Suppr超能文献

家庭医学期刊的统计趋势。

Statistical trends in family medicine journals.

作者信息

Kwon Hae-Jin, Park Yong-Gyu

机构信息

Department of Biostatistics, The Catholic University of Korea School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

Korean J Fam Med. 2012 Jan;33(1):9-16. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.2012.33.1.9. Epub 2012 Jan 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study proposed a desirable direction for the future development of the Korean Journal of Family Medicine (KJFM) by comparing with the overseas SCI journals, Family Medicine (FM) and The Journal of Family Practice (JFP) based on the statistical viewpoints.

METHODS

All of the original articles published in KJFM from January 1981 to June 2011, FM from January 1998 to June 2011, and JFP from January 1978 to June 2011, were reviewed and compared in terms of content, data size, research design, and statistical method.

RESULTS

Of 3,226 total original articles, KJFM published 1,549, FM 322, and JFP 1,355, respectively. Both JFP and KJFM mainly focused on biomedical topics (67.2% and 61.7%), while FM focused on education (55.9%). Most of the studies in three journals used the data size of between 100 to 300 cases. The most frequently used research design was cross-sectional, FM 66.8%, JFP 58.4%, and KJFM 72.4%, respectively. The statistical methods in KJFM were gradually diversified.

CONCLUSION

The quality of the original articles in KJFM has been improved over the years, but still has conducted based on the relatively weak research designs. Under the circumstances that the higher ranked SCI journals demand the prospective design and large size of data, and most researchers in Korea could not use the large scaled prospective data, we need to collaborate to accumulate the small sized data sets and try to make a registry. More refined statistical method such as a propensity score matching analysis for retrospective data could be an alternative.

摘要

背景

本研究从统计学角度将《韩国家庭医学杂志》(KJFM)与海外SCI期刊《家庭医学》(FM)和《家庭医疗实践杂志》(JFP)进行比较,为其未来发展提出了一个理想的方向。

方法

对1981年1月至2011年6月在KJFM上发表的所有原创文章、1998年1月至2011年6月在FM上发表的文章以及1978年1月至2011年6月在JFP上发表的文章进行了回顾,并在内容、数据规模、研究设计和统计方法方面进行了比较。

结果

在总共3226篇原创文章中,KJFM发表了1549篇,FM发表了322篇,JFP发表了1355篇。JFP和KJFM都主要关注生物医学主题(分别为67.2%和61.7%),而FM则关注教育(55.9%)。三种期刊中的大多数研究使用的病例数据规模在100至300例之间。最常用的研究设计是横断面研究,FM为66.8%,JFP为58.4%,KJFM为72.4%。KJFM中的统计方法逐渐多样化。

结论

多年来KJFM原创文章的质量有所提高,但仍基于相对薄弱的研究设计。在排名较高的SCI期刊要求前瞻性设计和大数据规模,而韩国大多数研究人员无法使用大规模前瞻性数据的情况下,我们需要合作积累小数据集并尝试建立登记册。对于回顾性数据,更精细的统计方法如倾向得分匹配分析可能是一种选择。

相似文献

1
Statistical trends in family medicine journals.家庭医学期刊的统计趋势。
Korean J Fam Med. 2012 Jan;33(1):9-16. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.2012.33.1.9. Epub 2012 Jan 31.
8
Meta-analysis: Problems with Russian Publications.荟萃分析:俄罗斯出版物存在的问题。
Int J Risk Saf Med. 2015;27 Suppl 1:S89-90. doi: 10.3233/JRS-150702.
9
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验