Related Articles

We describe the development of a computer-based representation of the medical school curriculum at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH). Over the past seven years the Medical School's Office of Academic Affairs has employed both relational database and text management software to design an integrated curriculum database system. Depending on the function selected--exploring the curriculum, searching through course outlines, retrieving elective descriptions, identifying teaching faculty, or searching for specific topics--either text management or relational database management routines are activated in a manner transparent to the user. Initial evaluation of the system has been positive but highlights the need for a more robust biomedical language for use as a controlled vocabulary to index content. Efforts are now underway, with support from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), to engage other interested schools in the U.S. and Canada in collaborating on further development of a system.

Background and aims

This survey was conducted to provide statistical data regarding publications in PubMed-indexed journals from Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Faculty of Dentistry.

Materials and methods

The database used for this study was PubMed. The search was conducted using key words including the names of the heads of the departments. Papers published between January 1, 2005 and April 31, 2012 were considered. The retrieved abstracts were reviewed and unrelated articles were excluded. Data were transferred to Microsoft Excel software for descriptive statistical analyses.

Results

A total of 158 papers matched the inclusion criteria, with the majority from the Department of Endodontics (49 articles). The highest proportion (48.3%) of papers was related to in vitro studies, followed by clinical trials, in vivo studies, and case reports. The number of publications showed a considerable increase over the studied period.

Conclusion

PubMed-indexed publications from different departments have increased steadily, suggesting that research has become an essential component in the evaluated institute.

Introduction

While oral health disparities exist in many ethnic groups in Hawaii, the challenge of developing research and intervention programs is hampered by the lack of a dental school and adequate state resources.

Objective

To use a collaboration model to establish a mentoring relationship with a research-intensive school of dentistry to reduce oral health disparities in Hawaii.

Methods

Collaborative interactions with the University of Hawaii School of Medicine (UH) and the University of North Carolina School of Dentistry at Chapel Hill (UNC) included bimonthly teleconferences, on-site planning and mentoring sessions, yearly conferences in Hawaii open to the community using UNC faculty, and on-site skills training sessions. The community was asked to participate in determining priorities for research through focus-group interactions. Two pilot investigations were also conducted.

Results

Both universities have been awarded grants to fund activities to support the combined intellectual and physical resources of multiple private, public, and community organizations to achieve the goal of improving the oral health status of the people of Hawaii. As a result of initial planning, two related grants have been submitted (one approved, one disapproved) to fund pilot studies on the oral health status of mothers and their babies in a rural community. These studies include both UH and UNC investigators.

Conclusions

Health disparities occur among diverse ethnic groups in Hawaii, and links between general health and oral health continue to emerge. In spite of obstacles to designing effective research and intervention programs in Hawaii, UH fostered a collaborative relationship with a premiere dental research institution to develop competence in clinical research, conduct pilot studies, and obtain extramural funding for comprehensive studies. Direct involvement of community representatives in the research process is integral to the success of such studies and will continue to serve as the foundation of our community-based participatory research. The network partners have accomplished their primary goal of developing culturally appropriate methods for assessing determinants of oral health, oral health-related quality of life, and health outcomes in Asians and Pacific Islanders.

The rivalry between the men’s basketball teams of Duke University and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC) is one of the most storied traditions in college sports. A subculture of students at each university form social bonds with fellow fans, develop expertise in college basketball rules, team statistics, and individual players, and self-identify as a member of a fan group. The present study capitalized on the high personal investment of these fans and the strong affective tenor of a Duke-UNC basketball game to examine the neural correlates of emotional memory retrieval for a complex sporting event. Male fans watched a competitive, archived game in a social setting. During a subsequent functional magnetic resonance imaging session, participants viewed video clips depicting individual plays of the game that ended with the ball being released towards the basket. For each play, participants recalled whether or not the shot went into the basket. Hemodynamic signal changes time-locked to correct memory decisions were analyzed as a function of emotional intensity and valence, according to the fan’s perspective. Results showed intensity-modulated retrieval activity in midline cortical structures, sensorimotor cortex, the striatum, and the medial temporal lobe, including the amygdala. Positively-valent memories specifically recruited processing in dorsal frontoparietal regions, and additional activity in the insula and medial temporal lobe for positively-valent shots recalled with high confidence. This novel paradigm reveals how brain regions implicated in emotion, memory retrieval, visuomotor imagery, and social cognition contribute to the recollection of specific plays in the mind of a sports fan.

