AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2692-9392/125
1 Gastroenterology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto,Portugal.
2 Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,Porto, Portugal.
*Corresponding Author: Daniela Falcão, Gastroenterology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, Portugal, and João Cruz, Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas Abel Salazar, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Citation: Daniela Falcão, João Cruz, Joana Silva, Professora Doutora Isabel Pedroto, (2022) Weekend Hospitalization in Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding – an Additional Risk?. J. Archives of Medical Case Reports and Case Study, 6(2); DOI:10.31579/2692-9392/125
Copyright: © 2022 Daniela Falcão and João Cruz, This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 02 May 2022 | Accepted: 06 June 2022 | Published: 10 June 2022
Keywords: weekend effect; upper gi bleeding; nonvariceal; rebleeding, mortality
Introduction: Weekend admission has been related to worse outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of the “weekend effect” in patients with nonvariceal uppergastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB).
Methods: Retrospective analysis of clinical and endoscopic data of patients admitted to Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, from January/2016 to December/2018 for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The association between weekend admission and the timing of endoscopy; level of hospitalisation; surgery need; rebleeding and mortality was evaluated.
Results: Atotal of 545 patients were included. No significant association between weekday and weekend admissions was observed in any of the outcomes. The majority of patients underwent upper endoscopy up to 12 hours afteradmission (62.0% vs. 57.2%, weekday vs. weekend admission, respectively), with similar timings of endoscopy between both groups (p=0.607). Hospitalization in intensive and/or intermediate care units (41.6% vs. 42.8%, p=0.869) was not related to the day of admission. Also, no differences were assessed in the following outcomes: surgery need (5.8% vs. 6.3%, p=0.843), rebleeding (9.3% vs. 6.2%, p=0.289) and mortality rates (6.2% vs. 2.4%, p=0.103).
Discussion and Conclusion: In this sample of patients with NVUGIB, clinical management and results were independent of the day of admission. The absence of “weekend effect” seems to be related to the gastroenterology emergency model evaluated and its continuous access to endoscopic resources.
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a major indication for emergency admission, with an incidence that varies from 48 to 160 cases per 100,000 individuals annually[1], representing at least 50% of the admissions regardinggastrointestinal bleeding [2]. The management of UGIB is a complexprocess, from resuscitation and stabilization to diagnosis and therapy. Endoscopy plays a key role, allowing clinical improvement of the outcomesin patients with UGIB 3.
The “weekendeffect” has been described as an increasedmortality in patientsadmitted during weekend [3-6]. Apparently, this is due to a reducedaccess to specialised medical care. On weekends, comparing to weekdays, hospitals usually operate on a reduced work schedule. This might be due to several reasonsincluding economic constraints, decreased staffing, includingsenior staff. In addition, some of these admissions might be relatedto adverse lifestyle related behaviours during the weekend[3,7-10].
The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guidelines recommends having endoscopyservices available for evaluation and management of UGIB 24-hours/7-days. However, endoscopy units may be closed or operate only on a limited weekend schedule, thereby delaying endoscopy [11,12]. Potentially, this might be one of the major reasons for poorer outcomes among patients who are hospitalized during the weekend [13-15].
In this context, “weekendeffect” closely reflectsthe organisational structure and performance of healthcare services,mainly “out-of-hours”, by identifying the efficiency gaps, so it can help to point improvement needs [6].
In Northern Portugal, located at Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto (CHUP) there is an organized gastroenterology emergency modelof care. A team of gastroenterologists from six public institutions and a nursing team from CHUP are responsible for the night shifts, the “out-of-hours” period,
from Monday to Sunday. This way, endoscopy is available seven days a week, 24 hours a day.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the overall weekend effect in patients’ outcomes, namely timing of endoscopy, intensive and intermediate care admission, bleeding recurrence, need for surgery and mortality rates in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of hospital records from patients admitted for UGIB, during the period of 1st of January 2016 and 31st of December 2018. The symptomsof UGIB were defined as melaena, hematemesis, hematochezia and/or symptomatic anaemia. Weekend admission was considered as hospitalization from Friday afternoon 3pm to Monday morning 7am. Despite the weekend definition, at CHUP, a gastroenterology team is present24-hours/7-days, to fulfilthe “out-of-hours” period, consisting of an experienced gastroenterologist and an endoscopy nurse. Patients with NVUGIB were included. The nonvariceal UGIB causes are presented on Table I.
