Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “PUBLISHING”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Restrictions impeding web-based courses: a survey of publishers' variation in authorising access to high quality on-line literature.

BACKGROUND: Web-based delivery of educational programmes is becoming increasingly popular and is expected to expand, especially in medicine. The successful implementation of these programmes is reliant on their ability to provide access to web based materials, including high quality published work. Publishers' responses to requests to access health literature in the context of developing an electronic Master's degree course are described. METHODS: Two different permission requests were submitted to publishers. The first was to store an electronic version of a journal article, to which we subscribe, on a secure password protected server. The second was to reproduce extracts of published material on password protected web pages and CD Rom. RESULTS: Eight of 16 publishers were willing to grant permission to store electronic versions of articles without levying charges additional to the subscription. Twenty of 35 publishers gave permission to reproduce extracts of published work at no fee. Publishers' responses were highly variable to the requests for access to published material. This may be influenced by vague terminology within the 'fair dealing' provision in the copyright legislation, which seems to leave it open to individual interpretation. Considerable resource costs were incurred by the exercise. Time expended included those incurred by us: research to identify informed representatives within the publishing organisation, request 'chase-ups' and alternative examples being sought if publishers were uncooperative; and the publisher when dealing with numerous permission requests. Financial costs were also incurred by both parties through additional staffing and paperwork generated by the permission process, the latter including those purely borne by educators due to the necessary provision of photocopy 'course packs' when no suitably alternative material could be found if publishers were uncooperative. Finally we discuss the resultant bias in material towards readily available electronic resources as a result of publisher's uncooperative stance and encourage initiatives that aim to improve open electronic access. CONCLUSIONS: The permission request process has been expensive and has resulted in reduced access for students to the relevant literature. Variations in the responses from publishers suggest that for educational purposes common policies could be agreed and unnecessary restrictions removed in the future.

CD-ROM↗
PubMed1992

Where are articles by candidates for academic promotion published?

BACKGROUND: Publication is an important factor in academic promotion. The purpose of this study was to describe the journals in which articles by a sample of tenure-track family practice faculty members in university-based programs were published. METHODS: Publication information about family practice candidates for academic promotion during the 1988-89 academic year was solicited from program chairmen; an 80% response rate was achieved. RESULTS: The candidates for faculty promotion had 393 articles published in 131 journals. The Journal of Family Practice published 93 articles, 24% of the total; nearly half of all the candidates had articles published in this journal. Five family practice journals published 35% of the articles. The 36 physician faculty members had 274 articles published in 77 journals. Five major family practice journals accounted for 46% of these articles. The Journal of Family Practice published the greatest number of the articles (32%). The eight nominees with PhD or EdD degrees had 104 articles published in 58 journals. Academic Medicine published the greatest number of these articles (12%). Only 8% of the articles were published in the five major family practice journals. Although PhD and EdD faculty had more articles published, more of the journals were nonrefereed and nonmedical journals; very few were family practice journals. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the works of family practice faculty are published in a wide range of journals. With an increasing number of journals, the decision of where to submit manuscripts will become even more complex. Furthermore, the greater the number of journals, the greater the need for family practice faculty to produce quality research.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2000

[Comparative analysis of articles published by Spanish authors (1993-1997) in biomedical journals with high impact factor].

