Dear Editors With great attention and interest, I read the editors’ short brief yet thought-provoking editorials [1,2] and it has helped me combine valuable information with my research and experiences. Today, artificial intelligence has become an application that we can use in all areas of our lives, being versatile, and able to analyze, collect and interpret. Writing ChatGPT that we can barely bring together for weeks or even months of work, and other AI applications can be used in minutes or even. We seconds can see that it produces original writings and offers a wide range of information. It is obvious that the time-saving experience provided by artificial intelligence provides convenience in most areas of our lives. But that's human researchers and artificial intelligence it may cause us to not understand some points about certain differences between the two. For example, when we look at the difference between an article written with artificial intelligence and an article written with human intelligence, it is undoubtedly almost understandable at first glance impossible. Because of life's developing and changing conditions, no field wanted to be left behind and turned to itself to build its essence, one of which is undoubtedly artificial Intelligence. With the rapid progression of the COVID-19 pandemic and swiftly evolving political decisions, technology has become exceedingly practical and adaptive, undergoing continuous transformation. Many research studies have begun to be conducted around the world, with the need for individuals to conduct faster and more extensive research to bring together new and diverse resources. While the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) appears as one of the most promising options for this purpose, we must inquire whether its inclusion as a co-author adheres to ethical and technical standards or if it occasionally neglects these principles. In my opinion, involving AI tools like ChatGPT as a co-author can potentially lead to ethical complexities, especially in terms of responsibility and accountability. Language models powered by artificial intelligence lack consciousness, autonomy, and the ability to claim ownership of their contributions. Ascribing authorship to these models blurs lines of responsibility and weakens the ethical obligations inherent in scholarly authorship. Simultaneously, the essence of scholarly authorship lies in the generation of hypotheses, experimentation, data analysis, and interpretation, attributes ascribed to individuals who actively contribute. In this context, even though ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence models expeditiously furnish us with desired information through rapid interactions, it is fundamentally derived from existing human input sources. In essence, these AI systems do not so much transform or recreate a wellspring of knowledge as they present it in its preexisting state. Introducing ChatGPT as a co-author could evoke the assumption of its active engage
{"title":"Concerns About Co-Authoring AI Tools in Academic Papers","authors":"Emrah Yildiz","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1836","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editors\u0000With great attention and interest, I read the editors’ short brief yet thought-provoking editorials [1,2] and it has helped me combine valuable information with my research and experiences. Today, artificial intelligence has become an application that we can use in all areas of our lives, being versatile, and able to analyze, collect and interpret. Writing ChatGPT that we can barely bring together for weeks or even months of work, and other AI applications can be used in minutes or even. We seconds can see that it produces original writings and offers a wide range of information. It is obvious that the time-saving experience provided by artificial intelligence provides convenience in most areas of our lives. But that's human researchers and artificial intelligence it may cause us to not understand some points about certain differences between the two. For example, when we look at the difference between an article written with artificial intelligence and an article written with human intelligence, it is undoubtedly almost understandable at first glance impossible.\u0000Because of life's developing and changing conditions, no field wanted to be left behind and turned to itself to build its essence, one of which is undoubtedly artificial Intelligence. With the rapid progression of the COVID-19 pandemic and swiftly evolving political decisions, technology has become exceedingly practical and adaptive, undergoing continuous transformation.\u0000Many research studies have begun to be conducted around the world, with the need for individuals to conduct faster and more extensive research to bring together new and diverse resources.\u0000While the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) appears as one of the most promising options for this purpose, we must inquire whether its inclusion as a co-author adheres to ethical and technical standards or if it occasionally neglects these principles.\u0000In my opinion, involving AI tools like ChatGPT as a co-author can potentially lead to ethical complexities, especially in terms of responsibility and accountability.\u0000Language models powered by artificial intelligence lack consciousness, autonomy, and the ability to claim ownership of their contributions. Ascribing authorship to these models blurs lines of responsibility and weakens the ethical obligations inherent in scholarly authorship. Simultaneously, the essence of scholarly authorship lies in the generation of hypotheses, experimentation, data analysis, and interpretation, attributes ascribed to individuals who actively contribute. In this context, even though ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence models expeditiously furnish us with desired information through rapid interactions, it is fundamentally derived from existing human input sources. In essence, these AI systems do not so much transform or recreate a wellspring of knowledge as they present it in its preexisting state. Introducing ChatGPT as a co-author could evoke the assumption of its active engage","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75837037","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Adnan Aydogdu, Omer Unal, Saltuk Bugra Baltaci, Esma Menevse, Rasim Mogulkoc, Said Sami Erdem, Muammer Buyukinan, Abdulkerim Kasim Baltaci
Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between leptin, nesfatin 1 and NPY hormones and zinc in boys and girls diagnosed with metabolic syndrome and obesity. Materials and Methods: This study included a total of 6 groups. Group 1 Boy Control, Group 2 Girl Control, Group 3 Obese Boys, Group 4 Obese Girls, Group 5 Boys with Metabolic Syndrome, Group 2 with Girls with Metabolic Syndrome. Plasma leptin, nesfatin-1, NPY (by ELISA method) and serum zinc (by AA method) levels were determined in blood samples obtained from the subjects. Results: Leptin and zinc levels were significantly higher both in boy and girl patients with metabolic syndrome than in obese and control children. Nesfatin-1 and NPY levels were significantly lower both in girl and boy obese and metabolic syndrome children compared to their control groups. Conclusion: In the current study a significant increase in plasma leptin and serum zinc levels and a significant decrease of plasma nesfatin-1 and NPY levels were observed in boys and girls with metabolic syndrome. The findings of our study show that leptin, nesfatin-1 and NPY levels may be important biomarkers in the assessment of metabolic syndrome risk in both girls and boys.
