TASK DEFINITION: Given a passage, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.
PROBLEM: Our aim was to investigate if: (a) authors of Biochemia Medica meet authorship criteria given by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), (b) authorship violations are more frequent in submissions containing some type of scientific misconduct.', 'Self-reported authorship contributions regarding the three ICMJE criteria were analysed for all submissions to Biochemia Medica (February 2013-April 2015) which were forwarded to peer-review. To test the differences in frequencies we used Chi-squared test. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.', '186 manuscripts were authored by 804 authors. All ICMJE criteria were met by 487/804 (61%) authors. The first and the last author met all the criteria more frequently than those authors in between (P<0.001). The degree to which ICMJE criteria was met for the first author did not differ between manuscripts authored by only one author and those authored by >1 author (P=0.859). In 9% of the manuscripts ICMJE criteria were not met by a single author. Authors of the 171/186 manuscripts declared that all persons qualify for authorship but only 49% of them satisfied all ICMJE criteria. Authors have failed to acknowledge contributors in 88/186 (47%) manuscripts; instead these contributors have been listed as authors without fulfilling ICMJE criteria. Authorship violation was not more common in 42 manuscripts with some type of scientific misconduct (P=0.135).

SOLUTION: Are iCMJE authorship criteria met in a substantial proportion of manuscripts submitted to Biochemia Medica?

PROBLEM: In this study, we compared the diagnostic performance of the standard SPECT with motion-frozen (MF) myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) in obese patients.', 'A total of 90 consecutive obese patients (body mass index, 30.1-46.8, average, 34.3 +/- 3.6; age, 63 +/- 12 y; 30% women) underwent standard supine rest (201)Tl/stress (99m)Tc dual-isotope gated MPS and cardiac catheterization within 3 mo. MF images were obtained by nonlinear warping of cardiac phases to the end-diastolic position. Total perfusion deficit (TPD) was obtained for summed (S-TPD) and motion-frozen (MF-TPD) datasets with sex-specific standard and MF normal limits.', 'The area under the receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve for detection of coronary artery disease (CAD) by MF-TPD was significantly larger than that for S-TPD (0.93 +/- 0.25 vs. 0.88 +/- 0.32, P < 0.05). MF-TPD had higher specificity (77% vs. 55%, P < 0.05) and accuracy (89% vs. 80%, P < 0.05) than did S-TPD.

SOLUTION: Does motion-frozen myocardial perfusion SPECT improve detection of coronary artery disease in obese patients?

PROBLEM: We investigated whether aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 antagonist, could decrease chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following cisplatin, when a conventional anti-emetic regimen had failed.', 'This was a prospective study (April 2011-April 2012) of patients with lung cancer, treated with cisplatin at the Beijing Cancer Hospital, and initially receiving granisetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide as anti-emetics. If patients experienced vomiting of grade ≥2 and required rescue anti-emetic medications during the first cycle, oral aprepitant was added in subsequent cycles (day 1: 125 mg; days 2-3: 80 mg once daily). Acute (day 1) and delayed (days 2-5) nausea and vomiting, use of rescue medications, and occurrence of adverse reactions were monitored after the start of chemotherapy.', 'Twenty-five of 132 patients (18.9 %) were administered aprepitant for secondary prophylaxis against emesis during the second cycle of chemotherapy. The incidences of acute and delayed nausea were 52 and 100 % in the first cycle, but 8 and 72 % in the second cycle. The incidences of acute and delayed vomiting were 20 and 100 % in the first cycle, but 0 and 36 % in the second cycle. No patients required rescue medications or intravenous rehydration during the second cycle. Aprepitant was not associated with additional adverse events.

SOLUTION:
Does addition of aprepitant improve protection against cisplatin-induced emesis when a conventional anti-emetic regimen fails?