BACKGROUND: To identify the Spanish scientific production amongst different areas of clinical knowledge, and to compare it with those of five other European Union countries. METHOD: Review of MEDLINE data base, for the period 1993-1997. Search limited to four journals, selected, for 10 different medical specialties (Cardiology, Endocrinology, Infectious Diseases, Gastroenterology-Hepatology, Haematology, Nephrology, Pneumology, Neurology, Oncology, Rheumatology). Articles published by authors from Germany, France, Italy, The Netherlands, Sweden and Spain. Journals included in the Internal Medicine subject classification were independently analysed. Data were also related with several econometric indexes. RESULTS: A total of 1,763 original articles published by Spanish authors were identified in the journal's sample over the analysed period (2.08 articles per 100 all published articles). Spain contributes to the total achieved by the six European countries analysed with 9.07 articles per 100 published articles. Gastroenterology-Hepatology was the medical specially which has more articles published by Spanish authors (total: 338 articles; 4.15 articles/100 published articles); and Oncology the one with less articles published (1.26 articles/100 published articles). The mean IF value per journal by article is highest for Gastroenterology-Hepatology (4.86 FI/article) and lowest for Pneumology (2.42 FI/article). Spain is the last amongst all six European countries analyzed in Endocrinology, Oncology and Haematology, and second to last in all others except for Gastroenterology-Hepatology (4th place). Mean cost for each article produced by Spanish authors in the analyzed sample was 0.49 US $ according the health expenditures per capita, and 0.07 US $ according the R+D expenditures per capita. Data from the independent analysis of Internal Medicine journals also showed that Gastroenterology and Hepatology is the subspecialty with a higher number of papers published in those journals. CONCLUSIONS: All efforts devoted to improve the quality of Spanish biomedical research, specially in clinical research, had produced positive, but uneven, results, measured by the number and impact factor of original articles published in top ranked biomedical journals. The overall distribution of high impact factor scientific production by specialties is poor when compared to the European Union countries included in the analysis. Those results showed several improvement opportunities. Besides increasing the overall budget for R+D, its is likely that the time has come for backing the highest quality Spanish biomedical research, the one that offers greater and better chances for achieving scientifically valid results, and is published in high impact factor biomedical journals.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed2001

Citation characteristics of research published in Emergency Medicine versus other scientific journals.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine how a cohort of published emergency medicine research is cited in scientific journals. METHODS: Data were collected on all research submitted to the 1991 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine meeting and subsequently published. Outcome measures included all citations of these studies found in journals listed in the Science Citation Index, as well as the impact factors (citations per manuscript per year) of citing journals. RESULTS: Two hundred four of the 493 submitted studies were published and met study entry criteria; the average article was cited 2.04 times a year during the study period. Twelve percent were never cited, and 39% were cited only once or twice. Thirty percent were published in non-emergency medicine journals, and these were cited at least twice as often (and by almost 3 times as many journals) as apparently similar studies published in emergency medicine journals. The percentage of studies never cited by anyone was about threefold higher when published in emergency medicine journals. Forty-two percent of the citations of research published in emergency medicine journals came from within the specialty. Emergency medicine journals provided only 16% of the citations of emergency medicine research published in non-emergency medicine journals because these studies were cited 3 times as often by authors in other disciplines. Rejection of research for presentation at the meeting did not predict the number or quality of citations or citing journals. CONCLUSION: Research submitted to the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine meeting and subsequently published is cited about as often as the average scientific journal article but receives more impact, is cited more widely, and is more likely to be cited by a broader range of authors when published by non-emergency medicine journals. The ability of emergency medicine journals to compete with larger non-emergency medicine journals for their larger audiences may help shape perceptions of the specialty.

Emergency Medicine↗
PubMed2006

Do financial factors such as author page charges and industry funding impact on the nature of published research in infectious diseases?

OBJECTIVES: The question of who pays for research to be conducted and published is an important one as it may result in publication bias. The traditional model of medical publishing has relied on subscriptions for funding. There has been increasing interest in making the results of scientific research freely available. One proposed mechanism is an author-pays system, which shifts cost from subscribers to authors. We investigated the impact of author page charges on the nature and type of published research, and the association of industry funding with types of published research. METHODS: Four infectious diseases journals with comparable scope were studied-two with page charges and two without. Variables included type of research study, area of research, author demographics, study setting and industry funding. The differences between a subscription model vs. a mixed model (author page charges and subscription charges) were studied. We also investigated changes within the same journal once it had moved from a subscription model to a mixed model. RESULTS: Authors from developing countries were significantly less likely to be published in the mixed-model journals (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.41, P < 0.001). Clinical trials published in any type of journal were significantly more likely to be industry funded than any other type of research (OR 12.7, 95% CI 7.0-22.9, P < 0.001). Industry-funded research was significantly less likely to be about diseases affecting predominantly the developing world (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.89, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: There is clearly a relationship between industry funding and certain types of published research. The model of funding of journal publishing can also affect the nature of published research. Shifting publishing costs to authors favours well-funded organizations, industry sponsored research and wealthy countries. Such potential for publication bias must be considered when planning for open access models.

Access to Information↗
PubMed1996

[Books published in Spain on smoking].