{"title":"Plasma Leptin, Nesfatin 1, NPY, and Zinc Levels in Obese and Metabolic Syndrome Children","authors":"Adnan Aydogdu, Omer Unal, Saltuk Bugra Baltaci, Esma Menevse, Rasim Mogulkoc, Said Sami Erdem, Muammer Buyukinan, Abdulkerim Kasim Baltaci","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1760","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1760","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between leptin, nesfatin 1 and NPY hormones and zinc in boys and girls diagnosed with metabolic syndrome and obesity. Materials and Methods: This study included a total of 6 groups. Group 1 Boy Control, Group 2 Girl Control, Group 3 Obese Boys, Group 4 Obese Girls, Group 5 Boys with Metabolic Syndrome, Group 2 with Girls with Metabolic Syndrome. Plasma leptin, nesfatin-1, NPY (by ELISA method) and serum zinc (by AA method) levels were determined in blood samples obtained from the subjects. Results: Leptin and zinc levels were significantly higher both in boy and girl patients with metabolic syndrome than in obese and control children. Nesfatin-1 and NPY levels were significantly lower both in girl and boy obese and metabolic syndrome children compared to their control groups. Conclusion: In the current study a significant increase in plasma leptin and serum zinc levels and a significant decrease of plasma nesfatin-1 and NPY levels were observed in boys and girls with metabolic syndrome. The findings of our study show that leptin, nesfatin-1 and NPY levels may be important biomarkers in the assessment of metabolic syndrome risk in both girls and boys.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"2016 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136107452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dear Editors, We have been reading with great interest your editorial discussion on “Artificial Intelligence and Co-Authorship” which you initiated some time ago [1]. In the current era, the vast amount of data generated from routine applications, scientific research, and the resulting outcomes has surpassed what the human mind can read and evaluate. Therefore, there has been a need to summarize data and develop information processing-based applications for easy access, leading to the design of automated - artificial intelligence-based - tools. Nowadays, these tools are used in various processes, from data collection and analysis to hypothesis generation, experimentation, and simulation. The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools is highly beneficial in conducting and reporting scientific research. Particularly, for tasks such as literature reviews, identifying research gaps, and learning about collaborations among researchers/institutions, a wide range of AI-based tools has been developed, making it easier for researchers to accomplish these tasks. However, researchers are still seeking solutions to expedite the time-consuming aspects of writing their research. AI can automate repetitive tasks efficiently and with minimal errors, allowing humans to focus on more creative and strategic tasks. They can make better decisions by forecasting the future based on evaluating various types of existing data. After analysing similar content, they can generate purposeful creative content. They can answer questions on topics that humans may not understand comprehensively and informatively. And of course, they can translate text and speeches accurately and fluently into other languages. Misuse of AI tools or misinterpretation of results obtained from these applications can have significantly adverse consequences. One notable example of this is the unchecked preparation of academic papers by AI-based software. In fact, ChatGPT has been listed as a co-author in at least four articles in the literature, but corrections have been made in some cases due to its inaccuracies. When the Web of Science is searched, it is seen that ChatGPT was removed from authorship by making corrections in 1 article in which ChatGPT was previously mentioned as a co-author [2], and in two articles in the British Journalism Review and in three articles about ChatGPT in different journals, it was mentioned as a group author. It has been observed that while AI models like ChatGPT can generate text that appears human-like, there can be issues with interpretation and the presentation of false references, as highlighted in studies in the literature. Therefore, AI-based software like ChatGPT should not be used as co-authors without control but should be used as tools like other software, with the written text going through human oversight. As a result, the full responsibility for what these AI tools produce should rest with the author(s) submitting the article and cannot be attributed to t
尊敬的编辑们:我们怀着极大的兴趣阅读了您前段时间发起的关于“人工智能与合著”的编辑讨论[1]。在当今时代，从日常应用、科学研究中产生的大量数据，以及由此产生的结果，已经超出了人类大脑的阅读和评估能力。因此，有必要总结数据并开发基于信息处理的应用程序，以便于访问，从而导致设计基于人工智能的自动化工具。如今，这些工具被用于各种过程，从数据收集和分析到假设生成、实验和模拟。人工智能(AI)工具的使用在进行和报告科学研究方面非常有益。特别是，对于诸如文献综述、确定研究差距以及了解研究人员/机构之间的合作等任务，已经开发了广泛的基于人工智能的工具，使研究人员更容易完成这些任务。然而，研究人员仍在寻求解决方案，以加快撰写研究的耗时方面。人工智能可以有效地自动执行重复性任务，并将错误降至最低，使人类能够专注于更具创造性和战略性的任务。他们可以通过评估各种类型的现有数据来预测未来，从而做出更好的决策。在分析类似的内容后，他们可以生成有目的的创意内容。它们可以回答人类可能无法全面和信息地理解的主题问题。当然，他们可以准确流利地将文本和演讲翻译成其他语言。滥用人工智能工具或误解从这些应用程序中获得的结果可能会产生严重的不良后果。其中一个显著的例子是人工智能软件对学术论文的不加检查的准备。事实上，ChatGPT在文献中至少有四篇文章被列为共同作者，但由于其不准确，在某些情况下已经进行了更正。在Web of Science检索时，可以看到ChatGPT在1篇文章中作为合著者被提及[2]，并且在《英国新闻评论》的两篇文章和不同期刊的三篇关于ChatGPT的文章中，ChatGPT被作为小组作者被提及，因此被删除了作者身份。据观察，虽然像ChatGPT这样的人工智能模型可以生成看起来像人类的文本，但正如文献研究所强调的那样，在解释和虚假参考文献的呈现方面可能存在问题。因此，像ChatGPT这样的基于人工智能的软件不应该在没有控制的情况下被用作共同作者，而应该像其他软件一样被用作工具，书面文本要经过人类的监督。因此，这些人工智能工具产生的全部责任应该由提交文章的作者承担，而不能归因于人工智能[3]。诸如出版伦理委员会(COPE)、世界医学编辑协会(WAME)和美国医学会杂志网络等组织是有关学术出版物内容和质量的重要监管机构。他们强调，由于人工智能工具无法履行这些职责，无法履行作者身份要求(如声明利益冲突、管理出版权和许可协议)的个人不能成为论文的作者[4-6]。根据我们上面的建议，这些组织还声明，作者必须对人工智能工具在手稿中所做的一切以及文章对道德标准的遵守承担全部责任。综上所述，基于人工智能的应用程序对学术研究做出了重大贡献，就像它们在许多其他领域所做的那样，并且是学术写作研究人员的重要工具。随着长期的发展和改进，我们相信随着他们文献综述能力的提高，他们将获得撰写相当一部分学术论文的能力。然而，书面信息的准确性和原创性必须始终受到人类的监督，以对文学做出新的贡献。在这一点上，基于人工智能的应用程序再次发挥作用，声称能够以大约99%的准确率检测人工智能生成的内容和人类创建的内容之间的差异。被认为是人工智能生成内容的案例已经通过法律行动或向上级当局上诉得到纠正[7]。最终，在学术研究中使用基于人工智能的工具，如ChatGPT和人工智能生成的内容，就像学术工作的其他特征一样，应该受到道德考虑的监管。你的真诚,
