Norio Ohba1. 1. Division of Orthoptics and Visual Science, Aichi Shukutoku University, Faculty of Medical Welfare, Nagoya, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the current status of international ophthalmic publications. METHODS: A collection of 55,591 original articles were found by an on-line National Library of Medicine database Medline search for 32 international ophthalmic journals during a 15-year period from 1988 to 2002 (internet access, November 11-13, 2003). RESULTS: The contributions to international ophthalmic publications were by 49.5% from North America, 31.3% from Western Europe, 15.1% from Asia and Oceania, 2.2% from Middle East, 0.85% from Central and South America, 0.53% from Eastern Europe, and 0.47% from Africa. Countries of Asia and Oceania showed an increasing trend in contributions while North America had a decreasing productivity in a relative sense. The top 10 productive countries were USA, United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, and France. Among the Asian countries India ranked 13th, China 18th, and Korea 21st. When related to population, small countries such as Israel, France, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark were more productive. When related to economic productivity as defined by GDP, Israel, the United Kingdom, Australia, Finland, and Sweden were among the most productive countries, whereas rich countries such as Japan and Germany had a lower number of publications relative to their GDP. As regards clinical research in terms of randomized controlled trials, The USA was by far the most productive. The number of authors per article has shown an increasing trend worldwide, so that Japan and France had a significantly larger proportion of multiauthored articles. CONCLUSIONS: There is an increasing trend in the productivity of international ophthalmic publications from non-English-speaking countries including Japan, China, and Korea.
PURPOSE: To assess the current status of international ophthalmic publications. METHODS: A collection of 55,591 original articles were found by an on-line National Library of Medicine database Medline search for 32 international ophthalmic journals during a 15-year period from 1988 to 2002 (internet access, November 11-13, 2003). RESULTS: The contributions to international ophthalmic publications were by 49.5% from North America, 31.3% from Western Europe, 15.1% from Asia and Oceania, 2.2% from Middle East, 0.85% from Central and South America, 0.53% from Eastern Europe, and 0.47% from Africa. Countries of Asia and Oceania showed an increasing trend in contributions while North America had a decreasing productivity in a relative sense. The top 10 productive countries were USA, United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, Canada, Australia, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, and France. Among the Asian countries India ranked 13th, China 18th, and Korea 21st. When related to population, small countries such as Israel, France, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark were more productive. When related to economic productivity as defined by GDP, Israel, the United Kingdom, Australia, Finland, and Sweden were among the most productive countries, whereas rich countries such as Japan and Germany had a lower number of publications relative to their GDP. As regards clinical research in terms of randomized controlled trials, The USA was by far the most productive. The number of authors per article has shown an increasing trend worldwide, so that Japan and France had a significantly larger proportion of multiauthored articles. CONCLUSIONS: There is an increasing trend in the productivity of international ophthalmic publications from non-English-speaking countries including Japan, China, and Korea.