On behalf of the Editorial Board, welcome to the new Italian Journal of Pediatrics, the official journal of the ISP/SIP (Italian Society of Pediatrics/Società Italiana di Pediatria), now publishing on BioMed Central's open access publishing platform. The move to BioMed Central will benefit authors by having their manuscripts published faster with rapid global dissemination. Readers will also benefit from free online access to the journal via the website and a range of full text archives.

Introduction

The aim of this survey was to illustrate statistical information about endodontic research published in pubmed index journals from the different universities of Iran.

Materials and Methods

A PubMed search was performed to retrieve the endodontic publications of authors affiliated to different universities of Iran. Abstracts were reviewed and unrelated articles were omitted. Citation of each article was obtained from Scopus and Google scholar databases. Data were extracted and transferred to Microsoft Excel to determine the related scintometric indicators.

Results

A total of 307 papers were found according to the defined criteria which shows considerable increase from 2 papers in 1992 to 54 in 2011. The majority of the papers (48%) were related to in vitro studies; this number was 33% for in vivo surveys. Meta-analysis, systematic review and clinical trial constituted 10% of all publications. The average number of authors for the overall publications was 3.84; majority of articles (20%) were written by three authors. The average number of citation from Google Scholar (8.93) was higher than those from Scopus (4.74). Most of the endodontic articles originated from the Mashad University of Medical Sciences (16%).

Conclusion

Endodontic publication from different universities in Iran has considerably increased, showing that research is becoming more important.

UK PubMed Central (UKPMC) is a full-text article database that extends the functionality of the original PubMed Central (PMC) repository. The UKPMC project was launched as the first ‘mirror’ site to PMC, which in analogy to the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration, aims to provide international preservation of the open and free-access biomedical literature. UKPMC (http://ukpmc.ac.uk) has undergone considerable development since its inception in 2007 and now includes both a UKPMC and PubMed search, as well as access to other records such as Agricola, Patents and recent biomedical theses. UKPMC also differs from PubMed/PMC in that the full text and abstract information can be searched in an integrated manner from one input box. Furthermore, UKPMC contains ‘Cited By’ information as an alternative way to navigate the literature and has incorporated text-mining approaches to semantically enrich content and integrate it with related database resources. Finally, UKPMC also offers added-value services (UKPMC+) that enable grantees to deposit manuscripts, link papers to grants, publish online portfolios and view citation information on their papers. Here we describe UKPMC and clarify the relationship between PMC and UKPMC, providing historical context and future directions, 10 years on from when PMC was first launched.

This editorial announces Algorithms for Molecular Biology, a new online open access journal published by BioMed Central. By launching the first open access journal on algorithmic bioinformatics, we provide a forum for fast publication of high-quality research articles in this rapidly evolving field. Our journal will publish thoroughly peer-reviewed papers without length limitations covering all aspects of algorithmic data analysis in computatioal biology. Publications in Algorithms for Molecular Biology are easy to find, highly visible and tracked by organisations such as PubMed. An established online submission system makes a fast reviewing procedure possible and enables us to publish accepted papers without delay. All articles published in our journal are permanently archived by PubMed Central and other scientific archives. We are looking forward to receiving your contributions.

Purpose: The purpose was to determine the impact of online journals on the citation patterns of medical faculty. This study looked at whether researchers were more likely to limit the resources they consulted and cited to those journals available online rather than those only in print.

Setting: Faculty publications from the college of medicine at a large urban university were examined for this study. The faculty publications from a regional medical college of the same university were also examined in the study. The number of online journals available for faculty, staff, and students at this institution has increased from an initial core of 15 online journals in 1998 to over 11,000 online journals in 2004.

Methodology: Searches by author affiliation were performed in the Web of Science to find all articles written by faculty members in the college of medicine at the selected institution. Searches were conducted for the following years: 1993, 1996, 1999, and 2002. Cited references from each faculty-authored article were recorded, and the corresponding cited journals were coded into four categories based on their availability at the institution in this study: print only, print and online, online only, and not owned. Results were analyzed using SPSS.

