J Med Libr Assoc. 2023 Jul 10;111(3):665-676. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2023.1631.
The Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) list, produced by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), has been used by clinicians and librarians for half a century for two main purposes: narrowing a literature search to clinically useful journals and identifying high priority titles for library collections. After documentation of low usage of the existing CCJ, a review was undertaken to assess current validity, followed by an update to current clinical needs.
As the subject coverage of the 50-year-old list had never been evaluated, the CCJ committee began its innovative step-wise approach by analyzing the existing subject scope. To determine whether clinical subjects had changed over the last half-century, the committee collected data on journal usage in hospitals and medical facilities, adding journal usage from Morning Report blogs recording the journal article citations used by physicians and residents in response to clinical questions. Patient-driven high-frequency diagnoses and subjects added contextual data by depicting the clinical environment.
The analysis identified a total of 80 subjects and selected 241 journals for the updated Clinical Journals filter, based on actual clinical utility of each journal.
These data-driven methods created a different framework for evaluating the structure and content of this filter. It is the real-world evidence needed to highlight CCJ clinical impact and push clinically useful journals to first page results. Since the new process resulted in a new product, the name warrants a change from Core Clinical Journals (CCJ) to Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). Therefore, the redesigned NLM Core Clinical Journals/AIM set from this point forward will be referred to as Clinically Useful Journals (CUJ). The evidence-based process used to reframe evaluation of the clinical impact and utility of biomedical journals is documented in this article.
美国国家医学图书馆(NLM)制作的核心临床期刊(CCJ)列表,半个世纪以来一直被临床医生和图书管理员用于两个主要目的:缩小文献搜索范围,使其仅限于有临床价值的期刊,并确定图书馆馆藏的高优先级期刊。在记录到现有 CCJ 的使用率较低后,进行了一次审查,以评估其当前的有效性,然后根据当前的临床需求进行更新。
由于该 50 年历史的列表的主题涵盖范围从未进行过评估,因此 CCJ 委员会开始采用创新的逐步方法,首先分析现有主题范围。为了确定过去半个世纪临床主题是否发生了变化,委员会收集了医院和医疗机构的期刊使用数据,并添加了记录医生和住院医师在回答临床问题时使用的期刊文章引用的晨间报告博客中的期刊使用数据。患者驱动的高频诊断和主题增加了上下文数据,描绘了临床环境。
分析共确定了 80 个主题,并根据每个期刊的实际临床实用性,为更新的临床期刊筛选器选择了 241 种期刊。
这些基于数据的方法为评估该筛选器的结构和内容创建了一个不同的框架。这是突出 CCJ 临床影响并将有临床用途的期刊推至第一页结果所需的真实世界证据。由于新流程产生了新产品,因此该名称需要从“核心临床期刊(CCJ)”更改为“临床有用期刊(CUJ)”。因此,从现在开始,重新设计的 NLM 核心临床期刊/AIM 集将被称为临床有用期刊(CUJ)。本文记录了用于重新构建评估生物医学期刊临床影响和实用性的循证流程。