Wong Victoria S S
Department of Neurology, University of California, Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California 95817, USA.
J Child Neurol. 2010 Oct;25(10):1298-301. doi: 10.1177/0883073810374647. Epub 2010 Jul 6.
Despite remarkable growth in the clinical neurology literature, there is little research on peer review and biomedical publication in neurology. Biomedical publication research encompasses every step of the research process, from the methodology to the publication of research findings. Some general medical journals have served as leaders in improving scientific publication. Many medical fields have taken it upon themselves to characterize journals and peer reviewers within their own fields. Not all of these data can be applied to the clinical neurology literature; research methodologies, article types, and the journals themselves are unique to every medical field. This article reviews current publication research in the neurology literature and concludes that, to sustain and improve upon the integrity of clinical neurology research, further study is needed of the journals and the peer review process in neurology. Otherwise, the value of clinical research findings and patient care guidelines will be diminished.
尽管临床神经学文献数量显著增长,但关于神经学领域同行评审和生物医学出版的研究却很少。生物医学出版研究涵盖了研究过程的每一个步骤,从研究方法到研究结果的发表。一些综合医学期刊在改善科学出版方面发挥了引领作用。许多医学领域都自行对本领域内的期刊和同行评审人员进行了特征描述。并非所有这些数据都能应用于临床神经学文献;每个医学领域的研究方法、文章类型以及期刊本身都是独特的。本文回顾了神经学文献中当前的出版研究,并得出结论,为了维持和提高临床神经学研究的完整性,需要对神经学领域的期刊和同行评审过程进行进一步研究。否则,临床研究结果和患者护理指南的价值将会降低。