Results: The number of journals cited per year continued to increase from 1993 to 2002. The results did not indicate that researchers were more likely to cite online journals or were less likely to cite journals only in print. At the regional location where the number of print-only journals was minimal, use of the print-only journals did decrease in 2002, although not significantly.

Conclusion/Discussion: It is possible that electronic access to information (i.e., online databases) has had a positive impact on the number of articles faculty will cite. Results of this study suggest, at this point, that faculty are still accessing the print-only collection, at least for research purposes, and are therefore not sacrificing quality for convenience.

BACKGROUND

Physicians who complete combined residency training in internal medicine and pediatrics (med-peds) have a variety of career options after training. Little is known about career transitions among this group or among other broadly trained physicians.

METHODS

To better understand these career transitions, we conducted semistructured, in-depth, telephone interviews of graduates of the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill School of Medicine med-peds program who self-identified as having had a career transition since completing training. We qualitatively analyzed interview transcripts, to develop themes describing their career transitions.

RESULTS

Of 106 physicians who graduated during 1980–2007, 20 participated in interviews. Participants identified factors such as personality, work environment, lifestyle, family, and finances as important to career transition. Five other themes emerged from the data; the following 4 were confirmed by follow-up interviews: (1) experiences during residency were not sufficient to predict future job satisfaction; work after the completion of training was necessary to discover career preferences; (2) a major factor motivating job change was a perceived lack of control in the workplace; (3) participants described a sense of regret if they did not continue to see both adult and pediatric patients as a result of their career change; (4) participants appreciated their broad training and, regardless of career path, would choose to pursue combined residency training again.

LIMITATIONS

We included only a small number of graduates from a single institution. We did not interview graduates who had no career transitions after training.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many professional opportunities for physicians trained in med-peds. Four consistent themes surfaced during interviews about med-peds career transitions. Future research should explore how to use these themes to help physicians make career choices and employers retain physicians.

The 2009-2010 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Council of Faculties Faculty Affairs Committee reviewed published literature assessing the scope and outcomes of faculty development for tenure and promotion. Relevant articles were identified via a PubMed search, review of pharmacy education journals, and identification of position papers from major healthcare professions academic organizations. While programs intended to enhance faculty development were described by some healthcare professions, relatively little specific to pharmacy has been published and none of the healthcare professions have adequately evaluated the impact of various faculty-development programs on associated outcomes.

The paucity of published information strongly suggests a lack of outcomes-oriented faculty-development programs in colleges and schools of pharmacy. Substantial steps are required toward the development and scholarly evaluation of faculty-development programs. As these programs are developed and assessed, evaluations must encompass all faculty subgroups, including tenure- and nontenure track faculty members, volunteer faculty members, women, and underrepresented minorities. This paper proposes AACP, college and school, and department-level recommendations intended to ensure faculty success in achieving tenure and promotion.

Osteopathic Medicine and Primary Care, which enters its third year of operation in 2009 under the umbrella of BioMed Central, continues to promote and advance open access publishing through universal online access without charge, indexing in PubMed and archiving in PubMed Central, retention of authors' copyright, and expeditious peer review. Notable accomplishments during 2008 included a median lag time of four months from initial manuscript submission to publication, designation of eight articles as "highly accessed," and achievement of a balanced proportion of publications in our core topic areas of osteopathic medicine and primary care. In October 2008, Springer Science+Business Media, a major publisher of journals in science, technology, and medicine, acquired the BioMed Central Group. Our 2009 Editorial Board is presented herein, as well as a new mechanism for posting book reviews on the Osteopathic Medicine and Primary Care website. We continue to encourage manuscript submissions and reader comments on our articles. Waivers or discounts of article processing charges are available via several mechanisms for eligible authors who submit qualified manuscripts.

Purpose: Identify journal collection access and use factors.

Setting and Subjects: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Health Sciences Library patrons.

Methodology: Survey forms and user interactions were monitored once a week for twelve weeks during the fall 1997 semester. The project was based on a 1989 New Mexico State University study and used Kantor's Branching Analysis to measure responses.

Result: 80% of reported sought journal articles were found successfully. Along with journal usage data, the library obtained demographic and behavioral information.

