| Literature DB >> 26413168 |
Kristina Ackel-Eisnach1, Patricia Raes2, Lisa Hönikl2, Daniel Bauer3, Stefan Wagener4, Andreas Möltner5, Jana Jünger5, Martin R Fischer3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The point of departure for the present work is the observation that, in comparison with Anglo-American countries or the Netherlands, Germany was responsible for only a marginal number of international publications in the field of medical education research before 2004. Recent years, however, have seen an increase in the importance of medical education research in Germany. The objective of this article is to evaluate the extent to which this trend can be substantiated by increased German publishing activity since the year 2004 in international, English-language journals in the subject area of "medical education research".Entities:
Keywords: content analysis; international publication; literature analysis; medical education research
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26413168 PMCID: PMC4580754 DOI: 10.3205/zma000972
Source DB: PubMed Journal: GMS Z Med Ausbild ISSN: 1860-3572
Table 1monthly / yearly user access via the open-access site of the medical education journal GMS between 2010 and 2013
Figure 1flowchart describing the article selection from six designated international, English-language journals on medical education
Figure 2number of project and original works with German participation by year and journal (n=145).
Figure 3Number of publications with German participation by year and journal (n=179)
Table 2categorisation of project and original works with German first or last authors using various criteria (n=133)
Table 3categorisation by research design of project and original works with German first or last authors (n=133)
Figure 4Number of published original and project works in the observation period sorted by faculties in Germany with at least one publication (only articles with German first or last authors). When first and last author belonged to the same faculty, the article was only counted once. When first and last author belonged to different faculties, the article was counted twice. When first and last authorship were shared, only the faculty of the first-named author was considered.