1.78 points]). These associations persisted after incorporating measures of political engagement.

Conclusions and relevance: In this survey study of 42 597 US adults, irritability represented another correlate of social media use that merits further characterization, in light of known associations with depression and suicidality.

重要性:了解社交媒体使用与心理健康之间复杂关系的努力主要集中在抑郁症上,很少调查其他形式的负面影响,如易怒和焦虑。目的:描述美国成年人自我报告的个人社交媒体平台使用与易怒之间的关系。设计、环境和参与者:本调查研究分析了2019年11月2日至2024年1月8日期间进行的基于网络的非概率调查COVID - States项目的两波数据,并应用多元线性回归模型来估计与易怒的关联。调查对象年龄在18岁及以上。曝光:自我报告的社交媒体使用情况。主要结果和测量方法:主要结果为简短易怒测试得分(范围5-30),得分越高表明易怒程度越高。结果:两波调查共纳入42 597名独立参与者,平均(SD)年龄46.0(17.0)岁;24例 919(58.5%)为女性,17例 222(40.4%)为男性,456例(1.1%)为非二元性。在整个样本中,1216人(2.9%)认为自己是亚裔美国人,5939人(13.9%)认为自己是黑人,5322人(12.5%)认为自己是西班牙裔,624人(1.5%)认为自己是美洲原住民,515人(1.2%)认为自己是太平洋岛民,28人 认为自己是白人,354人(66.6%)认为自己是白人,627人(1.5%)认为自己是其他(即,选择其他选项会提示提供自由文本自我描述的机会)。总共有33 325人(78.2%)表示每天至少使用一个社交媒体平台,其中6037人(14.2%)每天使用一次,16 678人(39.2%)每天使用多次,10 610人(24.9%)每天使用大部分时间。在单变量回归模型中,频繁使用社交媒体与更大的易怒程度显著相关(每天使用一次以上vs从不使用,1.43点[95% CI, 1.22-1.63点];一天中的大部分时间与从不,3.37点[95% CI, 3.15-3.60点])和调整模型(每天超过一次,0.38点[95% CI, 0.18-0.58点];当天大部分时间为1.55点[95% CI, 1.32-1.78点])。这些联系在纳入政治参与措施后仍然存在。结论和相关性:在这项对42, 597名美国成年人的调查研究中,易怒是社交媒体使用的另一个相关因素,鉴于已知与抑郁和自杀的关联,值得进一步表征。
{"title":"Irritability and Social Media Use in US Adults.","authors":"Roy H Perlis, Ata Uslu, Jonathan Schulman, Faith M Gunning, Mauricio Santillana, Matthew A Baum, James N Druckman, Katherine Ognyanova, David Lazer","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.52807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.52807","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Efforts to understand the complex association between social media use and mental health have focused on depression, with little investigation of other forms of negative affect, such as irritability and anxiety.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize the association between self-reported use of individual social media platforms and irritability among US adults.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>This survey study analyzed data from 2 waves of the COVID States Project, a nonprobability web-based survey conducted between November 2, 2023, and January 8, 2024, and applied multiple linear regression models to estimate associations with irritability. Survey respondents were aged 18 years and older.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Self-reported social media use.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was score on the Brief Irritability Test (range, 5-30), with higher scores indicating greater irritability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across the 2 survey waves, there were 42 597 unique participants, with mean (SD) age 46.0 (17.0) years; 24 919 (58.5%) identified as women, 17 222 (40.4%) as men, and 456 (1.1%) as nonbinary. In the full sample, 1216 (2.9%) identified as Asian American, 5939 (13.9%) as Black, 5322 (12.5%) as Hispanic, 624 (1.5%) as Native American, 515 (1.2%) as Pacific Islander, 28 354 (66.6%) as White, and 627 (1.5%) as other (ie, selecting the other option prompted the opportunity to provide a free-text self-description). In total, 33 325 (78.2%) of the survey respondents reported daily use of at least 1 social media platform, including 6037 (14.2%) using once a day, 16 678 (39.2%) using multiple times a day, and 10 610 (24.9%) using most of the day. Frequent use of social media was associated with significantly greater irritability in univariate regression models (for more than once a day vs never, 1.43 points [95% CI, 1.22-1.63 points]; for most of the day vs never, 3.37 points [95% CI, 3.15-3.60 points]) and adjusted models (for more than once a day, 0.38 points [95% CI, 0.18-0.58 points]; for most of the day, 1.55 points [95% CI, 1.32-1.78 points]). These associations persisted after incorporating measures of political engagement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this survey study of 42 597 US adults, irritability represented another correlate of social media use that merits further characterization, in light of known associations with depression and suicidality.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2452807"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142949077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Academic Detailing Interventions and Evidence-Based Prescribing: A Systematic Review. 学术详细干预和循证处方:系统回顾。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684
Benjamin N Rome, Ellen Dancel, Alexander Chaitoff, Dominick Trombetta, Shuvro Roy, Paul Fanikos, Jayda Germain, Jerry Avorn

