Clinical Surgery Alfred Cuschieri Pdf Free _BEST_ 53

African Health Sciences is an open access, free online, internationally refereed journal publishing original articles on research, clinical practice, public health, policy, planning, implementation and evaluation, in the health and related sciences relevant to Africa and the tropics. African Health Sciences acknowledges support provided by the African Health Journals Partnership Project that is funded by the US National Institutes of Health (through the National Library of Medicine and the Fogarty International Center) and facilitated by the Council of Science Editors.

The provision of cell phone numbers and email addresses enhances the accessibility of medical consultations, but can add to the burden of physicians' routine clinical practice and affect their free time. The objective was to assess the attitudes of physicians to providing their telephone number or email address to patients. Primary care physicians in the southern region of Israel completed a structured questionnaire that related to the study objective. The study population included 120 primary care physicians with a mean age of 41.2 ± 8.5, 88 of them women (73.3%). Physicians preferred to provide their cell phone number rather than their email address (P = 0.0007). They preferred to answer their cell phones only during the daytime and at predetermined times, but would answer email most hours of the day, including weekends and holidays (P = 0.001). More physicians (79.7%) would have preferred allotted time for email communication than allotted time for cell phone communication (50%). However, they felt that email communication was more likely to lead to miscommunication than telephone calls (P = 0.0001). There were no differences between male and female physicians on the provision of cell phone numbers or email addresses to patients. Older physicians were more prepared to provide cell phone numbers that younger ones (P = 0.039). The attitude of participating physicians was to provide their cell phone number or email address to some of their patients, but most of them preferred to give out their cell phone number.

Background The provision of cell phone numbers and email addresses enhances the accessibility of medical consultations, but can add to the burden of physicians' routine clinical practice and affect their free time. The objective was to assess the attitudes of physicians to providing their telephone number or email address to patients. Methods Primary care physicians in the southern region of Israel completed a structured questionnaire that related to the study objective. Results The study population included 120 primary care physicians with a mean age of 41.2 ± 8.5, 88 of them women (73.3%). Physicians preferred to provide their cell phone number rather than their email address (P = 0.0007). They preferred to answer their cell phones only during the daytime and at predetermined times, but would answer email most hours of the day, including weekends and holidays (P = 0.001). More physicians (79.7%) would have preferred allotted time for email communication than allotted time for cell phone communication (50%). However, they felt that email communication was more likely to lead to miscommunication than telephone calls (P = 0.0001). There were no differences between male and female physicians on the provision of cell phone numbers or email addresses to patients. Older physicians were more prepared to provide cell phone numbers that younger ones (P = 0.039). Conclusions The attitude of participating physicians was to provide their cell phone number or email address to some of their patients, but most of them preferred to give out their cell phone number. PMID:21426591

Sample size calculations require effect size estimations. Sometimes, effect size estimations and standard deviation may not be readily available, particularly if efficacy is unknown because the intervention is new or developing, or the trial targets a new population. In such cases, one way to estimate the effect size is to gather expert opinion. This paper reports the use of a simple strategy to gather expert opinion to estimate a suitable effect size to use in a sample size calculation. Researchers involved in the design and analysis of clinical trials were identified at the University of Birmingham and via the MRC Hubs for Trials Methodology Research. An email invited them to participate.An online questionnaire was developed using the free online tool 'Survey Monkey©'. The questionnaire described an intervention, an electronic participant information sheet (e-PIS), which may increase recruitment rates to a trial. Respondents were asked how much they would need to see recruitment rates increased by, based on 90%. 70%, 50% and 30% baseline rates, (in a hypothetical study) before they would consider using an e-PIS in their research.Analyses comprised simple descriptive statistics. The invitation to participate was sent to 122 people; 7 responded to say they were not involved in trial design and could not complete the questionnaire, 64 attempted it, 26 failed to complete it. Thirty-eight people completed the questionnaire and were included in the analysis (response rate 33%; 38/115). Of those who completed the questionnaire 44.7% (17/38) were at the academic grade of research fellow 26.3% (10/38) senior research fellow, and 28.9% (11/38) professor. Dependent upon the baseline recruitment rates presented in the questionnaire, participants wanted recruitment rate to increase from 6.9% to 28.9% before they would consider using the intervention. This paper has shown that in situations where effect size estimations cannot be collected from previous research, opinions 2b1af7f3a8