Rochon P A, Gurwitz J H, Cheung C M, Hayes J A, Chalmers T C
Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, University of Toronto, North York, Ontario, Canada.
JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):108-13.
To determine the relationship between the quality of articles and whether they were published in a supplement or in the parent journal.
All randomized control trials of drug therapies in adults published in the American Journal of Cardiology, the American Journal of Medicine and the American Heart Journal from January 1990 and obtained in November 1992 by means of a MEDLINE search. A total of 318 abstracts appeared to meet our inclusion criteria, and these articles were obtained and reviewed in further detail. An additional 76 were excluded.
Three reviewers who were "blinded" and thus unaware of supplement status independently assessed the quality of each of the remaining 242 articles according to a standard quality scoring system.
Overall, 67 (27.7%) of the articles were published in journal supplements. Article quality scores ranged from 4.2% to 87.5%, with a mean (+/- SD) score of 37.2% +/- 13.1%. Quality scores were lower in articles published in journal supplements than in those published in the parent journal (t[240] = 2.61, P = .01). The mean quality score for articles published in journal supplements was 33.6% +/- 12.8% compared with a score of 38.5% +/- 13.1% for articles published in the parent journal. Supplement articles included in their final analysis a smaller proportion of the patients initially randomized (t[75] = 2.8, P = .007).
Our findings suggest that randomized control trials published in journal supplements are generally of inferior quality compared with articles published in the parent journal. The review process surrounding the publication of journal supplements should be consistent with that of the parent journal.
确定文章质量与文章是发表在增刊还是母刊之间的关系。
1990年1月至1992年11月发表于《美国心脏病学杂志》《美国医学杂志》和《美国心脏杂志》上的所有关于成人药物治疗的随机对照试验，通过医学文献数据库检索获得。共有318篇摘要似乎符合纳入标准，对这些文章进行获取并进一步详细审查。另外排除了76篇。
三位不知情（即不知道文章是否发表在增刊）的评审员根据标准质量评分系统独立评估其余242篇文章中每一篇的质量。
总体而言，67篇（27.7%）文章发表在期刊增刊上。文章质量得分范围为4.2%至87.5%，平均（±标准差）得分为37.2%±13.1%。发表在期刊增刊上的文章质量得分低于发表在母刊上的文章（t[240]=2.61，P = 0.01）。发表在期刊增刊上的文章平均质量得分为33.6%±12.8%，而发表在母刊上的文章得分为38.5%±13.1%。增刊文章在最终分析中纳入的最初随机分组患者比例较小（t[75]=2.8，P = 0.007）。
我们的研究结果表明，与发表在母刊上的文章相比，发表在期刊增刊上的随机对照试验质量普遍较差。围绕期刊增刊发表的评审过程应与母刊一致。