Importance: Academic detailing (interactive educational outreach) is a widely used strategy to encourage evidence-based prescribing by clinicians.

Objective: To evaluate academic detailing programs targeted at improving prescribing behavior and describe program aspects associated with positive outcomes.

Evidence review: A systematic search of MEDLINE from April 1, 2007, through December 31, 2022, was performed for randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of academic detailing interventions to improve prescribing. Academic detailing was defined as evidence-based medication education outreach delivered interactively to individuals or small groups of prescribers. Only studies that measured prescribing outcomes were included. Two investigators independently assessed studies for risk of bias using validated assessment tools. Among all studies rated as having low risk of bias and randomized trials rated as having moderate risk of bias, the absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medications and the proportion of studies that led to significant changes in 1 or more prescribing outcome were determined. The data analysis was performed between January 25, 2022, and November 4, 2024.

Findings: The 118 studies identified varied by setting (eg, inpatient, outpatient) and academic detailing delivery (eg, individual vs groups of prescribers). The most common therapeutic targets were antibiotic overuse (32 studies [27%]), opioid prescribing (24 studies [20%]), and management of mental health conditions (16 studies [14%]) and cardiovascular disease (13 studies [11%]). Most studies (66 [56%]) combined academic detailing with other interventions (eg, audit and feedback, electronic health record reminders). Among 36 studies deemed to have the lowest risk of bias, 18 interventions (50%; 95% CI, 33%-67%) led to significant improvements in all prescribing outcomes, and 7 (19%; 95% CI, 8%-36%) led to significant improvements in 1 or more prescribing outcomes. The median absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medication or medications was 4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%) in the intended direction.

Conclusions and relevance: In this systematic review of academic detailing interventions addressing evidence-based prescribing, most interventions led to substantial changes in prescribing behavior, although the quality of evidence varied. These findings support the use of academic detailing to bring about more evidence-based prescribing in a variety of clinical settings.

