Bhattacharyya N
Joint Center for Otolaryngology and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Laryngoscope. 1999 Apr;109(4):640-4. doi: 10.1097/00005537-199904000-00023.
To determine if the otolaryngology literature is comparable to other surgical specialty journals with respect to quality and types of articles published.
The four major otolaryngology journals--Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, Archives of Otolaryngology--Head and Neck Surgery, Laryngoscope, and Otolaryngology--Head and Neck Surgery--were studied for 6-months and examined for the following variables: 1) proportion of clinical or basic science research, 2) proportion of prospective or retrospective studies, 3) types of statistics used, 4) sample sizes of the studies, and 5) proportion of single case reports. A composite group of surgical specialty journals consisting of Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Neurosurgery, and Ophthalmology was also studied for the same time period. The otolaryngology journals and other specialty journals were compared with respect to each of these variables, after which the comparison was conducted within the group of otolaryngology journals.
Analysis of 905 articles, comprising 508 articles from the four major otolaryngology journals and 397 articles from the composite of the other specialty journals, was conducted. No significant difference in the proportion of single case reports between the otolaryngology journals (15.0%) and the other specialty journals (12.8%) was noted (P = .364). The otolaryngology journals had a significantly higher proportion of basic research than the other specialty journals (27.4% vs. 14.5%, P<.001) as well as a higher percentage of prospective studies (62.1% vs. 49.0%, P = .001). The studies in the otolaryngology journals had a much lower mean sample size than those in the other specialty journals (70.2 vs. 373.8, P = .010). No difference between the two groups was found in the use of statistics (P = .228). Among the otolaryngology journals, Laryngoscope was found to publish fewer single case reports than the other three journals, and Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology had the highest proportion of prospective studies (P = .031 and .012, respectively). No differences were found for sample sizes and use of statistical analysis (P = .266 and P = .710, respectively) among the otolaryngology journals.
The otolaryngology literature compares quite favorably with the literature of other surgical specialties, excelling in prospective studies and basic science research. It only lags with respect to sample size. The study composition among the different major otolaryngology journals is largely similar with respect to basic study parameters, suggesting comparable quality among the journals.
确定耳鼻咽喉科文献在发表文章的质量和类型方面是否与其他外科专业期刊相当。
对四种主要的耳鼻咽喉科期刊——《耳、鼻、喉学纪事》《耳鼻咽喉科——头颈外科文献》《喉镜》以及《耳鼻咽喉科——头颈外科》进行了为期6个月的研究，并检查了以下变量：1）临床或基础科学研究的比例；2）前瞻性或回顾性研究的比例；3）所使用的统计类型；4）研究的样本量；5）单病例报告的比例。同时还对一组由《骨与关节外科杂志》《神经外科》和《眼科学》组成的外科专业期刊进行了研究。将耳鼻咽喉科期刊和其他专业期刊在这些变量方面进行了比较，之后又在耳鼻咽喉科期刊组内进行了比较。
对905篇文章进行了分析，其中包括来自四种主要耳鼻咽喉科期刊的508篇文章以及来自其他专业期刊组合的397篇文章。耳鼻咽喉科期刊（15.0%）和其他专业期刊（12.8%）之间单病例报告的比例没有显著差异（P = 0.364）。耳鼻咽喉科期刊基础研究的比例显著高于其他专业期刊（27.4%对14.5%，P<0.001），前瞻性研究的百分比也更高（62.1%对49.0%，P = 0.001）。耳鼻咽喉科期刊中的研究平均样本量远低于其他专业期刊（70.2对373.8，P = 0.010）。两组在统计使用方面没有差异（P = 0.228）。在耳鼻咽喉科期刊中，发现《喉镜》发表的单病例报告比其他三本期刊少，而《耳、鼻、喉学纪事》前瞻性研究的比例最高（分别为P = 0.031和0.012）。耳鼻咽喉科期刊在样本量和统计分析使用方面没有差异（分别为P = 0.266和P = 0.710）。
耳鼻咽喉科文献与其他外科专业的文献相比相当不错，在前瞻性研究和基础科学研究方面表现出色。仅在样本量方面落后。不同主要耳鼻咽喉科期刊之间的研究构成在基础研究参数方面基本相似，表明各期刊质量相当。
