Funk M E, Reid C A
Leon S. McGoogan Library of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68105-1065.
Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1988 Jan;76(1):14-21.
Librarians have often questioned the usefulness of the proceedings of biomedical meetings. Because articles in proceedings are similar to journal articles, the usefulness of the two were compared. Thirty-two monographic cardiovascular proceedings were compared to thirty-five cardiovascular journals, all published in 1978. Citations to the articles in these samples were counted for the years 1978, 1979, and 1980, and an impact factor was calculated for each proceedings and journal. The mean impact factor of the journals (3.86) was significantly higher than the mean impact factor of the proceedings (0.98, p less than .001). A short delay in publication of a proceedings was not associated with a higher impact factor. There were no differences in impact factors between U.S. and non-U.S. meeting sites. Proceedings of "hot" topics were not associated with higher impact factors, and multiple-index coverage of proceedings was only weakly associated (tau = 0.27) with higher impact factors. While camera-ready proceedings had a significantly higher mean impact factor (2.37) than typeset proceedings (0.66, p less than .02), selection based on printing method is not recommended. It is concluded that most libraries can safely forego the purchase of monographic proceedings. If a library needs monographic proceedings, it should purchase only those recommended by subject specialists.
图书馆员常常质疑生物医学会议论文集的实用性。由于论文集中的文章与期刊文章相似，因此对两者的实用性进行了比较。将32本专题心血管会议论文集与35种心血管期刊进行了比较，这些期刊和论文集均于1978年出版。统计了1978年、1979年和1980年这些样本中文章的被引次数，并为每本论文集和期刊计算了影响因子。期刊的平均影响因子（3.86）显著高于论文集的平均影响因子（0.98，p<0.001）。论文集出版稍有延迟与较高的影响因子并无关联。美国和非美国会议地点的影响因子没有差异。“热门”主题的论文集与较高的影响因子无关，论文集的多索引覆盖与较高的影响因子仅有微弱关联（tau = 0.27）。虽然预印本论文集的平均影响因子（2.37）显著高于排版论文集（0.66，p<0.02），但不建议根据印刷方法进行选择。得出的结论是，大多数图书馆可以放心地放弃购买专题论文集。如果图书馆需要专题论文集，应只购买学科专家推荐的那些。