重要性:学术细节(互动教育外展)是一种广泛使用的策略,以鼓励临床医生以证据为基础开处方。目的:评估旨在改善处方行为的学术详细计划,并描述与积极结果相关的计划方面。证据回顾:从2007年4月1日至2022年12月31日,对MEDLINE进行了系统检索,对学术详细干预措施改善处方进行了随机试验和非随机研究。学术细节被定义为以证据为基础的药物教育推广,以互动的方式向个人或一小群处方者提供。仅包括测量处方结果的研究。两名研究者使用经过验证的评估工具独立评估了研究的偏倚风险。在所有被评为低偏倚风险的研究和被评为中等偏倚风险的随机试验中,确定了使用靶向药物的患者比例的绝对变化,以及导致1个或多个处方结局发生显著变化的研究比例。数据分析在2022年1月25日至2024年11月4日之间进行。发现:118项研究因环境(例如,住院患者,门诊患者)和学术细节交付(例如,个人与处方者群体)而异。最常见的治疗目标是抗生素过度使用(32项研究[27%]),阿片类药物处方(24项研究[20%]),以及精神健康状况(16项研究[14%])和心血管疾病(13项研究[11%])的管理。大多数研究(66项[56%])将学术细节与其他干预措施(例如,审计和反馈、电子健康记录提醒)结合起来。在36项被认为具有最低偏倚风险的研究中,18项干预措施(50%;95% CI, 33%-67%)导致所有处方结果显著改善,7例(19%;95% CI, 8%-36%)导致1个或多个处方结果的显著改善。使用靶向药物或药物的患者比例在预期方向上的绝对变化中位数为4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%)。结论和相关性:在这篇针对循证处方的学术详细干预措施的系统综述中,尽管证据的质量各不相同,但大多数干预措施导致了处方行为的实质性改变。这些发现支持使用学术细节在各种临床环境中带来更多基于证据的处方。
{"title":"Academic Detailing Interventions and Evidence-Based Prescribing: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Benjamin N Rome, Ellen Dancel, Alexander Chaitoff, Dominick Trombetta, Shuvro Roy, Paul Fanikos, Jayda Germain, Jerry Avorn","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53684","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Academic detailing (interactive educational outreach) is a widely used strategy to encourage evidence-based prescribing by clinicians.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate academic detailing programs targeted at improving prescribing behavior and describe program aspects associated with positive outcomes.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A systematic search of MEDLINE from April 1, 2007, through December 31, 2022, was performed for randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of academic detailing interventions to improve prescribing. Academic detailing was defined as evidence-based medication education outreach delivered interactively to individuals or small groups of prescribers. Only studies that measured prescribing outcomes were included. Two investigators independently assessed studies for risk of bias using validated assessment tools. Among all studies rated as having low risk of bias and randomized trials rated as having moderate risk of bias, the absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medications and the proportion of studies that led to significant changes in 1 or more prescribing outcome were determined. The data analysis was performed between January 25, 2022, and November 4, 2024.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The 118 studies identified varied by setting (eg, inpatient, outpatient) and academic detailing delivery (eg, individual vs groups of prescribers). The most common therapeutic targets were antibiotic overuse (32 studies [27%]), opioid prescribing (24 studies [20%]), and management of mental health conditions (16 studies [14%]) and cardiovascular disease (13 studies [11%]). Most studies (66 [56%]) combined academic detailing with other interventions (eg, audit and feedback, electronic health record reminders). Among 36 studies deemed to have the lowest risk of bias, 18 interventions (50%; 95% CI, 33%-67%) led to significant improvements in all prescribing outcomes, and 7 (19%; 95% CI, 8%-36%) led to significant improvements in 1 or more prescribing outcomes. The median absolute change in the proportion of patients using the targeted medication or medications was 4.0% (IQR, 0.3%-11.3%) in the intended direction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this systematic review of academic detailing interventions addressing evidence-based prescribing, most interventions led to substantial changes in prescribing behavior, although the quality of evidence varied. These findings support the use of academic detailing to bring about more evidence-based prescribing in a variety of clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2453684"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142949184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Comparison of Outcomes Between Low-Risk Aortic Valve Replacement Trials and a Surgical Registry. 低风险主动脉瓣置换术试验与外科登记的结果比较。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53267
Makoto Mori, Kayoko Shioda, Christina Waldron, Chenxi Huang, Mario Gaudino, Isaac George, Hiroo Takayama, Arnar Geirsson

Importance: It remains unknown whether outcomes of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 3 (PARTNER 3) and Evolut Low Risk trials are comparable with surgical outcomes in nontrial settings, considering the added risk of concomitant cardiac operations.

Objective: To compare 30-day mortality and stroke incidences of patients in the surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) arm of low-risk trials with those of similar patients in the US Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (STS ACSD).

Design, setting, and participants: A cross-sectional sampling study was conducted of adults in the STS ACSD with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk for AVR who underwent SAVR during the years low-risk AVR trials (PARTNER 3 and Evolut Low Risk) were enrolling (calendar years 2016-2018). After trial exclusion criteria were applied, 1000 samples were created, each including 1000 patients selected from the STS ACSD according to the likelihood-based selection probabilities to achieve similar STS predicted risk of mortality (PROM) distribution to the trial participants. The distribution of 30-day mortality and stroke rates among these samples were compared with the results from the trials. The analysis was conducted between October 2, 2023, and May 27, 2024.

Main outcomes and measures: The main outcomes were 30-day postoperative mortality and stroke.

