Limitations of using the DATASUS database as a primary source of data in surgical research: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

DATASUS is the Brazilian Public Unified Health System (SUS) department responsible for providing health data that are used as a primary source of data in several studies on surgery and surgical specialties although its main limitations have not been previously reviewed. The objective of this work is to synthesize information from studies on surgery that used DATASUS systems as a data source and to identify the main gaps in this platform.

METHODS

a scoping review was conducted according to the PRISMA-ScR method to identify papers on surgery, and other surgical specialties, that used the DATASUS platform as a primary data source. No restrictions were imposed regarding the type of study or year of publication. Grounded Theory was used to analyze the content of the articles.

RESULTS

248 works were initially analyzed and 47 were included in the final analysis of this study. The original articles included were published between 2009 and 2022 and the majority (12.76%, n=6) were published in the Journal of the Brazilian College of Surgeons. Retrospective studies (40.43%, n=19) were the most common type of study found. Content analysis of the articles identified four predominant domains in the scientific literature about the limitations of using DATASUS in surgical research: lack of data, reliability, precision and data integration.

CONCLUSION

the information systems available in DATASUS are the largest source of information about the SUS, but the scientific literature on the quality of data available in these systems remains scarce and studies aimed at measuring this metric are necessary.

Women Representation on Editorial Boards in Latin America Journals: Promoting Gender Equity in Academic Surgery, Anesthesia, and Obstetrics

BACKGROUND

Inequitable representation in journal editorial boards may impact women's career progression across surgical, anesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) specialties. However, data from Latin America are lacking. We evaluated women's representation on editorial boards of Latin America SAO journals in 2021.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis, retrieving journals through Scimago Journal and Country Rank 2020. Journals were included if active, focused on SAO topics, and publicly provided information on editorial board staff. Editorial board member names and positions were extracted from journals' websites. Members were classified into senior (e.g., editor-in-chief), academic (e.g., reviewer), and non-academic roles (e.g., administrative office). Women's representation was predicted from first names using Genderize.io. The number of women SAO physicians per country was obtained from articles and governmental reports.

RESULTS

We included 19 of 25 identified journals and analyzed 1,318 names. Three anesthesiology, seven obstetric, and nine surgical journals represented five Latin American countries. Women held 17% (224/1,318) of board positions [p < 0.0001; 95% CI(0.14, 0.19)]. Women held fewer academic roles (14.3%, 155/1,084) compared to senior [28.9%, 64/221 (p < 0.001)] and non-academic roles [38.4%, 5/13 (p = 0.042)]. Surgical journals had fewer women (7.7%, 58/752) compared to anesthesia [25.5%, 52/204 (p = 0.006)] and obstetrics [31.5%, 114/362 (p < 0.001)]. Women's proportion on editorial boards increased according to the number of women SAO physicians per country (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study assessed the composition of editorial boards from Latin America SAO journals and demonstrated that women remain underrepresented. Our findings highlight the need for regional strategies to advance women's careers across SAO specialties.