Literature DB >> 27708938

Overview of the publications of rheumatologists after the millennium.

Mehmet Engin Tezcan1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Scientific progress can be directly measured by the growth of the scientific archive. To our knowledge, there has never been a systematic evaluation of the number and properties of the publications of rheumatologists. In this paper, we aimed to evaluate the properties of these papers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: All papers that were published between 2000 and 2011 by at least one rheumatologist author and that were indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded were evaluated. For this purpose, we used the ISI web of knowledge web of science software.
RESULTS: Original articles were the most common document type. Most of the papers were published in rheumatology journals. From the point of the number of published papers, the top 3 countries were United States, England, and Germany; the top 3 journals were Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, Rheumatology, and Arthritis and Rheumatism, and the top 3 institutes are Harvard University, Leiden University, and The Imperial College of Science, Technology. Moreover, the publications of rheumatologists increased annually between 2000 and 2011.
CONCLUSION: This paper is an overview of the publications of rheumatologists between 2000 and 2011. The results indicate an increasing trend of scientific productivity for rheumatologists. The outcomes about countries, institutions, and journals are in concordance with the general medical publication trends. More than half of the publications written by rheumatologist were published by rheumatology journals. We consider only quantitative data about publications; new research is required to qualitatively evaluate the data.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Rheumatology; publication; rheumatic diseases; rheumatologist

Year:  2015        PMID: 27708938      PMCID: PMC5047259          DOI: 10.5152/eurjrheum.2015.0112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Rheumatol        ISSN: 2147-9720


  6 in total

1.  Quality of reporting randomised clinical trials in dental and medical research.

Authors:  P Sjögren; A Halling
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2002-01-26       Impact factor: 1.626

Review 2.  The number, quality, and coverage of randomized controlled trials in nephrology.

Authors:  Giovanni F M Strippoli; Jonathan C Craig; Francesco P Schena
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 10.121

Review 3.  Systematic review of the quality of randomized controlled trials for patellofemoral pain syndrome.

Authors:  Mario Bizzini; John D Childs; Sara R Piva; Anthony Delitto
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.751

Review 4.  Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.

Authors:  R W Scherer; P Langenberg; E von Elm
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2007-04-18

5.  The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation.

Authors:  D F Horrobin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Assessing the quality of randomization from reports of controlled trials published in obstetrics and gynecology journals.

Authors:  K F Schulz; I Chalmers; D A Grimes; D G Altman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-07-13       Impact factor: 56.272

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.