{"title":"Discussion on the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools Usage in the Scientific World","authors":"Mazhar Özkan, H. Sasani","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1837","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editors,\u0000We have been reading with great interest your editorial discussion on “Artificial Intelligence and Co-Authorship” which you initiated some time ago [1]. In the current era, the vast amount of data generated from routine applications, scientific research, and the resulting outcomes has surpassed what the human mind can read and evaluate. Therefore, there has been a need to summarize data and develop information processing-based applications for easy access, leading to the design of automated - artificial intelligence-based - tools. Nowadays, these tools are used in various processes, from data collection and analysis to hypothesis generation, experimentation, and simulation.\u0000The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools is highly beneficial in conducting and reporting scientific research. Particularly, for tasks such as literature reviews, identifying research gaps, and learning about collaborations among researchers/institutions, a wide range of AI-based tools has been developed, making it easier for researchers to accomplish these tasks. However, researchers are still seeking solutions to expedite the time-consuming aspects of writing their research.\u0000AI can automate repetitive tasks efficiently and with minimal errors, allowing humans to focus on more creative and strategic tasks. They can make better decisions by forecasting the future based on evaluating various types of existing data. After analysing similar content, they can generate purposeful creative content. They can answer questions on topics that humans may not understand comprehensively and informatively. And of course, they can translate text and speeches accurately and fluently into other languages.\u0000Misuse of AI tools or misinterpretation of results obtained from these applications can have significantly adverse consequences. One notable example of this is the unchecked preparation of academic papers by AI-based software. In fact, ChatGPT has been listed as a co-author in at least four articles in the literature, but corrections have been made in some cases due to its inaccuracies. When the Web of Science is searched, it is seen that ChatGPT was removed from authorship by making corrections in 1 article in which ChatGPT was previously mentioned as a co-author [2], and in two articles in the British Journalism Review and in three articles about ChatGPT in different journals, it was mentioned as a group author.\u0000It has been observed that while AI models like ChatGPT can generate text that appears human-like, there can be issues with interpretation and the presentation of false references, as highlighted in studies in the literature. Therefore, AI-based software like ChatGPT should not be used as co-authors without control but should be used as tools like other software, with the written text going through human oversight. As a result, the full responsibility for what these AI tools produce should rest with the author(s) submitting the article and cannot be attributed to t","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76440447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: Suspicious microcalcifications detected in mammographic examinations may appear as early signs of breast malignancies. Microcalcifications that appear only on mammography and are not accompanied by any ultrasonographic mass should be excised after marking with a stereotactic wire, and pathological examination should be performed. In this study, we aimed to analyze the stereotactic biopsy results and share their findings. Methods: Lesions with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography (Figure 1) and in which no mass image was detected in the ultrasonographic response were evaluated retrospectively between January 2016 and December 2022. Excision was applied to the patients after marking with mammography and stereotactic wire. Removal of the suspicious microcalcification area was confirmed by radiography of the specimen in all patients. Pathological examination results of the patients, whether re-excision was made, tumor diameter in cases with malignancy, and follow-up periods of the patients were evaluated. Results: A total of 54 patients who underwent excision due to microcalcification were evaluated in the study. Malignancy was detected in 15 (27.7%) patients. The most common ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was detected. Re-excision was performed in 4 (26.6%) patients, and mastectomy was performed in 2 (13.3%) patients with malignancy. The median tumor diameter of malignant lesions was 9 mm. The mean follow-up period of the patients was found to be 42.46+16.44 months. Conclusion: Suspicious microcalcification areas detected in mammographic examinations, lack of ultrasonographic visibility, and biopsy with another minimally invasive method should be excised after marking with a stereotactic wire. This procedure is an effective method that allows early diagnosis of malignancies.