Discussion and Conclusions: Journals are the library's most used resource and, even as more electronic journals are offered, print journals continue to make up the majority of the collection. Several factors highlighted the need to study journal availability. User groups indicated that finding journals was problematic, and internal statistics showed people requesting interlibrary loans for owned items. The study looked at success rates, time, and ease of finding journals. A variety of reasons contributed to not finding journals. While overall user reports indicated relatively high success rate and satisfaction, there were problems to be addressed. As the library proceeds in redesigning both the physical space and electronic presence, the collected data have provided valuable direction.

Reference/Citation:

Alla S, Sullivan SJ, Hale L, McCrory P. Self-report scales/checklists for the measurement of concussion symptoms: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43 (suppl 1):i3–i12.

Clinical Question:

Which self-report symptom scales or checklists are psychometrically sound for clinical use to assess sport-related concussion?

Data Sources:

Articles available in full text, published from the establishment of each database through December 2008, were identified from PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and AMED. Search terms included brain concussion, signs or symptoms, and athletic injuries, in combination with the AND Boolean operator, and were limited to studies published in English. The authors also hand searched the reference lists of retrieved articles. Additional searches of books, conference proceedings, theses, and Web sites of commercial scales were done to provide additional information about the psychometric properties and development for those scales when needed in articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

Study Selection:

Articles were included if they identified all the items on the scale and the article was either an original research report describing the use of scales in the evaluation of concussion symptoms or a review article that discussed the use or development of concussion symptom scales. Only articles published in English and available in full text were included.

Data Extraction:

From each study, the following information was extracted by the primary author using a standardized protocol: study design, publication year, participant characteristics, reliability of the scale, and details of the scale or checklist, including name, number of items, time of measurement, format, mode of report, data analysis, scoring, and psychometric properties. A quality assessment of included studies was done using 16 items from the Downs and Black checklist1 and assessed reporting, internal validity, and external validity.

Main Results:

The initial database search identified 421 articles. After 131 duplicate articles were removed, 290 articles remained and were added to 17 articles found during the hand search, for a total of 307 articles; of those, 295 were available in full text. Sixty articles met the inclusion criteria and were used in the systematic review. The quality of the included studies ranged from 9 to 15 points out of a maximum quality score of 17. The included articles were published between 1995 and 2008 and included a collective total of 5864 concussed athletes and 5032 nonconcussed controls, most of whom participated in American football. The majority of the studies were descriptive studies monitoring the resolution of concussive self-report symptoms compared with either a preseason baseline or healthy control group, with a smaller number of studies (n = 8) investigating the development of a scale.

The authors initially identified 20 scales that were used among the 60 included articles. Further review revealed that 14 scales were variations of the Pittsburgh Steelers postconcussion scale (the Post-Concussion Scale, Post-Concussion Scale: Revised, Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT, Post-Concussion Symptom Scale: Vienna, Graded Symptom Checklist [GSC], Head Injury Scale, McGill ACE Post-Concussion Symptoms Scale, and CogState Sport Symptom Checklist), narrowing down to 6 core scales, which the authors discussed further. The 6 core scales were the Pittsburgh Steelers Post-Concussion Scale (17 items), Post-Concussion Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (10 items), Concussion Resolution Index postconcussion questionnaire (15 items), Signs and Symptoms Checklist (34 items), Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) postconcussion symptom scale (25 items), and Concussion Symptom Inventory (12 items). Each of the 6 core scales includes symptoms associated with sport-related concussion; however, the number of items on each scale varied. A 7-point Likert scale was used on most scales, with a smaller number using a dichotomous (yes/no) classification.

Only 7 of the 20 scales had published psychometric properties, and only 1 scale, the Concussion Symptom Inventory, was empirically driven (Rasch analysis), with development of the scale occurring before its clinical use. Internal consistency (Cronbach α) was reported for the Post-Concussion Scale (.87), Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item (.88–.94), Head Injury Scale 9-item (.78), and Head Injury Scale 16-item (.84). Test-retest reliability has been reported only for the Post-Concussion Scale (Spearman r = .55) and the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item (Pearson r = .65). With respect to validity, the SCAT postconcussion scale has demonstrated face and content validity, the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item and Head Injury Scale 9-item have reported construct validity, and the Head Injury Scale 9-item and 16-item have published factorial validity.

