Cargando…

Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?

The pathophysiologic mechanisms behind urologic disease are increasingly being elucidated. The object of this investigation was to evaluate the publication policies of urologic journals during a period of progressively better understanding and management of urologic disease. Based on the ISI Web of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mani, Jens, Makarević, Jasmina, Juengel, Eva, Ackermann, Hanns, Nelson, Karen, Haferkamp, Axel, Blaheta, Roman A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526592/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23285032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052420
_version_ 1782253596007464960
author Mani, Jens
Makarević, Jasmina
Juengel, Eva
Ackermann, Hanns
Nelson, Karen
Haferkamp, Axel
Blaheta, Roman A.
author_facet Mani, Jens
Makarević, Jasmina
Juengel, Eva
Ackermann, Hanns
Nelson, Karen
Haferkamp, Axel
Blaheta, Roman A.
author_sort Mani, Jens
collection PubMed
description The pathophysiologic mechanisms behind urologic disease are increasingly being elucidated. The object of this investigation was to evaluate the publication policies of urologic journals during a period of progressively better understanding and management of urologic disease. Based on the ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports and the PubMed database, the number and percentage of original experimental, original clinical, review or commentarial articles published between 2002–2010 in six leading urologic journals were analyzed. “British Journal of Urology International”, “European Urology”, “Urologic Oncology-Seminars and Original Investigations” (“Urologic Oncology”), “Urology”, “The Journal of Urology”, and “World Journal of Urology” were chosen, because these journals publish articles in all four categories. The publication policies of the six journals were very heterogeneous during the time period from 2002 to 2010. The percentage of original experimental and original clinical articles, related to all categories, remained the same in “British Journal of Urology International”, “Urologic Oncology”, “Urology” and “The Journal of Urology”. The percentage of experimental reports in “World Journal of Urology” between 2002–2010 significantly increased from 10 to 20%. A distinct elevation in the percentage of commentarial articles accompanied by a reduction of clinical articles became evident in “European Urology” which significantly correlated with a large increase in the journal’s impact factor. No clearly superior policy could be identified with regard to a general increase in the impact factors from all the journals. The publication policy of urologic journals does not expressly reflect the increase in scientific knowledge, which has occurred over the period 2002–2010. One way of increasing the exposure of urologists to research and expand the interface between experimental and clinical research, would be to enlarge the percentage of experimental articles published. There is no indication that such policy would be detrimental to a journal’s impact factor.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3526592
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35265922013-01-02 Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan? Mani, Jens Makarević, Jasmina Juengel, Eva Ackermann, Hanns Nelson, Karen Haferkamp, Axel Blaheta, Roman A. PLoS One Research Article The pathophysiologic mechanisms behind urologic disease are increasingly being elucidated. The object of this investigation was to evaluate the publication policies of urologic journals during a period of progressively better understanding and management of urologic disease. Based on the ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports and the PubMed database, the number and percentage of original experimental, original clinical, review or commentarial articles published between 2002–2010 in six leading urologic journals were analyzed. “British Journal of Urology International”, “European Urology”, “Urologic Oncology-Seminars and Original Investigations” (“Urologic Oncology”), “Urology”, “The Journal of Urology”, and “World Journal of Urology” were chosen, because these journals publish articles in all four categories. The publication policies of the six journals were very heterogeneous during the time period from 2002 to 2010. The percentage of original experimental and original clinical articles, related to all categories, remained the same in “British Journal of Urology International”, “Urologic Oncology”, “Urology” and “The Journal of Urology”. The percentage of experimental reports in “World Journal of Urology” between 2002–2010 significantly increased from 10 to 20%. A distinct elevation in the percentage of commentarial articles accompanied by a reduction of clinical articles became evident in “European Urology” which significantly correlated with a large increase in the journal’s impact factor. No clearly superior policy could be identified with regard to a general increase in the impact factors from all the journals. The publication policy of urologic journals does not expressly reflect the increase in scientific knowledge, which has occurred over the period 2002–2010. One way of increasing the exposure of urologists to research and expand the interface between experimental and clinical research, would be to enlarge the percentage of experimental articles published. There is no indication that such policy would be detrimental to a journal’s impact factor. Public Library of Science 2012-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3526592/ /pubmed/23285032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052420 Text en © 2012 Mani et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mani, Jens
Makarević, Jasmina
Juengel, Eva
Ackermann, Hanns
Nelson, Karen
Haferkamp, Axel
Blaheta, Roman A.
Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title_full Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title_fullStr Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title_full_unstemmed Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title_short Publication of Original Research in Urologic Journals – A Neglected Orphan?
title_sort publication of original research in urologic journals – a neglected orphan?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526592/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23285032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052420
work_keys_str_mv AT manijens publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT makarevicjasmina publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT juengeleva publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT ackermannhanns publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT nelsonkaren publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT haferkampaxel publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan
AT blahetaromana publicationoforiginalresearchinurologicjournalsaneglectedorphan