{"title":"Breast Stereotactic Excision Results","authors":"Zehra Ünal Özdemir, Mehmet Onur Gül","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1825","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1825","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Suspicious microcalcifications detected in mammographic examinations may appear as early signs of breast malignancies. Microcalcifications that appear only on mammography and are not accompanied by any ultrasonographic mass should be excised after marking with a stereotactic wire, and pathological examination should be performed. In this study, we aimed to analyze the stereotactic biopsy results and share their findings.\u0000Methods: Lesions with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography (Figure 1) and in which no mass image was detected in the ultrasonographic response were evaluated retrospectively between January 2016 and December 2022. Excision was applied to the patients after marking with mammography and stereotactic wire. Removal of the suspicious microcalcification area was confirmed by radiography of the specimen in all patients. Pathological examination results of the patients, whether re-excision was made, tumor diameter in cases with malignancy, and follow-up periods of the patients were evaluated.\u0000Results: A total of 54 patients who underwent excision due to microcalcification were evaluated in the study. Malignancy was detected in 15 (27.7%) patients. The most common ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was detected. Re-excision was performed in 4 (26.6%) patients, and mastectomy was performed in 2 (13.3%) patients with malignancy. The median tumor diameter of malignant lesions was 9 mm. The mean follow-up period of the patients was found to be 42.46+16.44 months.\u0000Conclusion: Suspicious microcalcification areas detected in mammographic examinations, lack of ultrasonographic visibility, and biopsy with another minimally invasive method should be excised after marking with a stereotactic wire. This procedure is an effective method that allows early diagnosis of malignancies.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"405 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77744212","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the cervical posture, sleep quality, and perceived health risk of technology-addicted adolescents, young adults and their controls. Methods: Adolescents and young-adults participants (n=160) were divided into four groups as addicted and non-addicted according to their age and Technology Addiction Scale scores. Cervical posture assessments were obtained by photographic analysis. Craniovertebral (CVA), craniohorizontal (CHA) and sagittal shoulder angle (SSA) values were recorded. Sleep quality was assessed with the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Scale. Participants' Perceived Health Risk was evaluated with a single-item, five-point Likert questionnaire. Results: The addicted participants had worse CVA than both their controls (p=0.000). Participants' CHA and SSA angles were similar in addicted groups (p=0.710 and p=0.612, respectively). Addicted adolescents had worse sleep quality than addicted young-adults (p=0.005). Perceived Health Risk is low level in all groups and there were no significant differences (p=0.055). Conclusion: Technology addiction affects the adolescent group more negatively than the young-adults. In the sample of adolescents and young-adults, individuals did not perceive excessive use of technological tools as a risk factor for their health. The degradation of CVA due to overuse of technological tools precedes the degradation of CHA and SSA. This can be explained by the fact that CVA is a more general angle that includes both the head- neck position and the vertebrae. It is necessary for public health and future health expenditures to educate and raise awareness of the more vulnerable adolescent group.
{"title":"Investigation of Cervical Posture, Sleep Quality and Perceived Health Risk in Technology Addicted Adolescents and Young Adults: A Comparative Study","authors":"Tuba Maden, Emir Ibrahim Isik","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1784","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the cervical posture, sleep quality, and perceived health risk of technology-addicted adolescents, young adults and their controls. Methods: Adolescents and young-adults participants (n=160) were divided into four groups as addicted and non-addicted according to their age and Technology Addiction Scale scores. Cervical posture assessments were obtained by photographic analysis. Craniovertebral (CVA), craniohorizontal (CHA) and sagittal shoulder angle (SSA) values were recorded. Sleep quality was assessed with the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Scale. Participants' Perceived Health Risk was evaluated with a single-item, five-point Likert questionnaire. Results: The addicted participants had worse CVA than both their controls (p=0.000). Participants' CHA and SSA angles were similar in addicted groups (p=0.710 and p=0.612, respectively). Addicted adolescents had worse sleep quality than addicted young-adults (p=0.005). Perceived Health Risk is low level in all groups and there were no significant differences (p=0.055). Conclusion: Technology addiction affects the adolescent group more negatively than the young-adults. In the sample of adolescents and young-adults, individuals did not perceive excessive use of technological tools as a risk factor for their health. The degradation of CVA due to overuse of technological tools precedes the degradation of CHA and SSA. This can be explained by the fact that CVA is a more general angle that includes both the head- neck position and the vertebrae. It is necessary for public health and future health expenditures to educate and raise awareness of the more vulnerable adolescent group.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136107458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mehmet Karagulle, Yilmaz Yildirim, Umut Ozsoy, Lütfi Süzen, Hatice IKIZLER MAY
Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively assess the changes in foot morphology in stroke patients using 3D scanning and focused on parameters like foot volume, area, and the root mean square difference (RMS) values. The objective was to enhance our understanding of post-stroke foot morphology and its potential relevance for rehabilitation, especially in designing orthotic supports and specialized footwear for stroke patients. Methods: Our study involved fourteen right hemiplegia patients and twenty healthy subjects. Stroke patients were assessed using international scales. We utilized a 3D scanning device to digitize and examine the differences in foot morphology between hemiplegic and healthy subjects, analyzing the data on a computer platform. Results: In the context of post-stroke individuals with hemiplegic feet, our morphometric analysis revealed notable differences in foot area and foot volume when compared to their healthy counterparts. These distinctions extended to linear measurements encompassing foot length, foot width, instep height, bimalleolar width, and ball width. Significantly, RMS exhibited a substantial increase in the patient cohort compared to the healthy group (p<0.05). Our investigation also established correlations between these standing morphometric parameters and RMS alterations, with noteworthy coefficients for various parameters: RMS(Foot Length Difference, 0.41), RMS(Foot Width Difference, 0.45), RMS(Instep Height Difference, 0.58), RMS(Ball Width Difference, 0.58), RMS(Bimalleolar Width Difference, 0.19), RMS(Volume Difference, 0.74), and RMS(Area Difference, 0.62). Conclusion: This study suggests incorporating RMS values as a novel parameter in the evaluation process. We anticipate that these findings will have practical implications, particularly in designing orthotic supports, specialized footwear for stroke patients, and the formulation of tailored rehabilitation programs within clinical settings.