Sensitivity and specificity have been reported only with the GSC (0.89 and 1.0, respectively) and the Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item when combined with the neurocognitive component of ImPACT (0.819 and 0.849, respectively). Meaningful change scores were reported for the Post-Concussion Scale (14.8 points), Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 22-item (6.8 points), and Post-Concussion Scale: ImPACT 21-item (standard error of the difference = 7.17; 80% confidence interval = 9.18).

Conclusions:

Numerous scales exist for measuring the number and severity of concussion-related symptoms, with most evolving from the neuropsychology literature pertaining to head-injured populations. However, very few of these were created in a systematic manner that follows scale development processes and have published psychometric properties. Clinicians need to understand these limitations when choosing and using a symptom scale for inclusion in a concussion assessment battery. Future authors should assess the underlying constructs and measurement properties of currently available scales and use the ever-increasing prospective data pools of concussed athlete information to develop scales following appropriate, systematic processes.

BioLit is a web server which provides metadata describing the semantic content of all open access, peer-reviewed articles which describe research from the major life sciences literature archive, PubMed Central. Specifically, these metadata include database identifiers and ontology terms found within the full text of the article. BioLit delivers these metadata in the form of XML-based article files and as a custom web-based article viewer that provides context-specific functionality to the metadata. This resource aims to integrate the traditional scientific publication directly into existing biological databases, thus obviating the need for a user to search in multiple locations for information relating to a specific item of interest, for example published experimental results associated with a particular biological database entry. As an example of a possible use of BioLit, we also present an instance of the Protein Data Bank fully integrated with BioLit data. We expect that the community of life scientists in general will be the primary end-users of the web-based viewer, while biocurators will make use of the metadata-containing XML files and the BioLit database of article data. BioLit is available at http://biolit.ucsd.edu.

Andreas Lundh and colleagues investigated the effect of publication of large industry-supported trials on citations and journal income, through reprint sales, in six general medical journals

Background

Transparency in reporting of conflict of interest is an increasingly important aspect of publication in medical journals. Publication of large industry-supported trials may generate many citations and journal income through reprint sales and thereby be a source of conflicts of interest for journals. We investigated industry-supported trials' influence on journal impact factors and revenue.

Methods and Findings

We sampled six major medical journals (Annals of Internal Medicine, Archives of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM]). For each journal, we identified randomised trials published in 1996–1997 and 2005–2006 using PubMed, and categorized the type of financial support. Using Web of Science, we investigated citations of industry-supported trials and the influence on journal impact factors over a ten-year period. We contacted journal editors and retrieved tax information on income from industry sources. The proportion of trials with sole industry support varied between journals, from 7% in BMJ to 32% in NEJM in 2005–2006. Industry-supported trials were more frequently cited than trials with other types of support, and omitting them from the impact factor calculation decreased journal impact factors. The decrease varied considerably between journals, with 1% for BMJ to 15% for NEJM in 2007. For the two journals disclosing data, income from the sales of reprints contributed to 3% and 41% of the total income for BMJ and The Lancet in 2005–2006.

Conclusions

Publication of industry-supported trials was associated with an increase in journal impact factors. Sales of reprints may provide a substantial income. We suggest that journals disclose financial information in the same way that they require them from their authors, so that readers can assess the potential effect of different types of papers on journals' revenue and impact.

Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Editors' Summary

Background

Medical journals publish many different types of papers that inform doctors about the latest research advances and the latest treatments for their patients. They publish articles that describe laboratory-based research into the causes of diseases and the identification of potential new drugs. They publish the results of early clinical trials in which a few patients are given a potential new drug to check its safety. Finally and most importantly, they publish the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs are studies in which large numbers of patients are randomly allocated to different treatments without the patient or the clinician knowing the allocation and the efficacy of the various treatments compared. RCTs are best way of determining whether a new drug is effective and have to be completed before a drug can be marketed. Because RCTs are very expensive, they are often supported by drug companies. That is, drug companies provide grants or drugs for the trial or assist with data analysis and/or article preparation.

Why Was This Study Done?

