DOCSLIB.ORG

Qualitative and Quantitative Measures of Indexed Health Sciences Electronic Journals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Qualitative and Quantitative Measures of Indexed Health Sciences Electronic Journals E-JOURNALS AND ONLINE INFORMATION Qualitative and Quantitative Measures of Indexed Health Sciences Electronic Journals Ann C. Weller, MA Context Little is known about qualitative and quantitative characteristics of indexed health sciences electronic journals (e-journals). LECTRONIC PUBLISHING HAS THE Methods To determine peer-review practices and qualitative and quantitative charac- potential to offer many advan- teristics of different types of indexed health sciences e-journals, 3 types of e-journals in- tages over traditional print pub- dexed in MEDLINE were compared (type 1, completely electronic with no print counter- lishing, but concerns over qual- part; type 2, print and electronic versions with the same title but each publishing some Eity exist.1 Several studies have identified unique content; and type 3, print and electronic versions containing equal content). the following qualitative and quantita- Results There were 13 type 1 journals, 16 type 2 journals, and 16 type 3 journals. tive measures that are appropriate for Most journals in each category (85%-94%) imply or state the use of peer review. Sig- Ͻ electronic journals (e-journals): peer- nificant differences (P .05, analysis of variance) exist among the e-journals for the review practices,2 citation patterns,3 inclusion of complex types of publications (clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and practice guidelines) (15%-100%), editorials (0%-75%), letters to structured abstracts,4 and editorial 5 the editor (10%-88%), and case reports (17%-94%); the average number of items boards. The objectives of this study indexed in MEDLINE (22.5-544.5); and the number of complex publication types, edi- were to determine if there are differ- torials, letters, and case reports. ent editorial peer-review practices or Conclusions Type 1 e-journals do not have the qualitative or quantitative complex- variations in qualitative and quantita- ity of traditional print journals. Although editors’ statements on editorial peer review tive measures among different types of are similar, there are differences in number and type of materials included in the 3 indexed health sciences e-journals. different types of e-journals. JAMA. 2002;287:2865-2866 www.jama.com METHODS There are 3 types of e-journals: type 1 were randomly selected from Abridged tions to authors. Items indexed from are completely electronic with no Index Medicus titles. electronic type 2 e-journals always car- regular print version; type 2 are titled Data for this study were collected from ried a unique identifier in MEDLINE, the same both in the print and elec- MEDLINE and each journal’s Web site usually an “e” preceded the page num- tronic versions, but each publish homepage. All items published in the ber. TABLE 1 lists those e-journal char- some unique content; and in type 3, year 2000 and indexed by August 2001 acteristics that were the same for both both the print and electronic versions were included. No e-journal in this study type 2 electronic and print versions. publish equal content. Each type 2 was selectively indexed by MEDLINE. More than 80% of all e-journals stated version has its own international Qualitative and quantitative mea- or implied the use of peer review and standard serial number, but type 3 sures included: editorial peer-review required original material. These data e-journals have 1 international stan- statements, inclusion of editorial boards, were located by searching the Web site dard serial number. requirement of original research or struc- homepages and reading the instruc- Thirty e-journals were listed as ac- tured abstracts, number of articles cited, tions to authors sections and other in- tive MEDLINE titles in June 2001: 13 the inclusion and number of complex formation about the e-journals. The av- were type 1, 16 were type 2, and 1 was publication types, case reports, editori- erage number of type 1 e-journals that not yet published. Abridged Index als, and letters to the editor. The index required structured abstracts (36%) was Medicus is a subset of 120 MEDLINE terms clinical trials, randomized control less than for either type 2 or type 3. All titles, which is considered a solid, core trials, meta-analyses, and practice guide- type 2 and type 3 and 92% of type 1 set of health sciences journals, and was lines were used for complex types of pub- e-journals listed an editorial board. used in selection of type 3 e-journals. lications. Author Affiliation: Library of the Health Sciences, Uni- To compare type 1 and type 2 e-jour- versity Library, University of Illinois, Chicago. nals with traditional print journals, 16 RESULTS Corresponding Author and Reprints: Ann C. Weller, MA, Library of the Health Sciences, University of Illi- that had electronic access to current is- Type 2 e-journals always shared a Web nois Library, 1750 W Polk