{"title":"Three-Dimensional (3D) Morphometric Analysis of Plegic and Healthy Feet of Patients with Stroke","authors":"Mehmet Karagulle, Yilmaz Yildirim, Umut Ozsoy, Lütfi Süzen, Hatice IKIZLER MAY","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1701","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively assess the changes in foot morphology in stroke patients using 3D scanning and focused on parameters like foot volume, area, and the root mean square difference (RMS) values. The objective was to enhance our understanding of post-stroke foot morphology and its potential relevance for rehabilitation, especially in designing orthotic supports and specialized footwear for stroke patients.\u0000Methods: Our study involved fourteen right hemiplegia patients and twenty healthy subjects. Stroke patients were assessed using international scales. We utilized a 3D scanning device to digitize and examine the differences in foot morphology between hemiplegic and healthy subjects, analyzing the data on a computer platform.\u0000Results: In the context of post-stroke individuals with hemiplegic feet, our morphometric analysis revealed notable differences in foot area and foot volume when compared to their healthy counterparts. These distinctions extended to linear measurements encompassing foot length, foot width, instep height, bimalleolar width, and ball width. Significantly, RMS exhibited a substantial increase in the patient cohort compared to the healthy group (p<0.05). Our investigation also established correlations between these standing morphometric parameters and RMS alterations, with noteworthy coefficients for various parameters: RMS(Foot Length Difference, 0.41), RMS(Foot Width Difference, 0.45), RMS(Instep Height Difference, 0.58), RMS(Ball Width Difference, 0.58), RMS(Bimalleolar Width Difference, 0.19), RMS(Volume Difference, 0.74), and RMS(Area Difference, 0.62).\u0000Conclusion: This study suggests incorporating RMS values as a novel parameter in the evaluation process. We anticipate that these findings will have practical implications, particularly in designing orthotic supports, specialized footwear for stroke patients, and the formulation of tailored rehabilitation programs within clinical settings.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88712104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dear Editors, I follow your journal with pleasure. I enjoyed reading your articles on artificial intelligence [1,2]. I would like to share my ideas with you about the use of artificial intelligence, which many researchers are currently curious about. Health applications are being renewed day by day. New technology and new gains in treatment have made us curious about the use of artificial intelligence [3]. Health experts using methods such as machine learning and deep learning, which are sub-branches of artificial intelligence, are switching to new methods in processes such as diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and health protection of diseases [4,5]. ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), used in the studies and also added as a co-author, is ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot with the GPT-3.5.5 language model, which was released by the artificial intelligence research company OpenAI on November 30, 2022, and reached 1 million users in 5 days [3]. This robot can become a promising and powerful tool for tasks such as automatic drafting, article summarization, homework, and language translation, which can be useful for making writing work faster and easier in academic activities. Talan and Kalınkara [6] used ChatGPT in the Anatomy course and found that students performed better. Aktay et al. [7] stated that students found ChatGPT interesting and fun and that it increased students achievement. Saygın and Kabakcı [8] stated that the use of ChatGPT can be useful in information learning and in producing something new. On the other hand, in a few studies, the addition of artificial intelligence as a co-author has been stated to be worrying [1,9]. If the academician does not produce it himself, but the artificial intelligence he uses as a co-author does, it may create an obstacle in multidisciplinary studies. If ChatGPT is written instead of a collaborator when you want to study anatomy, we are concerned about the decrease in our assistants, students, and research scientists. As a result, ChatGPT can be used in the learning of the Anatomy course and can also be useful in increasing knowledge in academia, but I do not find it ethically correct for ChatGPT to do the work that master’s and doctoral students have done for years in master’s and doctoral studies in a short time. In addition, in the studies on Anatomy, while writing a scientist is a co-author, the inclusion of ChatGPT will pave the way for the production of studies without labor in a short time, and this will cause serious concerns in academia. It will save time in academia, but academics’ communication with each other will decrease, there will be no cooperation and multidisciplinary studies will decrease. Who will be responsible in case of any problems while participating as a co-author with ChatGPT? I think that the use of ChatGPT should be supervised and that it is worrying to be a co-author at the moment. Yours sincerely
{"title":"In the Anatomic Studies, Is It Correct to Add an Artificial Intelligence Such as ChatGPT as a Co-Author?","authors":"Gökçe Bağcı Uzun","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1826","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Editors,\u0000I follow your journal with pleasure. I enjoyed reading your articles on artificial intelligence [1,2]. I would like to share my ideas with you about the use of artificial intelligence, which many researchers are currently curious about.\u0000Health applications are being renewed day by day. New technology and new gains in treatment have made us curious about the use of artificial intelligence [3]. Health experts using methods such as machine learning and deep learning, which are sub-branches of artificial intelligence, are switching to new methods in processes such as diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and health protection of diseases [4,5]. ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer), used in the studies and also added as a co-author, is ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence chatbot with the GPT-3.5.5 language model, which was released by the artificial intelligence research company OpenAI on November 30, 2022, and reached 1 million users in 5 days [3]. This robot can become a promising and powerful tool for tasks such as automatic drafting, article summarization, homework, and language translation, which can be useful for making writing work faster and easier in academic activities. Talan and Kalınkara [6] used ChatGPT in the Anatomy course and found that students performed better. Aktay et al. [7] stated that students found ChatGPT interesting and fun and that it increased students achievement. Saygın and Kabakcı [8] stated that the use of ChatGPT can be useful in information learning and in producing something new.\u0000On the other hand, in a few studies, the addition of artificial intelligence as a co-author has been stated to be worrying [1,9]. If the academician does not produce it himself, but the artificial intelligence he uses as a co-author does, it may create an obstacle in multidisciplinary studies. If ChatGPT is written instead of a collaborator when you want to study anatomy, we are concerned about the decrease in our assistants, students, and research scientists.\u0000As a result, ChatGPT can be used in the learning of the Anatomy course and can also be useful in increasing knowledge in academia, but I do not find it ethically correct for ChatGPT to do the work that master’s and doctoral students have done for years in master’s and doctoral studies in a short time. In addition, in the studies on Anatomy, while writing a scientist is a co-author, the inclusion of ChatGPT will pave the way for the production of studies without labor in a short time, and this will cause serious concerns in academia. It will save time in academia, but academics’ communication with each other will decrease, there will be no cooperation and multidisciplinary studies will decrease. Who will be responsible in case of any problems while participating as a co-author with ChatGPT? I think that the use of ChatGPT should be supervised and that it is worrying to be a co-author at the moment.\u0000Yours sincerely","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85933999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Objective: In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in taxi drivers. Methods: Forty male professional taxi drivers who participated in a driving simulator experiment in the sleep laboratory were included in the current study. All participants were asked to fill out the KSS before and after a 50-minute driving simulator task in the morning after overnight polysomnography (PSG) in the hospital. OSA was defined as an apnea-hypopnea-index (AHI) 15 events/hour on the PSG. Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) was defined as KSS score of at least 6. Results: In all, only 3 cases fulfilled the criteria for EDS before the driving whereas 13 cases were sleepy after the task was completed (p <0.001). No significant association was found between KSS scores after the task and the PSG variables including total sleep time, time spent in delta sleep and REM sleep as well as OSA severity indices AHI and Oxygen Desaturation Index (ODI). The agreement between OSA and sleepiness on the KSS was calculated as 0.21 (p=0.07) indicating a very weak association. The KSS has a sensitivity of 24.1%, a specificity of 45.5%, a positive predictive value of 53.9%, a negative predictive value of 30.0%, an accuracy of 46.6% for the OSA diagnosis. The area under the curve was 0.57 (95% CI 0.39 – 0.74) for the AHI and 0.56 (95% CI 0.39 – 0.73) for the ODI, confirming a very poor performance of the KSS scores to predict AHI and ODI. Conclusion: The KSS is not associated with the severity of the OSA indices in male taxi drivers. Objective measurements of EDS are warranted for a more precise evaluation of fitness to drive in professional drivers.