Whenever a medical journal publishes an article, the article's authors have to declare any conflicts of interest such as financial gain from the paper's publication. Conflict of interest statements help readers assess papers—an author who owns the patent for a drug, for example, might put an unduly positive spin on his/her results. The experts who review papers for journals before publication provide similar conflict of interest statements. But what about the journal editors who ultimately decide which papers get published? The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which produces medical publishing guidelines, states that: “Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts must have no personal, professional, or financial involvement in any of the issues that they might judge.” However, the publication of industry-supported RCTs might create “indirect” conflicts of interest for journals by boosting the journal's impact factor (a measure of a journal's importance based on how often its articles are cited) and its income through the sale of reprints to drug companies. In this study, the researchers investigate whether the publication of industry-supported RCTs influences the impact factors and finances of six major medical journals.

What Did the Researchers Do and Find?

The researchers determined which RCTs published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the British Medical Journal (BMJ), The Lancet, and three other major medical journals in 1996–1997 and 2005–2006 were supported wholly, partly, or not at all by industry. They then used the online academic citation index Web of Science to calculate an approximate impact factor for each journal for 1998 and 2007 and calculated the effect of the published RCTs on the impact factor. The proportion of RCTs with sole industry support varied between journals. Thus, 32% of the RCTs published in the NEJM during both two-year periods had industry support whereas only 7% of the RCTs published in the BMJ in 2005–2006 had industry support. Industry-supported trials were more frequently cited than RCTs with other types of support and omitting industry-supported RCTs from impact factor calculations decreased all the approximate journal impact factors. For example, omitting all RCTs with industry or mixed support decreased the 2007 BMJ and NEJM impact factors by 1% and 15%, respectively. Finally, the researchers asked each journal's editor about their journal's income from industry sources. For the BMJ and The Lancet, the only journals that provided this information, income from reprint sales was 3% and 41%, respectively, of total income in 2005–2006.

What Do These Findings Mean?

These findings show that the publication of industry-supported RCTs was associated with an increase in the approximate impact factors of these six major medical journals. Because these journals publish numerous RCTs, this result may not be generalizable to other journals. These findings also indicate that income from reprint sales can be a substantial proportion of a journal's total income. Importantly, these findings do not imply that the decisions of editors are affected by the possibility that the publication of an industry-supported trial might improve their journal's impact factor or income. Nevertheless, the researchers suggest, journals should live up to the same principles related to conflicts of interest as those that they require from their authors and should routinely disclose information on the source and amount of income that they receive.

Additional Information

Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000354.

This study is further discussed in a PLoS Medicine Perspective by Harvey Marcovitch

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors provides information about the publication of medical research, including conflicts of interest

The World Association of Medical Editors also provides information on conflicts of interest in medical journals

Information about impact factors is provided by Thomson Reuters, a provider of intelligent information for businesses and professionals; Thomson Reuters also runs Web of Science

Welcome to CytoJournal! We would like to introduce you to your journal, one that is run by and for the scientific cytopathology community with incontestable benefits of Open Access, and support from Cytopathology Foundation, Inc. CytoJournal is a peer-reviewed, PubMed indexed, online journal, publishing research in the field of cytopathology and related areas, with world wide free access. Authors submitting to CytoJournal retain the copyright to their hard earned work.

Background:

Thesis is an important part of specialisation and doctorate education and requires intense work. The aim of this study was to investigate the publication rates of Turkish Public Health Doctorate Theses (PHDT) and Public Health Specialization (PHST) theses in international and Turkish national peer-review journals and to analyze the distribution of research areas.

Methods:

List of all theses upto 30 September 2009 were retrieved from theses database of the Council of Higher Education of the Republic of Turkey. The publication rates of these theses were found by searching PubMed, Science Citation Index-Expanded, Turkish Academic Network and Information Center (ULAKBIM) Turkish Medical Database, and Turkish Medline databases for the names of thesis author and mentor. The theses which were published in journals indexed either in PubMed or SCI-E were considered as international publications.

Results:

Our search yielded a total of 538 theses (243 PHDT, 295 PHST). It was found that the overall publication rate in Turkish national journals was 18%. The overall publication rate in international journals was 11.9%. Overall the most common research area was occupational health.

Conclusion:

Publication rates of Turkish PHDT and PHST are low. A better understanding of factors affecting this publication rate is important for public health issues where national data is vital for better intervention programs and develop better public health policies.

Objectives:

This study was designed to document the state of open access (OA) in the biomedical field in 2005.

Methods:

PubMed was used to collect bibliographic data on target articles published in 2005. PubMed, Google Scholar, Google, and OAIster were then used to establish the availability of free full text online for these publications. Articles were analyzed by type of OA, country, type of article, impact factor, publisher, and publishing model to provide insight into the current state of OA.