St, Chicago, IL 60612 sues and qualified as type 3 e-journals site homepage and had 1 set of instruc- (e-mail: [email protected]). ©2002 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. (Reprinted) JAMA, June 5, 2002—Vol 287, No. 21 2865 Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 09/23/2021 INDEXED HEALTH SCIENCES ELECTRONIC JOURNALS review statements, requirement of origi- Table 1. Journal Characteristics* nal research, and the inclusion of edito- Type, % rial boards. A lack of a statement on peer 1 2 3 review or original research does not mean Journal Characteristics (n = 13) (n = 16) (n = 16) that no policy exists. Editors address the Stated peer-review status statement Definite 77 81 62 editorial peer-review process in journal Implied 8 13 25 guidelines more frequently today than Not mentioned 15 6 13 they did in 1987.2 The structured ab- Require structured abstracts 36 53 69 stract was proposed for medical jour- Mention original research 82 88 87 nals in 1987.4 One third to two thirds of Has editorial board 92 100 100 all types of e-journals in this study used *There were an average 4.62 type 1, 383.06 type 2, and 369.31 type 3 electronic journal articles cited in the year 2000 (P = .01). this format. This study confirmed the ear- lier study by Harter3 that type 1 e-jour- nals continue to be infrequently cited. Table 2. Comparison by Journal Type* This phenomenon may continue until Type 2 (n = 16) Type 1 Type 3 type 1 e-journals become established, MEDLINE (n = 13) Electronic Print (n = 16) mainstream medical literature. Presence of publication types, % Many electronic type 2 publications Complex 15 25 88 100 Editorials 30 0 75 75 serve a specialized function and may rep- Letters 10 13 75 88 resent a trend to publish journals with Case reports 17 38 88 94 different content in the print and elec- Average No. of publications indexed tronic versions. The electronic type 2 Total No. indexed 22.5 48.8 459.3 544.5 publications often include only 1 type Complex 0.5 6.5 50.2 35.1 of feature, such as short reports, rapid Editorials 0.5 0 18.1 11.0 communication, or letters. For ex- Letters 1.5 6.9 31.6 48.4 ample, one electronic type 2 e-journal Case reports 0.2 22.5 47.7 47.9 published all letters electronically, while *PϽ.001 for all comparisons. another published only “ultra-rapid” A search in August 2001 of Institute The type 1 and the electronic type 2 were communications, and another let the au- for Scientific Information’s Web of Sci- less likely (PϽ.001) than print type 2 or thor choose which version for case re- ence determined frequency of citations type 3 e-journals to publish editorials, ports. Eleven (69%) of the 16 type 2 to each e-journal. The ISI captures all letters to the editor, and case reports. journals stated specific criteria for in- cited references in each journal it cov- For the year 2000, type 1 and elec- clusion in the electronic only version. ers independent of whether the title is tronic type 2 published significantly The 13 indexed health sciences type covered by the database; 54% of type 1 fewer items than print type 2 and type 1 e-journals lack the depth and breadth e-journals are covered by ISI. An aver- 3(PϽ.001). There were also statisti- of traditional print journals. The type age of 4.62 articles published in type 1 cally significant differences for the av- 1 and electronic type 2 e-journals pub- e-journals in the year 2000 were cited, erage number of items indexed as com- lished significantly fewer indexed com- whereas more than 350 articles pub- plex types of publication (P=.01). Both plex types of publications, editorials, let- lished in type 2 and type 3 e-journals in type 1 and electronic type 2 published ters, and case reports than either type the year 2000 were cited (P=.01, single- significantly fewer editorials (P=.03), 2 print or type 3 e-journals. Data from factor analysis of variance). letters (P =.002), and case reports this study provide an early snapshot of TABLE 2 compares results when sepa- (P=.004) than print type 2 and type 3. e-journals. The type 1 e-journals will rate data exist for type 2 e-journals. probably become more numerous and There were statistically significant dif- COMMENT more accepted, but they currently do ferences among the e-journals (PϽ.001) The following qualitative measures were not have the complexity of traditional indexed as complex publication types. similar for all types of e-journals: peer- print journals. REFERENCES 1. Wright SM, Tseng WT-C, Kolodner K. Physician tronic journals: an impact study.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2021 Offerings Include