目的:在本研究中，我们旨在评估卡罗林斯卡嗜睡量表(KSS)对出租车司机阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)的诊断效用。方法:选取40名参加睡眠实验室驾驶模拟器实验的男性职业出租车司机为研究对象。所有参与者都被要求在医院过夜多导睡眠描记(PSG)后的早上进行50分钟驾驶模拟器任务之前和之后填写KSS。在PSG上，OSA定义为呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI) 15次/小时。白天过度嗜睡(EDS)定义为KSS评分至少为6分。结果:只有3例患者在驾驶前达到EDS标准，而13例患者在任务完成后出现困倦(p <0.001)。任务后KSS评分与总睡眠时间、delta睡眠时间和REM睡眠时间以及OSA严重程度指数AHI和氧去饱和指数(ODI)等PSG变量无显著相关。在KSS上，OSA和困倦之间的一致性计算为0.21 (p=0.07)，表明相关性非常弱。KSS诊断OSA的敏感性为24.1%，特异性为45.5%，阳性预测值为53.9%，阴性预测值为30.0%，准确率为46.6%。AHI的曲线下面积为0.57 (95% CI 0.39 - 0.74)， ODI的曲线下面积为0.56 (95% CI 0.39 - 0.73)，证实了KSS评分在预测AHI和ODI方面的表现非常差。结论:男性出租车司机的KSS与OSA指标的严重程度无相关性。为了更精确地评估职业司机的驾驶适应性，客观测量EDS是有必要的。
{"title":"Karolinska Sleepiness Scale is not Associated with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Severity Indices in Male Taxi Drivers","authors":"Y. Çelik","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1794","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1794","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in taxi drivers.\u0000Methods: Forty male professional taxi drivers who participated in a driving simulator experiment in the sleep laboratory were included in the current study. All participants were asked to fill out the KSS before and after a 50-minute driving simulator task in the morning after overnight polysomnography (PSG) in the hospital. OSA was defined as an apnea-hypopnea-index (AHI) 15 events/hour on the PSG. Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) was defined as KSS score of at least 6.\u0000Results: In all, only 3 cases fulfilled the criteria for EDS before the driving whereas 13 cases were sleepy after the task was completed (p <0.001). No significant association was found between KSS scores after the task and the PSG variables including total sleep time, time spent in delta sleep and REM sleep as well as OSA severity indices AHI and Oxygen Desaturation Index (ODI). The agreement between OSA and sleepiness on the KSS was calculated as 0.21 (p=0.07) indicating a very weak association. The KSS has a sensitivity of 24.1%, a specificity of 45.5%, a positive predictive value of 53.9%, a negative predictive value of 30.0%, an accuracy of 46.6% for the OSA diagnosis. The area under the curve was 0.57 (95% CI 0.39 – 0.74) for the AHI and 0.56 (95% CI 0.39 – 0.73) for the ODI, confirming a very poor performance of the KSS scores to predict AHI and ODI.\u0000Conclusion: The KSS is not associated with the severity of the OSA indices in male taxi drivers. Objective measurements of EDS are warranted for a more precise evaluation of fitness to drive in professional drivers.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"98 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81377837","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fusun Fakili, M. Taylan, İrem Zehra Bilgiç, İ. Düzen
Objective: The primary aim of this study was to investigate the mortality and associated factors in patients with pulmonary embolism. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on adult patients with pulmonary embolism who applied to X University Hospital between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2023. All-cause mortality and related factors in pulmonary embolism patients were determined. Results: This study included 152 patients with a median age of 59 years and 81 (53.3%) women. The all-cause mortality rate was 25.7%, and pulmonary embolism-related deaths were 1.3%. Age (p<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (p=0.013), heart failure (p=0.018), atrial fibrillation (p=0.015), massive pulmonary embolism (p=0.029), hemoglobin level (p<0.001) and NT-Pro BNP level (p<0.001) were significantly associated with increased all-cause mortality. In binary logistic regression analysis, for each unit of increasing pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) score, mortality increased 2.2-fold (95% CI:1.03-5.09), massive PTE 1.6-fold (95% CI:0.14-17.86), anticoagulant duration (daily) 0.98-fold (95% CI:0.98-0.99) and Hb level (per unit Hb reduction) 0.67-fold (95% CI:0.45-1.02) mortality was increasing. There was no statistical difference between the number of hospitalization days for patients with low and high PESI and simplified PE severity index (sPESI) scores. Conclusions: All-cause mortality in patients with pulmonary embolism increased with age, cardiac diseases, and COPD comorbidities. The PESI and sPESI scores used in the acute phase of PTE were found to be highly reliable in predicting all-cause mortality in PE patients. The diagnosis of massive PE and elevated NT-proBNP levels, a marker of right ventricular dysfunction, were factors that increased mortality.