| Weekday (n=366) | Weekend (n=179) | All (n=545) | P value | ||||||||
n | % | n | % | n | % | ||||||
| Mean age (SD),years | 68.1 | (17.1) | 68.3 | (15.5) | 0.961 | ||||||
| Sex | |||||||||||
| Male | 273 | 74.6 | 127 | 70.9 | 400 | 73.4 | 0.366 | ||||
| Female | 93 | 25.4 | 52 | 29.1 | 145 | 26.6 | |||||
| Drugs used | |||||||||||
| Anticoagulant | 52 | 16.4 | 24 | 16.2 | 76 | 16.3 | 0.959 | ||||
| Antiplatelet | 104 | 33.0 | 56 | 38.1 | 160 | 34.6 | 0.285 | ||||
| NSAID | 39 | 12.3 | 26 | 17.9 | 65 | 14.1 | 0.106 | ||||
| PPIs | 65 | 20.6 | 25 | 17.2 | 90 | 19.6 | 0.394 | ||||
| Comorbidities | |||||||||||
| Myocardial infarction | 18 | 12.2 | 49 | 15.4 | 67 | 14.4 | 0.352 | ||||
| Congestive heartfailure | 39 | 26.4 | 82 | 25.7 | 121 | 25.9 | 0.882 | ||||
| Chronic liverdisease | 24 | 16.2 | 42 | 13.3 | 66 | 14.2 | 0.400 | ||||
| Chronic renaldisease | 20 | 13.5 | 36 | 11.3 | 56 | 12.0 | 0.498 | ||||
| Diabetes mellitus | 41 | 27.7 | 77 | 24.2 | 118 | 25.3 | 0.420 | ||||
| Cerebrovascular diseases | 21 | 14.6 | 42 | 13.6 | 63 | 13.9 | 0.787 | ||||
| Malignant tumors | 16 | 11.0 | 46 | 14.9 | 62 | 13.7 | 0.265 | ||||
| CCI | |||||||||||
| <6> | 188 | 62.5 | 99 | 68.8 | 287 | 64.5 | 0.194 | ||||
| ≥6 | 113 | 37.5 | 45 | 31.3 | 158 | 35.5 | |||||
| Pre-endoscopy Rockall Score, mean (SD) | 3.4 | (1.7) | 3.3 | (1.7) | 0.715 | ||||||
| Symptoms | |||||||||||
| Melaena | 87 | 26.7 | 33 | 22.3 | 120 | 25.3 | |||||
| Hematemesis | 127 | 39.0 | 51 | 34.5 | 178 | 37.6 | |||||
| Hematochezia | 10 | 3.1 | 3 | 2.0 | 13 | 2.7 | 0.073 | ||||
| Melaena and hematemesis | 34 | 10.4 | 28 | 18.9 | 62 | 13.1 | |||||
| Anemia | 60 | 18.4 | 25 | 16.9 | 85 | 17.9 | |||||
| Other | 8 | 2.5 | 8 | 5.4 | 16 | 3.4 | |||||
| Diagnosis | |||||||||||
| Mallory-Weiss syndrome | 40 | 10.9 | 21 | 11.7 | 61 | 11.2 | |||||
| Gastric ulcer | 110 | 30.1 | 61 | 34.1 | 171 | 31.4 | |||||
| Duodenal ulcer | 98 | 26.8 | 36 | 20.1 | 134 | 24.6 | 0.778 | ||||
| Gastric angioectasia | 29 | 7.9 | 13 | 7.3 | 42 | 7.7 | |||||
| Malignacies | 40 | 10.9 | 22 | 12.3 | 62 | 11.4 | |||||
| Inconclusive | 4 | 1.1 | 2 | 1.1 | 6 | 1.1 | |||||
| Others* | 45 | 12.3 | 24 | 13.4 | 69 | 12.7 | |||||
| Endoscopic treatment | |||||||||||
| Yes | 135 | 36.9 | 70 | 39.1 | 205 | 37.6 | 0.615 | ||||
| No | 231 | 63.1 |  | 109 | 60.9 |  | 340 | 62.4 | |
| |
 |
SD: standard deviation;NSAID: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; PPIs: protón-pump inhibitors; CCI: Charlson comorbidity index. *Esophagitis, esophageal ulcer, hemorrhagic gastritis, gastroduodenitis, Dieulafoy’s lesion, duodenal angioectasia, antral vascular ectasia
For each patient, data collected were age, sex, comorbidities and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), symptoms, pre-endoscopy Rockall score, antiplatelet, anticoagulant and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use,
bleeding cause and need of endoscopic treatment. Different endoscopic treatments were used: submucosal adrenaline injections, sclerosant injections of polidocanol, thermocoagulation (heat probe, argon plasma),
endoscopic clips, and topic hemospray. The CCI was stratified into two groups according to the score (<6>24 hours. Rebleeding was considered in cases of furtherhematemesis, passage of fresh melaenaor hematochezia and/orhypovolemic shock after the first endoscopy. In case of rebleeding, patients were rescoped. If bleeding could not be controlled by endoscopy, patientswere referred for surgery.