    JAMA 2021 Offerings Include: Print Edition Rate Card Effective January 1, 2021 • Patient Page Publication • Selections A supplement of curated articles on a therapeutic topic • Microsites Contact Account Manager for Information Contacts Editor Howard C. Bauchner, MD Boston University School of Medicine Insertion Order or Billing Questions Reprints Denise Steinhauser JAMA, JAMA Cardiology, JAMA Internal Medicine, (312) 464-2455 JAMA Ophthalmology, JAMA Neurology, JAMA Oncology, [email protected] JAMA Psychiatry and JAMA Network Open Marsha Fogler, Account Manager Production Questions JAMA Network Reprint Sales Michael Deegan [email protected] (312) 464-2401 USA: 1-800-482-1450 [email protected] Rest of World: 1-856-489-4446 Please include in the email the specific issue of JAMA in which your ad is running. (Note: JAMA is a weekly.) JAMA Dermatology, JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, JAMA Pediatrics, JAMA Surgery, and JAMA Network Open Display + Online Advertising Rachel Sisholtz Pharmaceutical | Device JAMA Network Reprint Sales (862) 261-9600 [email protected] Maureen Reichert USA: 1-800-482-1450 [email protected] Rest of World: 1-856-489-4446 (862) 261-9616 General Inquiries and Non-Profit Organization requests: Nancy Souza JAMA Network Reprints Communications [email protected] [email protected] (862) 261-9615 Requests from non-profit organizations, AMA members, medical Jeff Bonistalli societies, and academic institutions. Director of Advertising Pharmaceutical & Devices [email protected] Health Systems Branding | Products and Service | CME Recruitment Advertising (800) 262-2260 | (312) 464-5909 Fax [email protected] Thalia Moss [email protected] Anna Frazier Director of Advertising Health Systems & Recruitment [email protected] Domestic Subscription Rates (800) 262-2350 Online Site Licensing (312) 464-4371 Page 2 JAMA 2021 Print Edition Rate Card Rates 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal Impact Factor Denominator Defining Citable (Counted) Items
    COMMENTARIES The Journal Impact Factor Denominator Defining Citable (Counted) Items Marie E. McVeigh, MS The items counted in the denominator of the impact fac- tor are identifiable in the Web of Science database by hav- Stephen J. Mann ing the index field document type set as “Article,” “Re- view,” or “Proceedings Paper” (a specialized subset of the VER ITS 30-YEAR HISTORY, THE JOURNAL IMPACT article document type). These document types identify the factor has been the subject of much discussion scholarly contribution of the journal to the literature and and debate.1 From its first release in 1975, bib- are counted as “citable items” in the denominator of the im- liometricians and library scientists discussed its pact factor. A journal accepted for coverage in the Thom- Ovalue and its vagaries. In the last decade, discussion has 6 son Reuters citation database is reviewed by experts who shifted to the way in which impact factor data are used. In consider the bibliographic and bibliometric characteristics an environment eager for objective measures of productiv- of all article types published by that journal (eg, items), which ity, relevance, and research value, the impact factor has been are covered by that journal in the context of other materi- applied broadly and indiscriminately.2,3 The impact factor als in the journal, the subject, and the database as a whole. has gone from being a measure of a journal’s citation influ- This journal-specific analysis identifies the journal sec- ence in the broader literature to a surrogate that assesses tions, subsections, or both that contain materials likely to the scholarly value of work published in that journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Web of Science Benefits
    Thomson.com Web of Science® What it offers. Why it matters to you. What Web of Science delivers How your work will benefit Content is the cornerstone For decades, the Thomson Scientific (formerly ISI) The result of this ongoing collection development? Excellence Editorial Development group has carefully Quality by default. without evaluated journals for potential inclusion in the excess database. Your search results will include only accurate, reliable, —— relevant data. You'll get not just more hits, but more The objective is to include only the most quality hits. You'll get the influential, relevant, and credible journal right answers, information available. If you publish — You'll easily find high impact quicker articles upon which to base your articles — increasing The criteria are detailed, unbiased, and time- the quality and credibility of your published work, tested — examining basic publishing standards, resulting in more publication in more prestigious timeliness, editorial scope and objectives, and sources. citation analyses. If you research — You'll be able to quickly identify The process is "publisher-neutral" — commercial, potential collaborators with prolific, significant citation open access, society, and university publishers are records. And tracking your own citation record will treated equally. help you demonstrate your work's impact on your field. Every publication indexed within Web of Science has passed through this rigorous evaluation If you teach — Your students will be assured of using process. the highest quality resources — finding valuable information in journals they may not have the knowledge and experience to seek on their own. It's a fact ... As of March 2006, the total number of Web of Science records is approximately 37 million.