Results: Among 25 811 patients at low risk undergoing SAVR, the mean (SD) age was 71 (7) years, including 650 220 men (65%). The probability-based sampling yielded a trial-like sample with STS PROM (mean [SD], 1.9% [0.6%]) and concomitant coronary artery bypass graft surgery frequencies of 13%, comparable with the trials. Among the sampled cohorts, the mean (SD) 30-day mortality rate was 1.39% (0.38%) which was not significantly different from the mortality rate in PARTNER 3 (1.1%) (P = .83) and Evolut Low Risk (1.3%) (P = .65). The stroke rate was 1.25% (0.36%), significantly lower than PARTNER 3 (2.4%) (P = .002) and Evolut Low Risk (3.4%) (P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the national samples of low-risk trial-like patients undergoing SAVR during the trial enrollment period had similar 30-day mortality but a lower incidence of stroke compared with the SAVR arm of both low-risk trials. These findings overall suggest that the low-risk trial findings may be generalizable to the broader national SAVR cohort.

重要性:考虑到合并心脏手术的风险,目前尚不清楚经主动脉瓣置入术3 (PARTNER 3)和Evolut低风险试验的结果是否与非试验环境下的手术结果相当。目的:比较低风险试验中手术主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)组患者的30天死亡率和卒中发生率与美国胸外科学会成人心脏外科数据库(STS ACSD)中类似患者的30天死亡率和卒中发生率。设计、环境和参与者:在低风险AVR试验(PARTNER 3和Evolut低风险)入组期间(2016-2018日历年),对STS ACSD中患有严重主动脉瓣狭窄且AVR手术风险低的成人进行了横断面抽样研究。应用试验排除标准后,创建1000个样本,每个样本包括1000例患者,根据基于似然的选择概率从STS ACSD中选择,以实现与试验参与者相似的STS预测死亡风险(PROM)分布。将这些样本的30天死亡率和中风率的分布与试验结果进行比较。该分析在2023年10月2日至2024年5月27日之间进行。主要结局和指标:主要结局为术后30天死亡率和脑卒中。结果:25 811例低风险患者行SAVR,平均(SD)年龄为71(7)岁,其中男性650 220例(65%)。基于概率的抽样产生了一个类似试验的样本,STS PROM(平均[SD] 1.9%[0.6%]),同时冠状动脉搭桥手术的频率为13%,与试验相当。在抽样队列中,平均(SD) 30天死亡率为1.39%(0.38%),与PARTNER 3组(1.1%)(P = 0.83)和Evolut低危组(1.3%)(P = 0.65)的死亡率无显著差异。卒中发生率为1.25%(0.36%),显著低于PARTNER 3 (2.4%) (P = 0.002)和Evolut低风险(3.4%)(P)。结论及相关性:在本横断面研究中,在试验入组期间接受SAVR治疗的低风险试验样患者的全国样本具有相似的30天死亡率,但与两项低风险试验的SAVR组相比,卒中发生率较低。这些发现总体上表明,低风险试验的结果可以推广到更广泛的国家SAVR队列。
{"title":"Comparison of Outcomes Between Low-Risk Aortic Valve Replacement Trials and a Surgical Registry.","authors":"Makoto Mori, Kayoko Shioda, Christina Waldron, Chenxi Huang, Mario Gaudino, Isaac George, Hiroo Takayama, Arnar Geirsson","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53267","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53267","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>It remains unknown whether outcomes of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 3 (PARTNER 3) and Evolut Low Risk trials are comparable with surgical outcomes in nontrial settings, considering the added risk of concomitant cardiac operations.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare 30-day mortality and stroke incidences of patients in the surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) arm of low-risk trials with those of similar patients in the US Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (STS ACSD).</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>A cross-sectional sampling study was conducted of adults in the STS ACSD with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk for AVR who underwent SAVR during the years low-risk AVR trials (PARTNER 3 and Evolut Low Risk) were enrolling (calendar years 2016-2018). After trial exclusion criteria were applied, 1000 samples were created, each including 1000 patients selected from the STS ACSD according to the likelihood-based selection probabilities to achieve similar STS predicted risk of mortality (PROM) distribution to the trial participants. The distribution of 30-day mortality and stroke rates among these samples were compared with the results from the trials. The analysis was conducted between October 2, 2023, and May 27, 2024.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The main outcomes were 30-day postoperative mortality and stroke.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 25 811 patients at low risk undergoing SAVR, the mean (SD) age was 71 (7) years, including 650 220 men (65%). The probability-based sampling yielded a trial-like sample with STS PROM (mean [SD], 1.9% [0.6%]) and concomitant coronary artery bypass graft surgery frequencies of 13%, comparable with the trials. Among the sampled cohorts, the mean (SD) 30-day mortality rate was 1.39% (0.38%) which was not significantly different from the mortality rate in PARTNER 3 (1.1%) (P = .83) and Evolut Low Risk (1.3%) (P = .65). The stroke rate was 1.25% (0.36%), significantly lower than PARTNER 3 (2.4%) (P = .002) and Evolut Low Risk (3.4%) (P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this cross-sectional study, the national samples of low-risk trial-like patients undergoing SAVR during the trial enrollment period had similar 30-day mortality but a lower incidence of stroke compared with the SAVR arm of both low-risk trials. These findings overall suggest that the low-risk trial findings may be generalizable to the broader national SAVR cohort.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2453267"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11704974/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142931765","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Error in Results. 结果中出现错误。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.58339
{"title":"Error in Results.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.58339","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.58339","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2458339"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11704969/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142931766","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Role of Social Determinants of Health in COVID-19 Recovery: A Qualitative Study. 健康的社会决定因素在COVID-19康复中的作用:一项定性研究
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53261
Neelima Navuluri, Nrupen A Bhavsar, Vivian Chen, Margaret Falkovic, Laura J Fish, Lauren Gray, Christina Makarushka, Laura Mkumba, Hnin Thuzar Lwin, Auston Stiefer, Deepshikha Charan Ashana

Importance: Health systems are increasingly required to conduct health-related social needs screening. However, how social resources negatively and positively affect recovery from acute illnesses, such as COVID-19, is incompletely understood.

Objective: To examine how social determinants of health (SDOH) influence recovery from COVID-19.

Design, setting, and participants: In this qualitative study, patients were recruited for semistructured interviews from a post-COVID-19 pulmonary clinic at a southeastern US academic medical center between November 2022 and March 2023. Caregivers were included in dyadic interviews when available. Interviews queried participants about SDOH domains, as defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and their relationship with COVID-19 recovery.

Main outcome and measures: Phenomenologic analysis identified themes characterizing participant perspectives on the influence of SDOH on COVID-19 recovery.

Results: A total of 24 interviews were conducted: 10 (42%) with patient-caregiver dyads, 13 (54%) with patients alone, and 1 (4%) with 2 patients who also served as each other's caregiver. Most participants were female (18 patients [72%] and 6 caregivers [60%]). The median age of patients was 57 years (IQR, 44-61 years) and of caregivers was 47 years (IQR, 39-62 years). Three cross-cutting themes that overlapped SDOH domains were identified. Participants noted that innovative mobilization of social resources (eg, policies to secure income during time away from work) supported recovery from COVID-19 illness, but destabilization and change introduced by illness (eg, disrupted social support networks) and mistrust of previously established institutions (eg, public health misinformation) hindered recovery.

Conclusions and relevance: Participants identified 3 distinct SDOH domains positively and negatively influencing recovery from COVID-19 illness. The findings suggest that longitudinal, multidomain data on SDOH are needed to best address barriers and identify resources for patients recovering from acute illness and may help determine opportunities for system- and policy-level interventions that can mitigate the influence of long-standing structural inequities on health.