Tobacco dependence, considered for a long time as a habit and, more recently, as an addiction, has many bad effects in health. The objective of this study was to analyse books published in this field in Spain. Books indexed in the ISBN Spanish database in CD-ROM (updated to 1993) dealing with addiction to tobacco, that included one of the following words: tabac*, tabak*, tabaq*, fuma*, fumad*, nicotine*, alquitran*, antitabac*, antitabaq*, cigarro*, cigarri*, exfumad*, pipa*, puro*, picadura* or filtro, were included in the study. Authors, ISBN classification, year of publication, language (of publication and original) and publishers were descriptively analysed. One hundred and four books were analysed. The highest number was published during the period 1990-1993 (42%); being 1993 (n = 15) and 1991 (n = 14) the most productive years. A big increase was observed from 1985. A great number (76% of books, n = 79) was written by personal authors and the 14% (n = 14) by public organizations. Most of the books (n = 88; 85%); were published in Spanish, followed by Catalan (n = 13; 13%); 21 books (20%) were translations: most of them from English (n = 12; 60%) or from French (n = 3; 14%). Forty six per cent of books was published by trade publishers and 31% by public organizations. According to the ISBN classification, these books were grouped in 20 different topics; but, most of them (70%) were included in three of these topics: hygiene (n = 42, 40%), pharmacology-toxicology-drugs (n = 18, 17%) and pathology-diseases and medical/therapeutical clinical practice (n = 14; 13%). The number of books published in Spain dealing with tobacco dependence has increased very much from 1985; it suggests that interest in this area in SPain has also increased. Most of the books are published in Spanish, and the most frequently translated language is English. These books are basically published by trade publishers and public organizations. These results have to be considered taking into account that fighting against consumption of tobacco and tobacco dependence is a relatively new area of research and study.

Bibliographies as Topic↗
PubMed2000

Top-cited dermatology authors publishing in 5 "high-impact" general medical journals.

BACKGROUND: In addition to publishing in the dermatologic literature, some dermatologists also publish articles in the general medical journals, which enjoy wide circulation and whose articles are often cited. OBJECTIVE: To identify articles and citations to these articles that the most frequently cited authors in the dermatologic literature published in highly cited general medical journals. DESIGN: We obtained a citation database from the Institute of Scientific Information, Philadelphia, Pa, that identified all articles published by the top-cited authors in the dermatologic literature in 5 "high-impact" general medical journals. SETTING: The 5 high-impact general medical journals with the historically highest impact factors. SUBJECTS: Two hundred top-cited authors in dermatology journals and their coauthors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Number of citations to articles published in 5 high-impact general medical journals. RESULTS: From 1981 to 1998, 120 of the 200 top-cited dermatology authors published a total of 674 papers in the 5 most highly cited general medical journals. Original articles published in these high-impact general medical journals were cited an average 7.5 times more often than articles published in dermatology journals. CONCLUSIONS: Top-cited authors in dermatology journals also frequently publish in the leading 5 high-impact general medical journals. Publications in these journals by dermatologists are often highly cited.

Databases as Topic↗
PubMed1996

Completeness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Lately, the number of systematic reviews published has increased substantially. Many systematic reviews exclude trials published in languages other than English. However, there is little empirical evidence to support this action. We looked for differences in the completeness of reporting between trials published in other languages and those published in English, to see whether the exclusion of trials published in other languages is justified. METHODS: We compared completeness of reporting, design characteristics, and analytical approaches of 133 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English between 1989 and 1994 and 96 published in French, German, Italian, or Spanish during the same time. RCTs were identified by hand searching of journals (seven in English and six in the other languages). FINDINGS: We found no significant differences between trials published in English and other-language trials for any single item in the completeness of reporting scale (randomisation, double-blinding, withdrawals), or for the overall score (percentage of maximum possible score 51.0% for trials in English, 46.2% for trials in other languages; 95% CI for difference -1.1 to 10.5). Other-language trials were more likely than English-language trials to have adult participants, to use two or more interventions, and to compare two or more active treatments without an untreated control group. Trials in other languages were less likely to report a clearly prespecified primary outcome or any rationale for sample size estimation. INTERPRETATION: These results provide evidence for inclusion of all trial reports, irrespective of the language in which they are published, in systematic reviews. Their inclusion is likely to increase precision and may reduce systematic errors. We hope that our findings will prove useful to those developing guidelines and policies for the conduct of reporting of systematic reviews.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The impact of biomedical literature published in the province of Vojvodina on researchers in the world and in Yugoslavia.