    [Show full text]
  • Babes and Boobs? Analysis of JAMA Cover Art Jocalyn P Clark
    Papers BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.319.7225.1603 on 18 December 1999. Downloaded from Babes and boobs? Analysis of JAMA cover art Jocalyn P Clark Abstract Of the 15 covers depicting women, 12 included Department of babies and six showed nudity. In contrast, only one Public Health Objective To determine the representation of the Sciences, University male image included a child and none contained of Toronto, Toronto, sexes in JAMA cover art. nudity. In the cover depicting a man with a child, the Canada M5S 1A8 doctoral candidate Design Review of 50 consecutive issues. man is not the child’s father but its doctor. Babes and Setting JAMA, March 1997-March 1998. boobs were featured in 12 of the 50 covers. Correspondence to: Main outcome measures Numbers and nature of J P Clark, Centre for Research in covers portraying men and women. Women’s Health, Results Of the 50 covers, 34 depicted humans. 15 Conclusions Toronto, Canada depicted women, 13 men, and 6 were of mixed or M5G 1N8 Visual imagery associated with medical journals shapes [email protected] indeterminate sex. 11 pictures of women included a our understanding of health and the human body. child and five included nudity. One cover showed a Images of babes and boobs in cover art emphasise BMJ 1999;319:1603–5 man with a child (not as a father) and none depicted women’s sexual and domestic roles, representing nudity. Men were depicted exclusively in authoritative women in traditional and stereotypical ways that under- roles. mine contemporary beliefs in the equality, autonomy, Conclusions Much of the cover art gives strong and status of women.34 These representations do not messages about sexual stereotypes that are reflect women’s contributions to the domains of science, inappropriate in modern society.
    [Show full text]
  • Affidavit of Stephen Barrett, M.D
    IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR POLK COUNTY ________________________________________________________________ _ STATE OF IOWA ex rel. ) THOMAS J. MILLER, ) ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA, ) EQUITY NO. CE-39318 99AG25112 ) ) Plaintiff , ) ) vs. ) AFFIDAVIT OF DR. ) STEPHEN BARRETT NEW WOMYN, INC. and ) DAN KAISER, ) ) Defendants. ) ________________________________________________________________ _ 1. I, Dr. Stephen Barrett of Allentown, Pennsylvania, being first duly sworn on oath, depose and state as follows: 2. I submit this declaration as an expert in the fields of quackery, “alternative medicine,” health fraud, peer review, and the analysis of unusual health claims. I intend this declaration to serve as expert testimony on the matters set forth herein. All opinions rendered herein are my professional and expert opinion, as consistent with my special knowledge, skill, training, education, and experience. 3. I have been asked by Investigator Barbara Blake of the Consumer Protection Division of the Iowa Department of Justice to review Paragraph 9 (a)-(d) of the Petition and Application to Enforce Civil Investigative Demand filed in the above-captioned matter. I have been asked to assume that the alleged representations as set forth below were made for a device called - 1 - "Stimulations VII" that was to be used by persons to enhance breast size. I have been further asked to express an opinion regarding the amount of substantiation experts in the field would agree is reasonable for the types of claims set forth below. 4. The claims set forth in the Petition are: (a). That Stimulations VII will permanently grow breast tissue; (b.) That Stimulations VII will cause breast enlargement of 2, 3 or even 4 cup sizes; (c.) That Stimulations VII has been scientifically proven safe and effective for breast enlargement; (d.) That Stimulations VII will regrow breasts that have been removed via mastectomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Thank You to JAMA Peer Reviewers, Authors, and Readers Phil B
    Opinion Editorials represent the opinions of the authors and JAMA EDITORIAL and not those of the American Medical Association. Thank You to JAMA Peer Reviewers, Authors, and Readers Phil B. Fontanarosa, MD, MBA; Howard Bauchner, MD In this issue of JAMA, we are pleased to publish the names of the Table. JAMA Statistics for 2013 3960 peer reviewers of JAMA manuscripts in 2013.1 We extend our sincere thanks to these reviewers for their thoughtful, insightful, Manuscript Data No. Major manuscripts received 6937 and scholarly evaluation of manuscripts. Even though the peer Research manuscripts received 4731 review process continues to undergo evaluation and evolution,2 Acceptance rate (overall), % 9 we find the comments and suggestions from JAMA peer review- Acceptance rate (research), % 4 ers an indispensable aspect of the scientific publication process. Manuscripts sent for external review, % 30 We also extend our sincere thanks to all authors who sub- Peer reviewers 3960 mitted manuscripts for consideration for publication in JAMA. Peer reviewer turnaround, median, d 13 In 2013, the 6937 total manuscripts and 4731 research papers Receipt to rejection, median, da 6 a submitted, as well as the 78 randomized clinical trials, Receipt to acceptance, median, d 27 Acceptance to publication, median, da 32 124 Editorials, and 192 View- Receipt to publication, median, da 77 points published in JAMA, Related article 742 Clinical trials published 78 represent all-time highs Impact factor (2012 data) 30 (Table and eTable in the Information Dissemination
