Top 10 Most Read in November: Emergency physicians’ need for recovery, early warning scales for COVID-19 and self-reported health in adults who use multivitamins.

As the year draws to a close, we are taking a look back on the top ten most read papers of November. While this list is still dominated by articles about COVID-19, five papers on a range of other topic areas have secured places in the top ten. New entries include a randomised controlled trial protocol to assess the effectiveness of exercise on rotator cuff related pain, as well as a Cohort Profile that describes the PHARMO Perinatal Research Network (PPRN), a resource that was created as a resource for life course perinatal and paediatric research by linking population-based data from existing registrations. 

A cross-sectional survey study from Cottey et al. takes the eighth spot this month. Cottey and colleagues aimed to determine the need for recovery (NFR) among emergency physicians in the UK and Ireland. By using the NFR scale to measure how much work demands affect the physician’s recovery between shifts, they found that higher NFR scores were observed among emergency physicians than have been reported in any other population and profession to date. 

New in at number six is a qualitative and Delphi study from Greenhalgh et al. In order to develop items for an early warning score for patients with suspected COVID-19, Greenhalgh and colleagues used mixed methods, such as focus groups and software development, to determine what items should be included on the REmote COVID-19 Assessment in Primary Care (RECAP) score. As a result, the RECAP-V0 scale comprises ten items and a ‘red flag box’. Validation of this scale is still ongoing. 

In the second spot this month is a study from Paranjpe et al. In this cross-sectional study, Paranjpe and colleagues aimed to compare the clinically measurable and self-reported health outcomes among adults who use multivitamin and multimineral supplements (MVM) and adults that do not use MVM. They found that adults who used MVM self-reported that they had better overall health. However, there were no differences in clinically measurable health outcomes between those that use MVM and those that do not. 

Rank Author(s) Title
1 McAloon et al.  Incubation period of COVID-19: a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of observational research
2 Paranjpe et al. Self-reported health without clinically measurable benefits among adult users of multivitamin and multimineral supplements: a cross-sectional study
3 O’Kelly et al. Ability of fabric face mask materials to filter ultrafine particles at coughing velocity
4 Houben et al. Cohort profile: the PHARMO Perinatal Research Network (PPRN) in the Netherlands: a population-based mother–child linked cohort
5 Raina MacIntyre et al. Contamination and washing of cloth masks and risk of infection among hospital health workers in Vietnam: a post hoc analysis of a randomised controlled trial
6 Greenhalgh et al. What items should be included in an early warning score for remote assessment of suspected COVID-19? qualitative and Delphi study
7 Liu et al.
8 Cottey et al. Need for recovery amongst emergency physicians in the UK and Ireland: a cross-sectional survey
9 Nutt et al. So near yet so far: why won’t the UK prescribe medical cannabis?
10 Dubé et al. Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: does the type of exercise influence the outcomes? Protocol of a randomised controlled trial

*Most read figures are based on PDF downloads and full text views. Abstract views are excluded

Like what you see? Follow this link for all our most recent content.

 

(Visited 319 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *