Korea-China Editorial Workshop

2018 The Korean Pain Society Fall Training Conference Korea-China Editorial Workshop Chair Kyung-Hoon Kim (Pusan National Univ., Korea)

Kyung-Hoon Kim : How can The Korean Journal of Pain become and remain covered in the SCI(E) journal? How can The Korean Journal of Pain become and remain covered in the SCI(E) journal? 1. Current status of the Korean Journal of pain (KJP) The Korean Journal of Pain (KJP) was published in Korean for 20 years starting in 1988, and in English since 2010. The KJP, in 2017, ranked 43 rd among the 124 journals in the field of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, in Medicine, 0.630 in the Scimago Journal Rankings (SJR), in the category of Quartile (Q)2. Its impact factor is 1.86 and its H index is 16. 1) The latest impact factor (IF) or cite score of the KJP in 2017 was 1.857 (2 years), 1.803 (3 years), and 1.712 (4 years). The impact factor (IF) of a journal is a measure reflecting the yearly average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal. 2) The Scimago Journal Rankings (SJR) indicator is influenced by the rank of the citing journal (greater than 1). It is a measure of the scientific influence of scholarly journals. It accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the journals where such citations come from [1]. 3) Based on the SJR, the journal impact factor quartile (Q) is the quotient of a journal s rank in its category (X) and the total number of journals in the category (Y), so that (X/Y) = percentile rank Z [2]. The KJP had ranked in Q3 from 2012 to 2013, and remained in Q2 from 2014 to 2017. Now, 31 journals are ranked in the category of Q1, the journals ranking 31st to 62nd are in the group Q2, those ranking 63rd to 93rd are positioned in Q3, and the journals ranking 94th to 124th are in the category of Q4. Kyung-Hoon Kim Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, School of Medicine, Pusan National University, Yangsan, Korea 4) The H (Jorge E Hirsch)-index is an author-level metric that attempts to measure both the productivity and citation impact of the publications of a scholar. The index is based on the set of the scientist s most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. The index can also be applied to the productivity and impact of a scholarly journal as well as a group of scientists, such as a department, university, or country. 2. What does the KJP publish? The Korean Journal of Pain (KJP) publishes several categories of manuscripts: editorials, systemic reviews and meta-analyses, original research, case reports, and letters to the editor. 1) Review articles and Meta-analyses Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials are recommended to follow the Preferred Reporting items for Systemic 97

Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Table 1) [3]. Meta-analyses of observational studies follow the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines (Table 2) [4]. Narrative reviews should include cutting-edge and evolving developments and health policy. Clinical guidelines should be summaries of official or consensus positions on issues related to clinical practice, health care delivery, or public policy. 2) Original articles Original research includes randomized controlled trials, observational studies, diagnostic studies, and reports of adverse drug effects. (1) It is recommended that randomized trials follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement (Table 3) [5]. The flow diagram of a parallel randomized trial consists of enrollment, allocation, follow-up, and analysis. (2) Non-randomized trials or observational human studies follow the instructions of the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) or the Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND) (Table 4 and 5) [6,7]. For animal studies, the recommendation is to follow the instructions of Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) (Table 6) [8]. (3) It is recommended that diagnostic test studies follow the Diagnostic accuracy studies of the Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests (STARD) (Table 7) [9]. (4) Cost effectiveness or cost utility studies should include comparisons of the relative costs and benefits of interventions. 3. How can the KJP become and remain covered by the Science Citation Index (expanded) SCI(E)? The IF of the Web of Science by Clarivate Analytics is determined by authors who write frequently. The English language in the article should be perfect, if the prolific authors can read, give consent to, and cite our articles. The country rankings in 2017 are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, France, Canada, Italy, India, Spain, Australia, the Russian Federation, and Korea (13th) [10]. Even though the KJP is published in Korea, it is mostly read by native English speakers. Therefore, it should be perfect grammatically not in order to be read by English native speakers. To increase the SJR indicator, more influential scientific journals must cite the KJP. To increase the H index, prominent scholars at leading institutes, universities, and countries must cite the KJP. The KJP is no longer truly the journal of The Korean Pain Society. Over 90% of authors are foreigners. Only the review articles can express the direction that the KJP wants to go. The KJP will have a new homepage which is accessible from both personal computers and mobile phones. After becoming covered by the SCI(E), the thorough regulations for authors listed above should be added to our requirements. References 1. https://www.scimagojr.com/scimagojournalrank.pdf 2. http://ipsciencehelp.thomsonreuters.com/incites2live/indicatorsgroup/abouthandbook/usingcitationindicatorswisely/jifquartile.html 3. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6: e1000097. 98

Kyung-Hoon Kim : How can The Korean Journal of Pain become and remain covered in the SCI(E) journal? 4. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, el al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-12. 5. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D; CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med 2010; 7: e1000251. 6. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Int J Surg 2014; 12: 1500-24. 7. Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N; TREND Group. Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. Am J Public Health 2004; 94: 361-6. 8. Kilkenny C, Browne W, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG; National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Amimals in Research. Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments--the ARRIVE guidelines. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2011; 31: 991-3. 9. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 2003; 326: 41-4. 10. https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?year=2017 Table 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) TITLE 1. Title ABSTRACT 2. Structured summary INTRODUCTION 3. Rationale 4. Objectives 5. Protocol and registration 6. Eligibility criteria 7. Information sources 8. Search strategy 9. Study selection METHODS 10. Data collection process 11. Data items 12. Risk of bias in individual studies 13. Summary measures 14. Synthesis of results 15. Risk of bias across studies 16. Additional analyses 17. Study selection 18. Study characteristics 19. Risk of bias within studies RESULTS 20. Results of individual studies 21. Synthesis of results 22. Risk of bias across studies 23. Additional analysis 24. Summary of evidence DISCUSSION 25. Limitations 26. Conclusions FUNDING 27. Funding 99

BACKGROUND SEARCH STRATEGY REPORTING OF METHODS REPORTING OF RESULTS REPORTING OF DISCUS- SION REPORTING OF CON- CLUSIONS Table 2. Preferred Reporting Items for Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies (MOOSE) 1. Problem definition 2. Hypothesis statement 3. Description of study outcome(s) 4. Type of exposure or intervention used 5. Type of study designs used 6. Study population 7. Qualification of researchers (e.g., librarians and investigators) 8. Search strategy, including time period included in the synthesis and key words 9. Effort to include all available studies, including contact with authors 10. Databases and registries searched 11. Search software used, name and version, including special features used (e.g., explosion) 12. Use of hand searching (e.g., reference lists of obtained articles) 13. List of citations located and those excluded, including justification 14. Method of addressing articles published in languages other than English 15. Method of handling abstracts and unpublished studies 16. Description of any contact with authors 17. Description of relevance or appropriateness of studies assembled for assessing the hypothesis to be tested 18. Rationale for the selection and coding of data (e.g., sound clinical principles or convenience) 19. Documentation of how data were classified and coded (e.g., multiple raters, blinding, and interrater reliability) 20. Assessment of confounding (e.g., comparability of cases and controls in studies were appropriate) 21. Assessment of study quality, including blinding of quality assessors; stratification or regression on possible predictors of study results 22. Assessment of heterogeneity 23. Description of statistical methods (e.g., complete description of fixed or random effects models, justification of whether the chosen models account for predictors of study results, dose-response models, or cumulative meta-analysis) I sufficient detail to be replicated 24. Provision of appropriate tables and graphics 25. Graphic summarizing individual study estimates and overall estimate 26. Table giving descriptive information for each study included 27. Results of sensitivity testing (e.g., subgroup analysis) 28. Indication of statistical uncertainty of findings 29. Quantitative assessment of bias (e.g., publication bias) 30. Justification for exclusion (e.g., exclusion of non-english-language citations) 31. Assessment of quality of included studies 32. Consideration of alternative explanations for observed results 33. Generalization of the conclusions (i.e., appropriate for the data presented and within the domain of the literature review) 34. Guidelines for future research 35. Disclosure of funding source 100

Kyung-Hoon Kim : How can The Korean Journal of Pain become and remain covered in the SCI(E) journal? TITLE AND ABSTRACT Table 3. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 statement checklist when reporting a randomized trial 1. Identification as a randomized trial in the title 2. Structured summary of trial design, methods, results, and conclusions INTRODUCTION 3. Background and objectives or hypotheses 4. Trial design (parallel or factorial) including allocation ratio and eligibility criteria 5. Participants 6. Interventions 7. Outcomes METHODS 8. Sample size 9. Randomization (sequence generation, allocation concealment mechanism, and implementation) 10. Binding 11. Statistical methods 12. Participant flow (diagram) 13. Recruitment 14. Baseline data RESULTS 15. Numbers analyzed 16. Outcomes and estimation 17. Ancillary analyses 18. Harms or unintended effects 19. limitations DISCUSSION 20. Generalization 21. Interpretation 22. Registration OTHER INFORMATION 23. Protocol 24. Funding 101

Table 4. The Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement for non-randomized trials or observational human studies TITLE AND ABSTRACT 1. Identification as a randomized trial in the title 2. Structured summary of trial design, methods, results, and conclusions INTRODUCTION 3. Background and objectives or hypotheses 4. Trial design (parallel or factorial) including allocation ratio and eligibility criteria 5. Participants 6. Interventions 7. Outcomes METHODS 8. Sample size 9. Randomization (sequence generation, allocation concealment mechanism, and implementation) 10. Binding 11. Statistical methods 12. Participant flow (diagram) 13. Recruitment 14. Baseline data RESULTS 15. Numbers analyzed 16. Outcomes and estimation 17. Ancillary analyses 18. Harms or unintended effects 19. limitations DISCUSSION 20. Generalization 21. Interpretation 22. Registration OTHER INFORMATION 23. Protocol 24. Funding 102

Kyung-Hoon Kim : How can The Korean Journal of Pain become and remain covered in the SCI(E) journal? Table 5. The Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs (TREND) for non-randomized trials or observational human studies TITLE AND ABSTRACT 1. Title and abstract INTRODUCTION 2. Background 3. Participants 4. Interventions 5. Objectives 6. Outcomes METHODS 7. Sample size 8. Assignment method 9. Binding (masking) 10. Unit of analysis 11. Statistical methods 12. Participant flow 13. Recruitment 14. Baseline data RESULTS 15. Baseline equivalence 16. Numbers analyzed 17. Outcomes and estimation 18. Ancillary analysis 19. Adverse events 20. Interpretation DISCUSSION 21. Generalizability 22. Overall evidence TITLE ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION Table 6. Animal research: reporting in vivo experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines 1. Title 2. Abstract 3. Background 4. Objectives 5. Ethical statement 6. Study design 7. Experimental procedures 8. Experimental animals 9. Housing and husbandry 10. Sample size 11. Allocating animals to experimental groups 12. Experimental outcomes 13. Statistical methods 14. Baseline data 15. Numbers analyzed 16. Outcomes and estimation 17. Adverse events 18. Interpretation/scientific implications 19. Generalizability/translation 20. Funding 103

TITLE, ABSTRACT, AND KEYWORDS Table 7. The Diagnostic accuracy studies of the Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests (STARD) `checklist for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies 1. Title, abstract, and keywords INTRODUCTION 2. Introduction METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION OTHER INFORMATION 3. Participants 4. Test methods 5. Statistical methods 6. Participants 7. Test results 8. Estimates 9. Key results 10. Limitations 11. Interpretation 12. Generalizability 13. Funding 104

Zhenhua Wu : Pain Academic and Academic Periodicals in China Pain Academic and Academic Periodicals in China Zhenhua Wu The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, P.R, China This paper briefly introduces the current situation of Chinese periodicals, the present situation of Chinese literature database, the development of electronic journals and the progress of media integration. This paper introduces the countermeasures against academic misconduct in China. The distribution and influence of medical journals are introduced. The paper introduces the related journal of pain medicine and its influence. 105

Development of pain medicine in China Xiaoli Liu The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, P.R, China 1. Development of pain medicine in China has two origin: Professor Zhang Lisheng ( 张立生 ), clinical medicine-anesthesiology, Professor Han Jisheng ( 韩济生 ), basic medicine-physiology. Professor Zhang Lisheng set up the earlier pain clinic in China in 1986, host and convened the first national conference of pain medicine in 1988, founded the first professional Journal pain clinic journal in 1993. Academician Han Jisheng established CASP - Chinese association of the study of pain in 1989, and CASP officially named to Chinese society of pain medicine in 1992, fund the Chinese journal of pain medicine in 1995, endeavor that Ministry of health issued document No 227 and determine to set up the department of pain medicine in 2007. 2. The first pain clinic was set up by doctor Ding Chanhan ( 丁昌汉 ), Wu Han workers hospital in 1986, the second and third are Zhang Lisheng or Yan Xiangmo ( 严相默 ), Yanbian medical college. Before 2007, most pain clinic is dependent to the department of anesthesiology; after 2007, pain medicine is independent department. Professional examination for the pain medicine begins 2008, National key clinical department of pain medicine was established in 6 hospital in 2014, and Society of Pain Clinicians of Chinese Medical Doctor Association was established in 2014. 3. There are 2 433 three A hospital and 8 560 two A hospital in China. Most three A hospital established pain medicine and more the half of two A hospital set up pain clinic. More than half pain doctors are anesthesiology based, and more than 6000 pain physicians have taken the pain professional examination from 2008 to 2017. Now pain physicians are estimated around 20 000. At present, the techniques used in pain medicine are mainly four kinds: Neural intervention technique, Neuromodulation, Spinal intervention technique and Endoscopic technique. A proposal was made this year that add pain medicine as independent first class discipline in the national standard classification of disciplines, and add a curriculum of pain medicine in Clinical Medicine Science Education. The following things have to do urgently: Resident standardization training and pain specialist training, Promoting construction of pain medicine, Broadening scope of management of pain disorders (ICD11), Editing and publishing academic books and Journals. 106

Eric D. Anderson : Common Mistakes in Medical English Common Mistakes in Medical English Eric D. Anderson Ethne Education The vast majority of today s medical research is written and published in the English language. This presents a challenge to the increasing number of researchers whose first language is not English. Eric D. Anderson has worked correcting the English in medical research since 2013, and has been the English editor for the Korean Journal of Pain for the past three years. In this presentation, Mr. Anderson shares the English problems he most frequently encounters while editing the research writing of authors who are not native English speakers, including the incorrect usage of articles, plurals, tense, pronouns, and punctuation. He also suggests strategies for avoiding or correcting these errors. 107