    [Show full text]
  • National Citation Patterns of NEJM, the Lancet, JAMA and the BMJ in the Lay Press: a Quantitative Content Analysis
    Open Access Research BMJ Open: first published as 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018705 on 12 November 2017. Downloaded from National citation patterns of NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA and The BMJ in the lay press: a quantitative content analysis Gonzalo Casino,1 Roser Rius,2 Erik Cobo2 To cite: Casino G, Rius R, ABSTRACT Strengths and limitations of this study Cobo E. National citation Objectives To analyse the total number of newspaper patterns of NEJM, The Lancet, articles citing the four leading general medical journals ► This is the first study that analyses the citations of JAMA and The BMJ in the and to describe national citation patterns. lay press: a quantitative the four leading general medical journals in the lay Design Quantitative content analysis. content analysis. BMJ Open press. Setting/sample Full text of 22 general newspapers in 2017;0:e018705. doi:10.1136/ ► This study shows the existence of a national factor 14 countries over the period 2008–2015, collected from bmjopen-2017-018705 in science communication that needs to be further LexisNexis. The 14 countries have been categorised into monitored and analysed. ► Prepublication history for four regions: the USA, the UK, Western World (European ► Citation and correspondence analyses offer a new this paper is available online. countries other than the UK, and Australia, New Zealand To view these files, please visit way to quantify and monitor the media impact of and Canada) and Rest of the World (other countries). the journal online (http:// dx. doi. scientific journals. Main outcome measure Press citations of four medical org/ 10. 1136/ bmjopen- 2017- ► This study is observational and descriptive; thus, it journals (two American: NEJM and JAMA; and two British: 018705).
    [Show full text]
  • Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a Review
    Clinical Review & Education JAMA | Review Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) A Review James M. Sanders, PhD, PharmD; Marguerite L. Monogue, PharmD; Tomasz Z. Jodlowski, PharmD; James B. Cutrell, MD Viewpoint pages 1769, and IMPORTANCE The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel 1767 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented Related article page 1839 challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of CME Quiz at scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected jamacmelookup.com by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. OBSERVATIONS No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly Author Affiliations: Department of expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of Pharmacy, University of Texas potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved (Sanders, Monogue); Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to Medicine, Department of Medicine, have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence University of Texas Southwestern does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor Medical Center, Dallas (Sanders, Monogue, Cutrell); Pharmacy Service, blockers in patients with COVID-19. VA North Texas Health Care System, Dallas (Jodlowski). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic Corresponding Author: James B.
    [Show full text]
  • Omega-3 Supplements May Interact with Drugs That Affect Blood Clotting
    U.S. Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health Omega-3 Supplements © Zoonar/Thinkstock Omega-3 fatty acids (omega-3s) are a group of polyunsaturated fatty acids that are important for a number of functions in the body. Some types of omega-3s are found in foods such as fatty fish and shellfish. Another type is found in some vegetable oils. Omega-3s are also available as dietary supplements. This fact sheet provides basic information about omega-3s—with a focus on dietary supplements, summarizes scientific research on effectiveness and safety, and suggests sources for additional information. Key Facts — There has been a substantial amount of research on supplements of omega-3s, particularly the types of omega-3s found in seafood and fish oil, and heart disease. The findings of individual studies have been inconsistent. In 2012, two combined analyses of the results of these studies did not find convincing evidence that these omega-3s protect against heart disease. — There is some evidence that omega-3s of the types found in seafood and fish oil may be modestly helpful in relieving symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis. For most other conditions for which omega-3s have been studied, definitive conclusions cannot yet be reached, or studies have not shown omega-3s to be beneficial. — Omega-3 supplements may interact with drugs that affect blood clotting. — It is uncertain whether people with fish or shellfish allergies can safely consume fish oil supplements. — Fish liver oils (which are not the same as fish oils) contain vitamins A and D as well as omega-3 fatty acids; these vitamins can be toxic in high doses.