This study uses bibliometric analysis to evaluate scientific biomedical literature published on the territory of Vojvodina and its impact on researchers in Yugoslavia and in the world. The study sample comprised 6.979 publications from the territory of Vojvodina published in the period 1986-1997. The following parameters were determined: productivity of authors and institutions where they were employed and some other bibliometric parameters. The impact of these publications on other researches was analyzed for the same period, by citation analysis of papers published in 3 most eminent medical journals in Yugoslavia (3.440 articles, 58.484 references) and in Science Citation Index. Results of the study revealed that production of biomedical literature on the territory of Vojvodina was at high level. Medical research presented in journals of Vojvodina, which are the carriers of current information and accomplishments in science, technique, and practice in biomedicine, was satisfactory. Biomedical articles published in Vojvodina showed a tendency towards increase in number of authors, whereas the greater number of publications were written by a small number of extremely productive authors and institutions. Biomedical researches in Yugoslavia usually cite only foreign literature, while domestic references are mostly self-citations or citations of older literature. The impact of publications published in Vojvodina on other researchers in Yugoslavia is evident, but it is greatest on the territory where they are published. In regard to biomedical journals from Vojvodina "Medical review" is the most cited journal in Yugoslavia and in SCI. Most of the cited references belong to a small number of authors. Thus, according to bibliometric criteria the impact of medical science and professional practice in Vojvodina on international scientific streems is negligible, as well as the impact of papers published in Vojvodina on researchers in the world. Only 0.4 works published in Vojvodina, 0.87% papers from journals published in Vojvodina and written by 0.59% authors were cited in SCI.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed2006

Open access: implications for scholarly publishing and medical libraries.

PURPOSE: The paper reviews and analyzes the evolution of the open access (OA) publishing movement and its impact on the traditional scholarly publishing model. PROCEDURES: A literature survey and analysis of definitions of OA, problems with the current publishing model, historical developments, funding agency responses, stakeholder viewpoints, and implications for scientific libraries and publishing are performed. FINDINGS: The Internet's transformation of information access has fueled interest in reshaping what many see as a dysfunctional, high-cost system of scholarly publishing. For years, librarians alone advocated for change, until relatively recently when interest in OA and related initiatives spread to the scientific community, governmental groups, funding agencies, publishers, and the general public. CONCLUSIONS: Most stakeholders acknowledge that change in the publishing landscape is inevitable, but heated debate continues over what form this transformation will take. The most frequently discussed remedies for the troubled current system are the "green" road (self-archiving articles published in non-OA journals) and the "gold" road (publishing in OA journals). Both movements will likely intensify, with a multiplicity of models and initiatives coexisting for some time.

Access to Information↗
PubMed2002

Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals.

CONTEXT: Citation by other authors is important in the dissemination of published science, but factors predicting it are little studied. METHODS: To identify characteristics of published research predicting citation in other journals, we searched the Science Citations Index database for a standardized 3.5 years for all citations of published articles originally submitted to a 1991 emergency medicine specialty meeting. Analysis was conducted by classification and regression trees, a nonparametric modeling technique of regression trees, to determine the impact of previously determined characteristics of the full articles on the outcome measures. We calculated the the number of times an article was cited each year and calculated the mean impact factor (citations per manuscript per year) in other citing journals. RESULTS: Of the 493 submitted manuscripts, 204 published articles met entry criteria. The mean citations per year was 2.04 (95% confidence interval, 1.6-2.4; range, 0-20.9) in 440 different journals. Nineteen articles (9.3%) were never cited. The ability to predict the citations per year was weak (pseudo R(2) = 0.14.). The strongest predictor of citations per year was the impact factor of the original publishing journal. The presence of a control group, the subjective newsworthiness score, and sample size predicted citation frequency (24.3%, 26.0%, and 26.5% as strongly, respectively). The ability to predict mean impact factor of the citing journals was even weaker (pseudo R(2) = 0.09). The impact factor of the publishing journal was the strongest predictor, followed by the newsworthiness score (89.9% as strongly) and a subjective quality score (61.5%). Positive outcome bias was not evident for either outcome measure. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of published research, commonly used measures of study methodology and design did not predict the frequency of citations or the importance of citing journals. Positive outcome bias was not evident. The impact factor of the original publishing journal was more important than any other variable, suggesting that the journal in which a study is published may be as important as traditional measures of study quality in ensuring dissemination.

Bibliometrics↗