Descriptive statistics was calculated for both continuous and discrete variables, stratifying the patientsaccording to weekdayvs. weekend admission. Differences between groups were assessed using the Chi-square and t-testtests. The primaryindependent predictor was the day of admission (weekday vs. weekend.Then, the modelwas adjusted for several risk factors selected based on their potential effect on the outcome.
Patient characteristics
A total of 545 patients with NVUGIB were included in the analysis.Demographic and clinicalcharacteristics according to admission are detailed in Table I. There were 366 patients(273 men and 93 women,mean (SD) age of 68.1 (17.1) years) admitted on weekdays, and 179 patients (127 men and 52 women, mean (SD) age of 68.3 (15.5) years) during the weekend. There was no significant difference between groups for the mean age of patients (p=0.961). Also, no difference was found in the use of anticoagulants, antiplatelets, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or proton- pump inhibitors (PPIs) according to the day of admission (p=0.959, 0.285, 0.106, 0.394, respectively). In both weekday and weekend admissions, the most common comorbidities were Diabetes mellitus (27.7% vs. 24.2%) and congestive heart failure (26.4% vs. 25.7%). When comparing both groups, most patients had a CCI score <6 p=0.194). p=0.715). p=0.615).>
Outcomes
Outcomes according to admission´s day are reported in Table II.When comparing the timing of endoscopy, no significant differences were observed between weekdays and weekends (p=0.607).Furthermore, most patients performed a very early endoscopy, <12hours>24h, on weekday or weekend, respectively. The intrahospital rebleeding rate was similar between weekdays and weekends (9.3% vs. 6.2%, p=0.289). Additionally, no difference was found in the need for surgeryon weekends versusweekdays, (5.8% vs. 6.3%, p=0.843).Regarding the need and level of care in hospitalization, there was no difference, according to the day of admission, either in intensive or intermediate care units (intensive, 4.8% vs. 6.0%; intermediate, 36.8% vs. 36.8%, p=0.869). Again, no difference was found in in-hospital mortalityrates, considering the day of admission (6.2% vs. 2.4%, p=0.103).
| Weekday (n=366) | Weekend (n=179) | All (n=545) | P value | ||||||||
n | % | n | % | n | % | ||||||
Surgery | 16 | 5.8 | 8 | 6.3 | 24 | 6.0 | 0.843 | ||||
Endoscopy timing | |||||||||||
Very early <12h> | 184 | 62.0 | 79 | 57.2 | 263 | 60.5 | 0.607 | ||||
Early ≤24h | 72 | 24.2 | 36 | 26.1 | 108 | 24.8 | |||||
Delayed >24h | 41 | 13.8 | 23 | 16.7 | 64 | 14.7 | |||||
Rebleeding, in-hospital | |||||||||||
Yes | 26 | 9.3 | 8 | 6.2 | 34 | 8.3 | 0.289 | ||||
No | 255 | 90.7 | 122 | 93.8 | 377 | 91.7 | |||||
Hospitalisation | |||||||||||
Intermediate care unit | 107 | 36.8 | 49 | 36.8 | 156 | 36.8 | 0.869 | ||||
Intensive careunit | 14 | 4.8 | 8 | 6.0 | 22 | 5.2 | |||||
No | 170 | 58.4 | 76 | 57.1 | 246 | 58.0 | |||||
Death, in-hospital | |||||||||||
Yes | 17 | 6.2 | 3 | 2.4 | 20 | 5.0 | 0.103 | ||||
No | 259 | 93.8 | 124 | 97.6 | 383 | 95.0 | |||||
Table 2: Outcomes of 545 patientsadmitted for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleedingaccording to weekday vs. weekend admission
We conducted a study of a large series of patients admitted for NVUGIB during a 3-year period. We did not find any significant relation between weekend admission and increased mortality, nor with other outcomes.