{"title":"Predictors of Mortality in Pulmonary Embolism: A Real-Life Study","authors":"Fusun Fakili, M. Taylan, İrem Zehra Bilgiç, İ. Düzen","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1818","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1818","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The primary aim of this study was to investigate the mortality and associated factors in patients with pulmonary embolism.\u0000Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on adult patients with pulmonary embolism who applied to X University Hospital between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2023. All-cause mortality and related factors in pulmonary embolism patients were determined.\u0000Results: This study included 152 patients with a median age of 59 years and 81 (53.3%) women. The all-cause mortality rate was 25.7%, and pulmonary embolism-related deaths were 1.3%. Age (p<0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (p=0.013), heart failure (p=0.018), atrial fibrillation (p=0.015), massive pulmonary embolism (p=0.029), hemoglobin level (p<0.001) and NT-Pro BNP level (p<0.001) were significantly associated with increased all-cause mortality. In binary logistic regression analysis, for each unit of increasing pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) score, mortality increased 2.2-fold (95% CI:1.03-5.09), massive PTE 1.6-fold (95% CI:0.14-17.86), anticoagulant duration (daily) 0.98-fold (95% CI:0.98-0.99) and Hb level (per unit Hb reduction) 0.67-fold (95% CI:0.45-1.02) mortality was increasing. There was no statistical difference between the number of hospitalization days for patients with low and high PESI and simplified PE severity index (sPESI) scores.\u0000Conclusions: All-cause mortality in patients with pulmonary embolism increased with age, cardiac diseases, and COPD comorbidities. The PESI and sPESI scores used in the acute phase of PTE were found to be highly reliable in predicting all-cause mortality in PE patients. The diagnosis of massive PE and elevated NT-proBNP levels, a marker of right ventricular dysfunction, were factors that increased mortality.","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79911139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ayşe Balat, Ş. Eren, M. Menzilcioğlu, I. Bahsi, İlkay Doğan, A. Acıduman, Bilal Çiğ, Tsvetoslav Georgiev, R. Grillo, F. Govsa, D. Kaplan, M. Karadağ, M. Karaoğlan, Özgür Kasapçopur, Waqar M. Naqvi, A. Nasimi, V. Nedzvetsky, Raphael Olszewski, Janusz Ostrowski, A. Özçelik, Harry Pantazopoulos, M. Piagkou, H. Resić, A. R. A. Rodrigues, Domenico Santoro, Ghada Shahrour, O. Taydaş, G. Tsoucalas, H. Yıldız, B. Yilmaz Furtun, M. Zdilla, Joseph Schmidt
Dear Colleagues, We are delighted to share another issue (September 2023, Volume 29, Issue 3) of the European Journal of Therapeutics (Eur J Ther). We believe this issue’s valuable and exciting works will be read with interest. As you will notice at first glance, you will see that this issue contains many editorials and letters to the editor, unlike the previous issues. As the new editorial team, we aim to publish current developments, interesting notes, or important historical anecdotes in medicine as Editorials, Special Editorials, or Letters to the Editor. We would like to inform you that you can submit all of your articles that meet these criteria to our journal. In this editorial, we would like to share the developments that we think are important for Eur J Ther, since our previous editorial [1]. First, we would like to share that the Eur J Ther is approved for inclusion in ERIH PLUS [2]. Moreover, the Eur J Ther now also appears in the Journal Section of the ResearchGate [3]. In this way, it will be possible to follow the Eur J Ther through ResearchGate. We wish to inform you that our editorial team is diligently striving to deliver enhanced advancements in the forthcoming editions. Another significant development is that an application to the Index Copernicus was submitted for the Eur J Ther on July 31, 2023 [4]. In the previous issue, it was reported that some of the cited references made to the previous articles published in the Eur J Ther were not reflected in the Web of Science, and applications via “data changes form” were made to correct them [1]. Most of these applications have been completed, updated in the Web of Science database, and corrected missing references. With these corrections and new citations in the last three to four months, the average per-item value (total number of citations for all articles divided by the number of articles) of the Eur J Ther has increased from 0.52 to 0.78 [5]. In addition, the journal’s H-Index has risen from 8 to 10. The current metrics of Eur J Ther in the Web of Science are as follows, as of August 16, 2023 [5]. Total number of publications: 800 (between 2007 to 2023) Citing Articles (total): 593 Citing Articles (without self-citations): 558 Times Cited (total): 620 Times Cited (without self-citations): 570 Average per item: 0.78 (620/800) H-Index: 10 Although these metrics may be insufficient for Eur J Ther, which has been published for over thirty years, we, the New Editorial Team, anticipate that we can achieve better levels in the long run with our updated policies. Another significant development is that the Journal Impact Factor value of the Eur J Ther was calculated for the first time, and this value was 0.3. As is known, the Web of Science calculated Journal Impact Factors for the first time for journals in the E-SCI index as of 2023 [6]. Although a Journal Impact Factor of 0.3 is not satisfactory, it is not bad for a journal whose Journal Impact Factor is calculated for the first t
