ScienceGuardians protects the academic community
Secure Environment: Verified contributors only, ensuring meaningful and responsible discussions. Members can stay anonymous while verified, ensuring legitimacy and accountability.
Combatting Misconduct: A fortress against anonymous intimidation and coordinated campaigns, fostering evidence-based dialogue and protecting the academic community.
Resources and Training: Access classified content, participate in enlightening debates, and stay at the forefront of ethical practices.
Hack-Proof Platform: Your privacy is paramount. The identity information of users choosing to remain anonymous is securely stored offline.
Our Commitment:
Integrity and Accountability: Every account verified for credible and responsible engagement.
Inclusivity and Fairness: A platform where all voices in the scientific community are respected.
Support and Collaboration: Helping resolve issues delicately and constructively.
Participant
This study provides useful insights into using ultrasound for diagnosing acute pancreatitis, but a couple of things could use more clarification. Since there was a high false positive rate (48 cases), could the authors discuss what might have contributed to this? For example, was operator skill or variability in interpreting ultrasound results a factor? Also, while CT was used as the gold standard, were any other confirmation methods, like MRI or biochemical markers, considered?