PubMed · 14391913
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A DAVIDOVICI. 1955-05-19. [Nitrous oxide anesthesia].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14391913/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
To determine separately the effect of corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) on analgesia and on inflammation, rats were assigned to receive CRH 60 microg/kg, CRH 300 microg/kg, morphine 4 mg/kg, or normal saline intravenously 15 min before a burn injury. Two mesh chambers that allowed collection of fluid had been previously implanted subdermally in each rat. The skin overlying the right chamber was subject to thermal injury. The left chamber served as a control. We assessed systemic analgesia, and levels of beta-endorphin and corticosterone in plasma and in chamber fluid before, 1, 4 and 24 h after drug administration. The CRH groups exhibited longer tail flick latencies than the control group (P=0.0001) although the increase in latency was of smaller magnitude than in the morphine group. We did not observe a CRH dose response for analgesia. Plasma corticosterone levels were higher in the CRH 300 microg/kg group than in the normal saline group at 4 h (P=0.03). Levels of beta-endorphin in plasma as well as the levels of corticosterone and beta-endorphin in chambers were similar in the CRH 300 microg/kg group and in the normal saline group (all P values>0.1). Thus, systemically administered CRH produces analgesia in thermal injury independent of its effect on these two markers of local or systemic inflammation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
CONTEXT: Duplicate publication is publication of an article that overlaps substantially with an article published elsewhere. Patterns of duplication are not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To investigate duplication patterns and propose a decision tree for classification. DATA SOURCES: We searched a comprehensive list of systematic reviews (1989 through August 15, 2002) in anesthesia and analgesia that is accessible on the Internet. We selected published full articles of duplicates that had been identified in these systematic reviews. Abstracts, letters, or book chapters were excluded. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Authors of 56 (40%) of 141 systematic reviews acknowledged identification of duplicates. Duplication patterns were identified independently by all investigators comparing samples and outcomes of pairs of duplicates and main articles. Information on cross-reference, sponsorship, authorship, and publication characteristics was extracted from the articles. DATA SYNTHESIS: The 56 systematic reviews included 1131 main articles (129 337 subjects) and excluded 103 duplicates (12 589 subjects) that originated from 78 main articles. Sixty articles were published twice, 13 three times, 3 four times, and 2 five times. We identified 6 duplication patterns: (1A) identical samples and identical outcomes (21 pairs); (1B) same as 1A but several duplicates assembled (n = 16); (2) identical samples and different outcomes (n = 24); (3A) increasing sample and identical outcomes (n = 11); (3B) decreasing sample and identical outcomes (n = 11); (4) different samples and different outcomes (n = 20). The prevalence of covert duplicate articles (without a cross-reference to the main article) was 5.3% (65/1234). Of the duplicates, 34 (33%) were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry, and 66 (64%) had authorship that differed partly or completely from the main article. The median journal impact factor was 1.8 (range, 0.1-29.5) for duplicates and 2.0 (range, 0.4-29.5) for main articles (P =.13). The median annual citation rate was 1.7 (range, 0-27) for duplicates and 2.1 (range, 0-31) for main articles (P =.45). The median number of authors was 4 (range, 1-14) for duplicates and 4 (range, 1-15) for corresponding main articles (P =.02). The median delay in publication between main articles and duplicates was 1 year (range, 0-7 years). CONCLUSIONS: Duplication goes beyond simple copying. Six distinct duplication patterns were identified after comparing study samples and outcomes of duplicates and corresponding main articles. Authorship was an unreliable criterion. Duplicates were published in journals with similar impact factors and were cited as frequently as main articles.