Results:

Twenty-seven percent of all the articles were accessible as OA articles. More than 70% of the OA articles were provided through journal websites. Mid-rank commercial publishers often provided OA articles in OA journals, while society publishers tended to provide OA articles in the context of a traditional subscription model. The rate of OA articles available from the websites of individual authors or in institutional repositories was quite low.

Discussion/Conclusions:

In 2005, OA in the biomedical field was achieved under an umbrella of existing scholarly communication systems. Typically, OA articles were published as part of subscription journals published by scholarly societies. OA journals published by BioMed Central contributed to a small portion of all OA articles.

Journal of Neuroinflammation is an Open Access, online journal published by BioMed Central. Open Access publishing provides instant and universal availability of published work to any potential reader, worldwide, completely free of subscriptions, passwords, and charges. Further, authors retain copyright for their work, facilitating its dissemination. Open Access publishing is made possible by article-processing charges assessed "on the front end" to authors, their institutions, or their funding agencies. Beginning November 1, 2004, the Journal of Neuroinflammation will introduce article-processing charges of around US$525 for accepted articles. This charge will be waived for authors from institutions that are BioMed Central members, and in additional cases for reasons of genuine financial hardship. These article-processing charges pay for an electronic submission process that facilitates efficient and thorough peer review, for publication costs involved in providing the article freely and universally accessible in various formats online, and for the processes required for the article's inclusion in PubMed and its archiving in PubMed Central, e-Depot, Potsdam and INIST. There is no remuneration of any kind provided to the Editors-in-Chief, to any members of the Editorial Board, or to peer reviewers; all of whose work is entirely voluntary. Our article-processing charge is less than charges frequently levied by traditional journals: the Journal of Neuroinflammation does not levy any additional page or color charges on top of this fee, and there are no reprint costs as publication-quality pdf files are provided, free, for distribution in lieu of reprints. Our article-processing charge will enable full, immediate, and continued Open Access for all work published in Journal of Neuroinflammation. The benefits from such Open Access will accrue to readers, through unrestricted access; to authors, through the widest possible dissemination of their work; and to science and society in general, through facilitation of information availability and scientific advancement.

Background

The Internet has recently made possible the free global availability of scientific journal articles. Open Access (OA) can occur either via OA scientific journals, or via authors posting manuscripts of articles published in subscription journals in open web repositories. So far there have been few systematic studies showing how big the extent of OA is, in particular studies covering all fields of science.

Methodology/Principal Findings

The proportion of peer reviewed scholarly journal articles, which are available openly in full text on the web, was studied using a random sample of 1837 titles and a web search engine. Of articles published in 2008, 8,5% were freely available at the publishers' sites. For an additional 11,9% free manuscript versions could be found using search engines, making the overall OA percentage 20,4%. Chemistry (13%) had the lowest overall share of OA, Earth Sciences (33%) the highest. In medicine, biochemistry and chemistry publishing in OA journals was more common. In all other fields author-posted manuscript copies dominated the picture.

Conclusions/Significance

The results show that OA already has a significant positive impact on the availability of the scientific journal literature and that there are big differences between scientific disciplines in the uptake. Due to the lack of awareness of OA-publishing among scientists in most fields outside physics, the results should be of general interest to all scholars. The results should also interest academic publishers, who need to take into account OA in their business strategies and copyright policies, as well as research funders, who like the NIH are starting to require OA availability of results from research projects they fund. The method and search tools developed also offer a good basis for more in-depth studies as well as longitudinal studies.

Purpose

To document the number of journal publications attributed to the academic faculty of Australian chiropractic tertiary institutions. To provide a discussion of the significance of this output and to relate this to the difficulty the profession appears to be experiencing in the uptake of evidence based healthcare outcomes and cultures.

Methods

The departmental websites for the three Australian chiropractic tertiary institutions were accessed and a list of academic faculty compiled. It was noted whether each academic held a chiropractic qualification or research Doctoral (not professional) degree qualification A review of the literature was conducted using the names of the academics and cross-referencing to publications listed independently in the PubMed and Index to Chiropractic Literature (ICL) databases (from inception to February 27 2006). Publications were excluded that were duplicates, corrected reprints, conference abstracts/proceedings, books, monographs, letters to the editor/comments or editorials. Using this information an annual and recent publication rate was constructed.

