Cargando…
Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010
Background: We wanted to asses and characterize the volume of Otolaryngology publications on clinical research, published in major journals. Methods and Material: To assess volume and study type of clinical research in Otolaryngology we performed a literature search in high impact factor journals. W...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6467099/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31024926 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2019.00018 |
_version_ | 1783411233301463040 |
---|---|
author | Kaper, Nina M. Ramakers, Geerte G. J. Aarts, Mark C. J. van der Heijden, Geert J. M. G. |
author_facet | Kaper, Nina M. Ramakers, Geerte G. J. Aarts, Mark C. J. van der Heijden, Geert J. M. G. |
author_sort | Kaper, Nina M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: We wanted to asses and characterize the volume of Otolaryngology publications on clinical research, published in major journals. Methods and Material: To assess volume and study type of clinical research in Otolaryngology we performed a literature search in high impact factor journals. We included 10 high impact factor Otolaryngology journals and 20 high impact factor medical journals outside this field (2011). We extracted original publications and systematic reviews from 2010. Publications were classified according to their research question, that is therapy, diagnosis, prognosis or etiology. Results: From Otolaryngology journals (impact factor 1.8 to 2.8) we identified 694 (46%) publications on original observations and 27 (2%) systematic reviews. From selected medical journals (impact factor 6.0 to 101.8) 122 (2%) publications related to Otolaryngology, 102 (83%) were on original observations and 2 (0.04%) systematic reviews. The most common category was therapy (40%). Conclusion: Half of publications in Otolaryngology concerns clinical research, which is higher than other specialties. In medical journals outside the field of Otolaryngology, a small proportion (2%) of publications is related to Otolaryngology. Striking is that systematic reviews, which are considered high level evidence, make up for only 2% of publications. We must ensure an increase of clinical research for optimizing medical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6467099 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64670992019-04-25 Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 Kaper, Nina M. Ramakers, Geerte G. J. Aarts, Mark C. J. van der Heijden, Geert J. M. G. Front Surg Surgery Background: We wanted to asses and characterize the volume of Otolaryngology publications on clinical research, published in major journals. Methods and Material: To assess volume and study type of clinical research in Otolaryngology we performed a literature search in high impact factor journals. We included 10 high impact factor Otolaryngology journals and 20 high impact factor medical journals outside this field (2011). We extracted original publications and systematic reviews from 2010. Publications were classified according to their research question, that is therapy, diagnosis, prognosis or etiology. Results: From Otolaryngology journals (impact factor 1.8 to 2.8) we identified 694 (46%) publications on original observations and 27 (2%) systematic reviews. From selected medical journals (impact factor 6.0 to 101.8) 122 (2%) publications related to Otolaryngology, 102 (83%) were on original observations and 2 (0.04%) systematic reviews. The most common category was therapy (40%). Conclusion: Half of publications in Otolaryngology concerns clinical research, which is higher than other specialties. In medical journals outside the field of Otolaryngology, a small proportion (2%) of publications is related to Otolaryngology. Striking is that systematic reviews, which are considered high level evidence, make up for only 2% of publications. We must ensure an increase of clinical research for optimizing medical practice. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6467099/ /pubmed/31024926 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2019.00018 Text en Copyright © 2019 Kaper, Ramakers, Aarts and van der Heijden. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Surgery Kaper, Nina M. Ramakers, Geerte G. J. Aarts, Mark C. J. van der Heijden, Geert J. M. G. Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title | Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title_full | Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title_fullStr | Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title_full_unstemmed | Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title_short | Publications on Clinical Research in Otolaryngology–A Systematic Analysis of Leading Journals in 2010 |
title_sort | publications on clinical research in otolaryngology–a systematic analysis of leading journals in 2010 |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6467099/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31024926 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2019.00018 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kaperninam publicationsonclinicalresearchinotolaryngologyasystematicanalysisofleadingjournalsin2010 AT ramakersgeertegj publicationsonclinicalresearchinotolaryngologyasystematicanalysisofleadingjournalsin2010 AT aartsmarkcj publicationsonclinicalresearchinotolaryngologyasystematicanalysisofleadingjournalsin2010 AT vanderheijdengeertjmg publicationsonclinicalresearchinotolaryngologyasystematicanalysisofleadingjournalsin2010 |