Industry involvement in evidence production for genomic medicine: A bibliometric and funding analysis of decision impact studies

Registered trials on novel therapies for myasthenia gravis: a cross-sectional study on ClinicalTrials.gov

Novel biologics in MG therapy research is on the rise. This research aimed to investigate the characteristics of registered trials on novel therapies for myasthenia gravis on ClinicalTrials.gov. This cross-sectional study used a descriptive approach to assess the features of the included trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. We found 62 registered trials from 2007 to 2023 on ClinicalTrials.gov. The results showed a yearly rise in the number of registered trials (r = 0.76, p < 0.001). Following 2017, more industry-sponsored trials were conducted (91.5% [43] vs. 60% [9], p = 0.009), fewer results were released (10.6% [5] vs. 60% [9], p = 0.001), and more trials entered phase 3 (67.4% [31] vs. 20% [2], p = 0.001). The most researched novel medications were neonatal Fc receptor inhibitors (51.2% [21]), complement inhibitors (39.0% [16]), and B cell depletors (14.6% [6]). According to the website's data, the neonatal Fc receptor inhibitors and complement inhibitors were effective in treating myasthenia gravis patients in three trials (NCT03315130, NCT03669588, and NCT00727194). This study provides valuable insights into the profile of registered trials on novel therapies for myasthenia gravis. More clinical studies are needed in the future to prove the value of its application.

Bibliometric Evaluation of the 100 Top-Cited Articles on Anesthesiology

This review is a bibliometric analysis based on anesthesiology, which is a medical specialty that deals with a patient's complete preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. The objective of the review attempts to analyze the bibliometric characteristics of the 100 most top-cited articles on anesthesiology. The meta-data of the study were collected from the Core Collection of Web of Science database. A title search option was employed, and "Anesthesia" and "Anesthesiology" were typed in two different search boxes separated with the Boolean operator ''OR''. Further, the data were sorted by highest citation order; later, "article" was selected from the filter of document type, and all other types of documents were excluded. Finally, downloaded the bibliographic details of the 100 top-cited articles. VOSviewer Software (version 1.6.10 by van Eck and Waltman) was used for bibliometric network analysis for co-authors and keywords. Pearson chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. The 100 top-cited articles were published between the years of 1971 and 2018. These articles gained a maximum of 1006 to a minimum of 276 citations with an average of 384.57 cites/article. Open accessed articles gained a slightly higher ratio of citations, while more than half of the articles were published in the two leading journals of "Anesthesiology" and "Anesthesia and Analgesia". There was no statistically significant difference in both citation analysis among open and closed access journals and Anesthesia vs Non-Anesthesia journals. Thirty-six articles were published in journals not specifically related to Anesthesia. Most of the top-cited articles were contributed by the United States, whereas Surgery and General Anesthesia were the two most occurred keywords.  We conclude that all the top-cited articles in anesthesiology were contributed by authors who belonged to the developed nations and the United States outclassed the rest of the world. This bibliometric analysis would be valuable to practitioners, academics, researchers, and students to understand the dynamics of progress in the field of anesthesiology.