Results

For the 41 academics there was a total of 155 PubMed listed publications (mean 3.8, annual rate per academic 0.31) and 415 ICL listed publications (mean 10.1, annual rate 0.62). Over the last five years there have been 50 PubMed listed publications (mean 1.2, annual rate 0.24) and 97 ICL listed publications (mean 2.4, annual rate 0.47). Chiropractor academics (n = 31) had 29 PubMed listed publications (mean 2.5, annual rate 0.27) and 265 ICL listed publications (mean 8.5, annual rate 0.57). Academics with a doctoral degree (n = 13) had 134 PubMed listed publications (mean 10.3, annual rate 0.70) and 311 ICL listed publications (mean 23.9, annual rate 1.44). Academics without a Doctoral degree (n = 28) had 21 PubMed listed publications (mean 0.8, annual rate 0.13) and 104 ICL listed publications (mean 3.7, annual rate 0.24).

Conclusion

While several academics have compiled an impressive list of publications, overall there is a significant paucity of published research authored by the majority of academics, with a trend for a falling recent publication rate and not having a doctoral degree being a risk factor for poor publication productivity. It is suggested that there is an urgent necessity to facilitate the acquisition of research skills in academic staff particularly in research methods and publication skills. Only when undergraduate students are exposed to an institutional environment conducive to and fostering research will concepts of evidence based healthcare really be appreciated and implemented by the profession.

Duplicate publication is considered unethical. It has several negative impacts. To estimate the frequency and characteristics of duplicate publications in Korean medical journals, we reviewed some portion of Korean journal articles. Among 9,030 articles that are original articles indexed in KoreaMed from January to December 2004, 455 articles (5%) were chosen by random sampling. PubMed, Google scholar, KMbase, and KoreaMed were searched by two librarians. Three authors reviewed titles, abstracts, and full text of index articles and suspected articles independently. Point of disagreement were reconciled by discussion. Criteria for a duplicate publication defined by editors of cardiothoracic journals and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors were used. A total of 455 articles were evaluated, of which 27 (5.93%) index articles were identified with 29 duplicate articles. Among 27 index articles, 1 was quadruple publication and 26 were double publications. Of 29 duplicated articles, 19 were classified as copy, 4 as fragmentation, and 6 as disaggregation. The proportion of duplicate publications in Korean medical journals appears to be higher than expected. Education on publication ethics to researchers is needed.

Citations are used ubiquitously in biomedical full-text articles and play an important role for representing both the rhetorical structure and the semantic content of the articles. As a result, text mining systems will significantly benefit from a tool that automatically extracts the content of a citation. In this study, we applied the supervised machine-learning algorithms Conditional Random Fields (CRFs) to automatically parse a citation into its fields (e.g., Author, Title, Journal, and Year). With a subset of html format open-access PubMed Central articles, we report an overall 97.95% F1-score. The citation parser can be accessed at: http://www.cs.uwm.edu/~qing/projects/cithit/index.html.

Purpose: The research sought to determine the impact of online journals on the use of print journals and interlibrary loan (ILL).

Setting: The Library of the Health Sciences–Peoria is a regional site of the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) Library with a print journal collection of approximately 400 titles. Since 1999, UIC site licenses have given students and faculty affiliated with UIC–Peoria access to more than 4,000 online full-text journal titles through the Internet.

Methodology: The Library of the Health Sciences–Peoria has conducted a journal-use study over an extended period of time. The information collected from this study was used to assess the impact of 104 online journals, added to the collection in January 1999, on the use of print journals.

Results: Results of the statistical analysis showed print journal usage decreased significantly since the introduction of online journals (F(1,147) = 12.10, P < 0.001). This decrease occurred regardless of whether a journal was available only in print or both online and in print. Interlibrary loan requests have also significantly decreased since the introduction of online journals (F(2,30) = 4.46, P < 0.02).

Conclusions: The decrease in use of the print collection suggests that many patrons prefer to access journals online. The negative impact the online journals have had on the use of the journal titles available only in print suggests users may be compromising quality for convenience when selecting journal articles. Possible implications for collection development are discussed.