The literature on the “weekend effect” is rapidly growing and large studies have been commissioned to investigate the magnitude and mechanisms of this effect[16]. Although the causes of the “weekendeffect” remain unclear,it is thought to be mediated through differences in the process of care and staffing between weekdays and weekends[17].
Several studieshave addressed the issue of the so-called“weekend effect” in patients admittedfor NVUGIB with inconsistent results[4,8,10,18-21]. Some reported a significant weekend effect in relation to the NVUGIB [4,10,19,21], whereas othersdid not find increased mortalityamong patients admitted on the weekend [8,18]. However, it is important to distinguish between varicealand nonvariceal bleeding.As the management and prognosisof variceal and nonvariceal bleedingdiffer significantly, this could influence the interpretation of the results. Data published suggests that thereis no weekend effect in variceal UGIB [8,20]. In contrast, what is known about the “weekendeffect” in patientswith NVUGIB is contradictory. Threestudies reported a significant weekendeffect in relationto NVUGIB
[10,19,20], whereas two did not [8,18]. In our study, we did not find any “weekend effect” in relation to mortality. On the contrary, mortality was lower.
The “weekend effect” can strongly reflect organisational differences among different healthcare systems. Most UGIB studieshave been conducted in the United States of America (USA) so far [10,20]. Ananthakrishnan et al. [20], documented a significant “weekend effect” in patients with nonvariceal bleeding. In addition, Shaheenet al. [10] performed one of the largest studiesin the USA, with over 200,000 patients admitted for peptic ulcer related UGIB, reporting a significantly higher mortality rate for patients admitted during the weekends. Regarding Europe, most studiescame from the United Kingdom(UK) [8,19]. A study conductedin Wales strengthened the “weekend effect” [19], but another one from the UK, Jairath et al. [8], concluded otherwise. More inconsistent resultscame from Europe.An Italian study [18] did not report differences in mortality rates based on the day of admission, whereas a Dutch study found a significant association [21]. Thus, information on this subject significantly differs not just between countries, but also between continents. This makes clear that asymmetries in patient’s management, in the set of UGIB, explain differences on patient’s outcomes.The day of admission is one variable in the process of care.
Previous studies have shown that endoscopy timing is significantly related to weekday or weekend admission. On one hand,according to some studies, endoscopy timing duringweekday admissions was significantly inferiorthan for weekend admissions [4,5,8,10,19,20]. On the other hand, a few studies showed that the timing of endoscopy for weekend admissions is shorter when compared to weekday admissions [22,23]. We found no difference in the timing of endoscopy, regardless the day of the week. These results can be explained by the model of CHUP’s gastroenterology emergencycare organization. In fact, as mentioned above, a gastroenterology specialized team is presentcontinuously. Therefore, no differences in endoscopy timingare observed betweenweekdays and weekends.
We also observed that in NVUGIB patients, the “weekend effect” is not associated with rebleeding. This finding is consistent with studies which also analysed rebleeding in UGIB patients [8,18,19].
Additionally, we did not find a difference in patients who underwent surgerybased on the day of admission. Despite our finding, Shaheen et al. [10] reported that patients with NVUGIB underwent more frequently a surgical intervention when admitted during the weekend. It seems that, at CHUP, endoscopy therapy is equally effective during the week comparing to the weekend.
Moreover, the need and level of hospitalization, according to our findings, was also not related to the day of admission. Additionally, the same number of patients with NVUGIB were hospitalized during the week and weekend, regardless the level of care. In the end, most patients were not hospitalized, nor during the week, nor during the weekend. This could be explained by another of our findings: our mean pre-endoscopy Rockall score. In fact, in both groups,the mean pre-endoscopy Rockall score was low, describing our patients’ sample with a very low chance of mortality, thus diminishing the need forhospitalization.
Our studyhas some limitations. Firstly, this is a northerncentre study whichlimits the possibility to generalize our conclusions to a nationallevel. Secondly, endoscopic and admission reportslacked some information, leaving us with some missing cases. The strengths of our study are the high number of patients includedand how it gives us a better understanding of the effectiveness of care in acute nonvariceal bleeders. Overall, our findings have significant implications for the understanding of gastroenterology emergency models of care.
We did not identify any differences in the clinical outcomes of patients admitted for NVUGIB during weekdays or weekends. Therefore, our data support that endoscopy units working 24 hours a day, seven days a week, may address this specific healthcare need in an efficient way.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
