Anaesthesia
-
Despite increasing numbers of women entering anaesthesia, they remain persistently under-represented within academic anaesthesia and research. Gender discordance is seen across multiple aspects of research, including authorship, editorship, peer review, grant receipt, speaking and leading. Women are also under-represented at higher faculty ranks and in department chair positions. ⋯ Peers and leaders alike, of all genders, can act as upstanders and speak up on behalf of targets of discrimination, both in the moment or after the fact. Gender inequities have persisted for far too long and can no longer be ignored. Diversifying the anaesthesia research community is essential to the future of the field.
-
Iron deficiency and anaemia are global health problems and major causes of morbidity in women. Current definitions of anaemia in women are historic and have been challenged by recent data from observational studies. Menstrual loss, abnormal uterine bleeding and pregnancy put women at risk of developing iron deficiency which can result in severe fatigue, reduced exercise capacity and poor work performance. ⋯ Many recommendations for the treatment of iron deficiency and anaemia in national guidelines are not supported by high-quality evidence. There is a need for robust epidemiological data and well-designed clinical trials. The latter will require collaborative working between researchers and patients to design studies in ways that incorporate patients' perspectives on the research process and target outcomes that matter to them.
-
Concerned that studies contain false data, I analysed the baseline summary data of randomised controlled trials when they were submitted to Anaesthesia from February 2017 to March 2020. I categorised trials with false data as 'zombie' if I thought that the trial was fatally flawed. I analysed 526 submitted trials: 73 (14%) had false data and 43 (8%) I categorised zombie. ⋯ I identified trials with false data and in turn categorised trials zombie for: 27/56 (48%) and 20/56 (36%) Chinese trials; 7/22 (32%) and 1/22 (5%) South Korean trials; 8/13 (62%) and 6/13 (46%) Indian trials; 2/11 (18%) and 2/11 (18%) Japanese trials; and 9/10 (90%) and 7/10 (70%) Egyptian trials, respectively. The review of individual patient data of submitted randomised controlled trials revealed false data in 44%. I think journals should assume that all submitted papers are potentially flawed and editors should review individual patient data before publishing randomised controlled trials.
-
Editorial Comment
Hundreds of thousands of zombie randomised trials circulate among us.