Search Results for ""
- ACP Online (7611)
- Annals of Internal Medicine (6848)
- IM Matters (3144)
- ACP Hospitalist (2393)
- Annals of Internal Medicine: Clinical Cases (500)
- ACP Store (226)
Displaying 631 - 640 of 7611 in ACP Online
National Abstract Competitions Volunteer Opportunities
Abstract Review is Now Open for VolunteersThe American College of Physicians thanks you for volunteering to review abstracts submitted by Medical Student, Resident/Fellow, and Early Career Physician members for the 2026 National Abstract Competitions.All abstracts should be reviewed and scored by January 16, 2026.Review Abstracts
Writing a Research Abstract
The written abstract is used in making selections for presentations at scientific meetings. Writing a good abstract is a formidable undertaking and many novice researchers wonder how it is possible to condense months of work into 300 to 400 words. Nevertheless, creating a well-written abstract is a skill that can be learned and mastering the skill will increase the probability that your research will be selected for presentation. The first rule of writing abstracts is to know the rules. Organizers of scientific meetings set explicit limits on the length abstracts.
Writing a Clinical Vignette (Case Report) Abstract
Case reports represent the oldest and most familiar form of medical communication. Far from a "second-class" publication, many original observations are first presented as case reports. Like scientific abstracts, the case report abstract is governed by rules that dictate its format and length. This article will outline the features of a well-written case report abstract and provide an example to emphasize the main features.
Selecting Visual Aids
After you have completed and prioritized your topic outline, the next task is to select your visual aids. This section will review why visual aids are important, list different options, and describe how to select the best option for your presentation. A subsequent article will outline how to construct your visual aids for the presentation. Visual aids help in the communication of ideas and concepts. This is because visual aids:
Presenting a Clinical Vignette: Deciding What to Present
If you are scheduled to make a presentation of a clinical vignette, reading this article will improve your performance. We describe a set of practical, proven steps that will guide your preparation of the presentation. The process of putting together a stellar presentation takes time and effort, and we assume that you will be willing to put forth the effort to make your presentation successful. This and subsequent articles will focus on planning, preparation, creating visual aids (slides), and presentation skills.
Preparing Visual Aids
Once your presentation is complete, begin to identify the information you can present visually. Keep in mind that the fundamental purpose for visuals is to help the audience understand your message. This section will address what to present and how to design it. Listed below are some suggestions of information categories that can be effectively communicated as a visual: Research
Preparing the Medical Research Presentation | ACP
Tips for preparing a medical research presentation and making a favorable impression at a scientific meeting. Access outline template, checklist & more.
Preparing a Poster Presentation
Posters are a legitimate and popular presentation format for research and clinical vignettes. They efficiently communicate concepts and data to an audience using a combination of visuals and text. Most scientific meeting planners take advantage of the popularity and communication efficiency of poster presentations by scheduling more poster than oral presentations. Poster presentations allow the author to meet and speak informally with interested viewers, facilitating a greater exchange of ideas and networking opportunities than with oral presentations.
Glossary of Common Research Terms
Terms found in the: Introduction Section Methods Section Results Section Introduction Section: A Priori hypothesis: A hypothesis that is generated before the study or experiment. Not based upon experimental fact.
Giving the Podium Presentation
The final step in the research process is the presentation. In order to ensure a successful presentation, this article will cover the following concluding steps: What to wear. Preparing on site. Delivering the presentation. Answering questions. Anticipating the unexpected. What you wear when making your presentation will affect your audience. This does not mean you need to go out and purchase an entirely new wardrobe, but consider the following suggestions:
Displaying 631 - 640 of 6848 in Annals of Internal Medicine
These Annals of Internal Medicine results only contain recent articles.
- Visit annals.org to search all content back to 1927.
- View Annals of Internal Medicine CME by topic here.
Telemedicine Versus In-Person Primary Care: Treatment and Follow-up Visits
Background: Beyond initial COVID-19 pandemic emergency expansions of telemedicine use, it is unclear how well primary care telemedicine addresses patients’ needs. Objective: To compare treatment and follow-up visits (office, emergency department, hospitalization) between primary care video or telephone telemedicine and in-person office visits. Design: Retrospective design based on administrative and electronic health record (EHR) data. Setting: Large, integrated health care delivery system with more than 1300 primary care providers, between April 2021 and December 2021 (including the COVID-19 pandemic Delta wave). Patients: 1 589 014 adult patients; 26.5% were aged 65 years or older, 54.9% were female, 22.2% were Asian, 7.4% were Black, 22.3% were Hispanic, 46.5% were White, 21.5% lived in neighborhoods with lower socioeconomic status, and 31.8% had a chronic health condition. Measurements: Treatment outcomes included medication or antibiotic prescribing and laboratory or imaging ordering. Follow-up visits included in-person visits to the primary care office or emergency department or hospitalization within 7 days. Outcomes were adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics overall and stratified by clinical area (abdominal pain, gastrointestinal concerns, back pain, dermatologic concerns, musculoskeletal pain, routine care, hypertension or diabetes, and mental health). Results: Of 2 357 598 primary care visits, 50.8% used telemedicine (19.5% video and 31.3% telephone). After adjustment, medications were prescribed in 46.8% of office visits, 38.4% of video visits, and 34.6% of telephone visits. After the visit, 1.3% of in-person visits, 6.2% of video visits, and 7.6% of telephone visits had a 7-day return in-person primary care visit; 1.6% of in-person visits, 1.8% of video visits, and 2.1% of telephone visits were followed by an emergency department visit. Differences in follow-up office visits were largest after index office versus telephone visits for acute pain conditions and smallest for mental health. Limitations: In the study setting, telemedicine is fully integrated with ongoing EHRs and with clinicians, and the study examines an insured population during the late COVID-19 pandemic period. Observational comparison lacks detailed severity or symptom measures. Follow-up was limited to 7 days. Clinical area categorization uses diagnosis code rather than symptom. Conclusion: In-person return visits were somewhat higher after telemedicine compared with in-person primary care visits but varied by specific clinical condition. Primary Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Blood Pressure Effect of Traffic-Related Air Pollution: A Crossover Trial of In-Vehicle Filtration: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 176, No 12
Background: Ambient air pollution, including traffic-related air pollution (TRAP), increases cardiovascular disease risk, possibly through vascular alterations. Limited information exists about in-vehicle TRAP exposure and vascular changes. Objective: To determine via particle filtration the effect of on-roadway TRAP exposure on blood pressure and retinal vasculature. Design: Randomized crossover trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05454930) Setting: In-vehicle scripted commutes driven through traffic in Seattle, Washington, during 2014 to 2016. Participants: Normotensive persons aged 22 to 45 years (n = 16). Intervention: On 2 days, on-road air was entrained into the vehicle. On another day, the vehicle was equipped with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration. Participants were blinded to the exposure and were randomly assigned to the sequence. Measurements: Fourteen 3-minute periods of blood pressure were recorded before, during, and up to 24 hours after a drive. Image-based central retinal arteriolar equivalents (CRAEs) were measured before and after. Brachial artery diameter and gene expression were also measured and will be reported separately. Results: Mean age was 29.7 years, predrive systolic blood pressure was 122.7 mm Hg, predrive diastolic blood pressure was 70.8 mm Hg, and drive duration was 122.3 minutes (IQR, 4 minutes). Filtration reduced particle count by 86%. Among persons with complete data (n = 13), at 1 hour, mean diastolic blood pressure, adjusted for predrive levels, order, and carryover, was 4.7 mm Hg higher (95% CI, 0.9 to 8.4 mm Hg) for unfiltered drives compared with filtered drives, and mean adjusted systolic blood pressure was 4.5 mm Hg higher (CI, −1.2 to 10.2 mm Hg). At 24 hours, adjusted mean diastolic blood pressure (unfiltered) was 3.8 mm Hg higher (CI, 0.02 to 7.5 mm Hg) and adjusted mean systolic blood pressure was 1.1 mm Hg higher (CI, −4.6 to 6.8 mm Hg). Adjusted mean CRAE (unfiltered) was 2.7 μm wider (CI, −1.5 to 6.8 μm). Limitations: Imprecise estimates due to small sample size; seasonal imbalance by exposure order. Conclusion: Filtration of TRAP may mitigate its adverse effects on blood pressure rapidly and at 24 hours. Validation is required in larger samples and different settings. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Institutes of Health.
Quality Indicators for Osteoporosis in Adults: A Review of Performance Measures by the American College of Physicians
Primary osteoporosis is characterized by decreasing bone mass and density and reduced bone strength that leads to a higher risk for fracture, especially hip and spine fractures. The prevalence of osteoporosis in the United States is estimated at 12.6% for adults older than 50 years. Although it is most frequently diagnosed in White and Asian females, it still affects males and females of all ethnicities. Osteoporosis is considered a major health issue, which has prompted the development and use of several performance measures to assess and improve the effectiveness of screening, diagnosis, and treatment. These performance measures are often used in accountability, public reporting, and/or payment programs. However, the reliability, validity, evidence, attribution, and meaningfulness of performance measures have been questioned. The purpose of this paper is to present a review of current performance measures on osteoporosis and inform physicians, payers, and policymakers in their selection of performance measures for this condition. The Performance Measurement Committee identified 6 osteoporosis performance measures relevant to internal medicine physicians, only 1 of which was found valid at all levels of attribution. This paper also proposes a performance measure concept to address a performance gap for the initial approach to therapy for patients with a new diagnosis of osteoporosis based on the current American College of Physicians guideline.
Once-Weekly Insulin Icodec With Dosing Guide App Versus Once-Daily Basal Insulin Analogues in Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes (ONWARDS 5): A Randomized Trial: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 176, No 11
Background: Inadequate dose titration and poor adherence to basal insulin can lead to suboptimal glycemic control in persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Once-weekly insulin icodec (icodec) is a basal insulin analogue that is in development and is aimed at reducing treatment burden. Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of icodec titrated with a dosing guide app (icodec with app) versus once-daily basal insulin analogues (OD analogues) dosed per standard practice. Design: 52-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3a trial with real-world elements. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04760626) Setting: 176 sites in 7 countries. Participants: 1085 insulin-naive adults with T2D. Intervention: Icodec with app or OD analogue (insulin degludec, insulin glargine U100, or insulin glargine U300). Measurements: The primary outcome was change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level from baseline to week 52. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes (Treatment Related Impact Measure for Diabetes [TRIM-D] compliance domain score and change in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire [DTSQ] total treatment satisfaction score). Results: The estimated mean change in HbA1c level from baseline to week 52 was greater with icodec with app than with OD analogues, with noninferiority (P < 0.001) and superiority (P = 0.009) confirmed in prespecified hierarchical testing (estimated treatment difference [ETD], −0.38 percentage points [95% CI, −0.66 to −0.09 percentage points]). At week 52, patient-reported outcomes were more favorable with icodec with app than with OD analogues (ETDs, 3.04 [CI, 1.28 to 4.81] for TRIM-D and 0.78 [CI, 0.10 to 1.47] for DTSQ). Rates of clinically significant or severe hypoglycemia were low and similar with both treatments. Limitation: Inability to differentiate the effects of icodec and the dosing guide app. Conclusion: Compared with OD analogues, icodec with app showed superior HbA1c reduction and improved treatment satisfaction and compliance with similarly low hypoglycemia rates. Primary Funding Source: Novo Nordisk A/S.
Addressing Viral Medical Rumors and False or Misleading Information
The rapid spread of medical rumors and false or misleading information on social media during times of uncertainty is a vexing challenge that threatens public health. Understanding the information ecosystem, social media networks, and the scope of incentives that drive users and social media platforms can provide critical insights for strong coordination between stakeholders and funders to address this challenge. The COVID-19 pandemic created an opportunity to demonstrate the role of media monitoring and counter-messaging efforts in responding to dangerous medical rumors, misinformation, and disinformation. It also highlighted the challenges. The efforts of ThisIsOurShot and VacunateYa to spread accurate health information about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines are described and lessons learned are discussed. These lessons include the need for substantial financial investments at the local and national levels to sustain and scale these types of programs. Examples in other fields that offer a path forward include Information Sharing and Analysis Centers and Public Health Emergency Operations Centers. Understanding the scale and scope of what it takes to address viral medical rumors, misinformation, and disinformation in a networked information environment should inspire elected leaders to consider policy and regulatory reforms. Our transformed information ecosystem requires new public health infrastructure to address information that threatens personal safety and population health.