她的研究兴趣包括临床解剖学(外科解剖学、头颈外科、血管外科、重建外科)、放射解剖学、解剖学教学和个性化治疗算法。她是数字成像和三维建模实验室- Ege 3D实验室(www.ege3dlab.com)的创始人，在那里个性化的手术计划增加了包括骨科，普外科，神经外科，眼科手术，放射肿瘤学和胸外科在内的复杂病例的手术成功率。她发表了150篇sci扩展索引学术期刊文章，并担任国内和国际出版商出版的多本科学书籍的编辑和章节作者。她曾与国内和国际科学家合作，执行和研究了许多国家项目。她是《外科放射解剖学》杂志教育与术语主题编辑，并担任多家国外期刊的编辑和审稿人。她是唯一一位被斯坦福大学列入世界最具影响力科学家名单的土耳其解剖学家。她与Yelda博士Pınar共同发表的题为“颞浅动脉及其分支的解剖:其对外科手术的重要性”的论文，自1950年以来被梅奥诊所整形外科列为面部恢复主题中被引用最多的50篇文章之一。这是“面部年轻化手术的里程碑:被引用最多的50篇文章”中唯一一项来自土耳其的研究。美容外科杂志，2020。“2010年至2012年，Govsa作为TÜBA土耳其医学术语词典工作组成员作出了贡献，并被邀请从2021年开始重新加入TÜBA工作组。自成立以来，她一直是土耳其解剖和临床解剖协会的成员，任职于其资格委员会和道德委员会。她也是欧洲临床解剖学协会(EACA)的成员。Özgür kasapopur，医学博士，是伊斯坦布尔大学Cerrahpasa医学院儿科教授，目前是儿科风湿病学主任。他担任Cerrahpasa医学院的机构审查委员会和临床研究伦理委员会主席。kasapopur教授在伊斯坦布尔大学Cerrahpasa医学院接受了医学本科教育，并在这里完成了儿科住院医师和研究员的工作。kasapopur教授是欧洲儿科风湿病学会(PReS)、儿科风湿病国际试验组织(PRINTO)、土耳其儿科协会和土耳其国家儿科风湿病学会的成员。kasapopur教授的研究兴趣包括疫苗反应、细胞因子通路和医学伦理学，临床重点是青少年特发性关节炎、家族性地中海热、自身炎症性疾病和青少年系统性红斑狼疮、皮肌炎和硬皮病。kasapopur教授在土耳其医学教科书中出版了83本书章节，并在医学期刊上发表了315多篇经同行评审的原创文章(和病例报告)。kasapopur教授的h指数在Google Scholar中为55，在Web of Science中为43。他在Web of Science上被引用超过8800次。Kasapcopur教授是《土耳其儿科档案》的主编。此外，Kasapcopur教授还是《风湿病学档案》、《儿科前沿》和《儿科病例报告》的副主编。他也是许多国内和国际科学期刊的编辑委员会成员。Harry Pantazopoulos博士是密西西比大学医学中心精神病学和人类行为学系的教员。Pantazopoulos博士在哈佛大学获得法学硕士学位，并在波士顿东北大学获得神经生物学博士学位。在加入密西西比大学之前，他曾在哈佛医学院麦克莱恩医院担任博士后研究员和初级教员。Pantazopoulos实验室的研究重点是识别精神疾病的神经病理学相关性，重点是细胞外基质和昼夜节律的作用。他通过结合人类尸体解剖和动物模型的方法来研究这些问题。他的长期研究目标是为几种疾病的神经回路变化奠定基础，包括自闭症谱系障碍、精神分裂症、双相情感障碍、重度抑郁症和物质使用障碍，他可以利用这些疾病开发更有效的治疗方法。此外，他的目标是确定基本的生物学机制，以深入了解昼夜节律系统和细胞外基质如何以特定大脑区域的方式调节神经功能，并与特定行为相关联。 Ghada Shahrour博士，PMHCNS，注册护士，是约旦科技大学护理学院的一名教员。她是精神病学护理领域的副教授，目前是社区和精神卫生N的主席
{"title":"Welcome to the New Issue (Vol: 29, No: 3, 2023) and Current News of the European Journal of Therapeutics","authors":"Ayşe Balat, Ş. Eren, M. Menzilcioğlu, I. Bahsi, İlkay Doğan, A. Acıduman, Bilal Çiğ, Tsvetoslav Georgiev, R. Grillo, F. Govsa, D. Kaplan, M. Karadağ, M. Karaoğlan, Özgür Kasapçopur, Waqar M. Naqvi, A. Nasimi, V. Nedzvetsky, Raphael Olszewski, Janusz Ostrowski, A. Özçelik, Harry Pantazopoulos, M. Piagkou, H. Resić, A. R. A. Rodrigues, Domenico Santoro, Ghada Shahrour, O. Taydaş, G. Tsoucalas, H. Yıldız, B. Yilmaz Furtun, M. Zdilla, Joseph Schmidt","doi":"10.58600/eurjther1795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.58600/eurjther1795","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Colleagues,\u0000We are delighted to share another issue (September 2023, Volume 29, Issue 3) of the European Journal of Therapeutics (Eur J Ther). We believe this issue’s valuable and exciting works will be read with interest. As you will notice at first glance, you will see that this issue contains many editorials and letters to the editor, unlike the previous issues. As the new editorial team, we aim to publish current developments, interesting notes, or important historical anecdotes in medicine as Editorials, Special Editorials, or Letters to the Editor. We would like to inform you that you can submit all of your articles that meet these criteria to our journal. In this editorial, we would like to share the developments that we think are important for Eur J Ther, since our previous editorial [1].\u0000First, we would like to share that the Eur J Ther is approved for inclusion in ERIH PLUS [2]. Moreover, the Eur J Ther now also appears in the Journal Section of the ResearchGate [3]. In this way, it will be possible to follow the Eur J Ther through ResearchGate. We wish to inform you that our editorial team is diligently striving to deliver enhanced advancements in the forthcoming editions. Another significant development is that an application to the Index Copernicus was submitted for the Eur J Ther on July 31, 2023 [4].\u0000In the previous issue, it was reported that some of the cited references made to the previous articles published in the Eur J Ther were not reflected in the Web of Science, and applications via “data changes form” were made to correct them [1]. Most of these applications have been completed, updated in the Web of Science database, and corrected missing references. With these corrections and new citations in the last three to four months, the average per-item value (total number of citations for all articles divided by the number of articles) of the Eur J Ther has increased from 0.52 to 0.78 [5]. In addition, the journal’s H-Index has risen from 8 to 10. The current metrics of Eur J Ther in the Web of Science are as follows, as of August 16, 2023 [5].\u0000\u0000Total number of publications: 800 (between 2007 to 2023)\u0000Citing Articles (total): 593\u0000Citing Articles (without self-citations): 558\u0000Times Cited (total): 620\u0000Times Cited (without self-citations): 570\u0000Average per item: 0.78 (620/800)\u0000H-Index: 10\u0000\u0000Although these metrics may be insufficient for Eur J Ther, which has been published for over thirty years, we, the New Editorial Team, anticipate that we can achieve better levels in the long run with our updated policies.\u0000Another significant development is that the Journal Impact Factor value of the Eur J Ther was calculated for the first time, and this value was 0.3. As is known, the Web of Science calculated Journal Impact Factors for the first time for journals in the E-SCI index as of 2023 [6]. Although a Journal Impact Factor of 0.3 is not satisfactory, it is not bad for a journal whose Journal Impact Factor is calculated for the first t","PeriodicalId":42642,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Therapeutics","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80870975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：