    [Show full text]
  • JAMA Oncology—The Year in Review, 2019 Mary L
    Opinion EDITORIAL JAMA Oncology—The Year in Review, 2019 Mary L. (Nora) Disis, MD JAMA Oncology had a very active year in 2019. The journal’s receive the JAMA Oncology electronic table of contents by impact factor of 22.4 places it as one of the highest-ranking email, you can sign up at http://www.jamaoncology.com.We oncology journals. I thank our authors, peer reviewers, and are proud to continue offering the most innovative, provoca- readers for the significant contributions made to the journal tive, and timely research for scientists, clinicians, and train- this past year. The editorial ees in the field of oncology worldwide. I encourage readers Related article board, our JAMA Oncology to stay involved with the journal by submitting Letters to the editors, and I are honored to Editor and offering recommendations for new topics that have the opportunity to serve the oncology community by you would like to see covered in future issues. Your sugges- offering original, innovative, and timely scientific content tions make this interdisciplinary oncology journal dynamic that has a direct impact on researchers, clinicians, and the and current. patients we serve. We have truly enjoyed being involved in JAMA Oncology’s Choosing manuscripts for the journal was rewarding continued success this year and look forward to the year ahead. but challenging. We received a total of 2980 manuscript sub- We could not have done it without you. I invite all of our missions in 2019. These submissions to JAMA Oncology readers to follow us on Twitter @JAMAOnc or friend JAMA included 1743 Original Investigations, 66 Clinical Trial Oncology on Facebook.
    [Show full text]
  • MEDICAL JOURNALS Because They ’S Web Site At
    JAMA PATIENT PAGE The Journal of the American Medical Association MEDICAL JOURNALS Medical Journals edical journals are publications that report medical information to physicians and other health professionals. In the past, these journals were available only in print. With the development of electronic publishing, many Mmedical journals now have Web sites on the Internet, and some journals publish only online. A few medical journals, like the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), are considered general medical journals because they cover many fields of medicine. Most medical journals are specialty journals that focus on a particular area of medicine. The June 5, 2002, issue of JAMA is dedicated to articles about medical journals. TYPES OF ARTICLES Medical journals publish many types of articles. Research articles report the results of research studies on a range of topics varying from the basic mechanisms of diseases to clinical trials that compare outcomes of different treatments. Research articles on important topics may be covered by the news media when they are published in a medical journal. Review articles summarize and analyze the information available on a specific topic based on a careful search of the medical literature. Because the results of individual research studies can be affected by many factors, combining results from different studies on the same topic can be helpful in reaching conclusions about the scientific evidence for preventing, diagnosing, or treating a particular disease. Case conferences and case reports may be published in medical journals to educate physicians about particular illnesses and how to treat them. Editorials in medical journals are short essays that express the views of the authors, often regarding a research or review article published in the same issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials a Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Darren B
    Opinion EDITORIAL Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials A Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Darren B. Taichman, MD, PhD; Peush Sahni, MB, BS, MS, PhD; Anja Pinborg, MD; Larry Peiperl, MD; Christine Laine, MD, MPH; Astrid James, MB, BS; Sung-Tae Hong, MD, PhD; Abraham Haileamlak, MD; Laragh Gollogly, MD, MPH; Fiona Godlee, FRCP; Frank A. Frizelle, MB, ChB, FRACS; Fernando Florenzano, MD; Jeffrey M. Drazen, MD; Howard Bauchner, MD; Christopher Baethge, MD; Joyce Backus, MSLS The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) nisms are not in place to mandate universal data sharing at this believes there is an ethical obligation to responsibly share data time. Although many issues must be addressed for data shar- generated by interventional clinical trials because trial partici- ing to become the norm, we remain committed to this goal. pants have put themselves at risk. In January 2016 we pub- Therefore, ICMJE will require the following as conditions lished a proposal aimed at helping to create an environment in of consideration for publication of a clinical trial report in our which the sharing of deidentified individual participant data member journals: becomes the norm. In response to our request for feedback we 1. As of July 1, 2018, manuscripts submitted to ICMJE jour- received many comments from individuals and groups.1 Some nals that report the results of clinical trials must contain a applauded the proposal while others expressed disappoint- data sharing statement as described below. ment it did not more quickly create a commitment to data shar- 2. Clinical trials that begin enrolling participants on or after Janu- ing.
    [Show full text]