重要性:越来越多地要求卫生系统开展与健康有关的社会需求筛查。然而,社会资源如何消极和积极地影响COVID-19等急性疾病的康复,尚不完全清楚。目的:探讨健康社会决定因素(SDOH)对COVID-19患者康复的影响。设计、环境和参与者:在这项定性研究中,在2022年11月至2023年3月期间,从美国东南部学术医疗中心的covid -19后肺部诊所招募了患者进行半结构化访谈。护理人员在可能的情况下被纳入二元访谈。采访询问了参与者关于美国疾病控制和预防中心定义的SDOH域及其与COVID-19恢复的关系。主要结果和措施:现象学分析确定了主题,表征了参与者对SDOH对COVID-19康复影响的看法。结果:共进行了24次访谈,其中10次(42%)为患者-照顾者二人组,13次(54%)为单独访谈,1次(4%)为两名患者同时担任对方的照顾者。大多数参与者为女性(18名患者[72%]和6名护理人员[60%])。患者年龄中位数为57岁(IQR, 44-61岁),护理人员年龄中位数为47岁(IQR, 39-62岁)。确定了重叠SDOH域的三个交叉主题。与会者指出,以创新方式调动社会资源(例如,在不工作期间确保收入的政策)有助于从COVID-19疾病中恢复过来,但疾病带来的不稳定和变化(例如,社会支持网络中断)以及对以前建立的机构的不信任(例如,公共卫生错误信息)阻碍了恢复。结论和相关性:参与者确定了3个不同的SDOH域对COVID-19疾病的康复有积极和消极的影响。研究结果表明,需要关于SDOH的纵向、多领域数据,以最好地解决障碍并确定从急性病中康复的患者的资源,并可能有助于确定系统和政策层面干预的机会,从而减轻长期存在的结构性不平等对健康的影响。
{"title":"Role of Social Determinants of Health in COVID-19 Recovery: A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Neelima Navuluri, Nrupen A Bhavsar, Vivian Chen, Margaret Falkovic, Laura J Fish, Lauren Gray, Christina Makarushka, Laura Mkumba, Hnin Thuzar Lwin, Auston Stiefer, Deepshikha Charan Ashana","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53261","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.53261","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Health systems are increasingly required to conduct health-related social needs screening. However, how social resources negatively and positively affect recovery from acute illnesses, such as COVID-19, is incompletely understood.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine how social determinants of health (SDOH) influence recovery from COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this qualitative study, patients were recruited for semistructured interviews from a post-COVID-19 pulmonary clinic at a southeastern US academic medical center between November 2022 and March 2023. Caregivers were included in dyadic interviews when available. Interviews queried participants about SDOH domains, as defined by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and their relationship with COVID-19 recovery.</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measures: </strong>Phenomenologic analysis identified themes characterizing participant perspectives on the influence of SDOH on COVID-19 recovery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 24 interviews were conducted: 10 (42%) with patient-caregiver dyads, 13 (54%) with patients alone, and 1 (4%) with 2 patients who also served as each other's caregiver. Most participants were female (18 patients [72%] and 6 caregivers [60%]). The median age of patients was 57 years (IQR, 44-61 years) and of caregivers was 47 years (IQR, 39-62 years). Three cross-cutting themes that overlapped SDOH domains were identified. Participants noted that innovative mobilization of social resources (eg, policies to secure income during time away from work) supported recovery from COVID-19 illness, but destabilization and change introduced by illness (eg, disrupted social support networks) and mistrust of previously established institutions (eg, public health misinformation) hindered recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Participants identified 3 distinct SDOH domains positively and negatively influencing recovery from COVID-19 illness. The findings suggest that longitudinal, multidomain data on SDOH are needed to best address barriers and identify resources for patients recovering from acute illness and may help determine opportunities for system- and policy-level interventions that can mitigate the influence of long-standing structural inequities on health.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2453261"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11704979/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142931770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
JAMA Network Open. JAMA网络开放。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.55993
{"title":"JAMA Network Open.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.55993","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.55993","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2455993"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142914718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Errors in Abstract Results. 摘要结果中的错误。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59710
{"title":"Errors in Abstract Results.","authors":"","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59710","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.59710","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2459710"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736498/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142983236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Insights Into Opportunistic Lung Cancer Screening for Individuals Who Have Never Smoked. 对从不吸烟的人进行机会性肺癌筛查的见解。
IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54009
Roger Y Kim
{"title":"Insights Into Opportunistic Lung Cancer Screening for Individuals Who Have Never Smoked.","authors":"Roger Y Kim","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54009","DOIUrl":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54009","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 1","pages":"e2454009"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142983279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
JAMA Network Open
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1