Accuracy of references in five biomedical informatics journals.
(25/121)
OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and type of errors in biomedical informatics journal article references. METHODS: References in articles from the first 2004 issues of five biomedical informatics journals, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, Journal of Biomedical Informatics, International Journal of Medical Informatics, Methods of Information in Medicine, and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine were compared with MEDLINE for journal, authors, title, year, volume, and page number accuracy. If discrepancies were identified, the reference was compared with the original publication. Two reviewers independently evaluated each reference. RESULTS: The five journal issues contained 37 articles. Among the 656 eligible references, 225 (34.3%) included at least one error. Among the 225 references, 311 errors were identified. One or more errors were found in the bibliography of 31 (84%) of the 37 articles. The reference error rates by journal ranged from 22.1% to 40.7%. Most errors (39.0%) occurred in the author element, followed by the journal (31.2%), title (17.7%), page (7.4%), year (3.5%), and volume (1.3%) information. CONCLUSION: The study identified a considerable error rate in the references of five biomedical informatics journals. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references and should more carefully check them, possibly using informatics-based assistance. (+info)
References in Indian Pediatrics: authors need to be accurate.
(26/121)
To determine the accuracy of references published in Indian Pediatrics, we reviewed the reference lists appended to the original articles published in Indian Pediatrics during the year 2002 (volume 39) for citation and quotation accuracy. A total of 176 references out of 322 cited in 17 original articles could be retrieved from available resources. Errors of citation were found in 69 (39.27 percent) references while errors of quotation were found in 15 (8.6 percent) references. The most common errors were those in the name of authors and title of the article. Contributors should make serious efforts to check the accuracy of the references cited in their manuscripts. (+info)
Trust, but verify. The accuracy of references in four anesthesia journals.
(27/121)
To determine the accuracy of bibliographic citation in the anesthesia literature, we reviewed all 1988 volumes of ANESTHESIOLOGY, Anesthesia and Analgesia, British Journal of Anaesthesia, and Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia and sequentially numbered all references appearing in that year (n = 22,748). One hundred references from each of the four journals were randomly selected. After citations to nonjournal articles (i.e., books or book chapters) were excluded, the remaining 348 citations were analyzed in detail. Six standard bibliographic elements--authors' names, article title, journal title, volume number, page numbers, and year--were examined in each selected reference. Primary sources were reviewed, unless our institution did not own the source or could not obtain it through interlibrary loan, in which case standard indexes, abstracting services, and computerized databases were consulted. Each element was checked for accuracy, and references were classified as either correct or incorrect. A reference was correct if each element of the citation was identical to its source. Of the examined references, more than half (50.3%) contained an error in at least one element. The elements most likely to be inaccurate were, in descending order, article title, author, page numbers, journal title, volume number, and year. No significant differences (P = 0.283) existed in the error rates of the four journals; the percentage of citations containing at least one error ranged from 44% (Anesthesia and Analgesia) to 56% (British Journal of Anaesthesia). The citation error rate of anesthesia journals is similar to that reported in other specialties, where error rates ranging from 38% to 54% have been documented. (+info)
Mapping the general literature of American nursing.
(28/121)
OBJECTIVES: As part of a project to map the literature of nursing, sponsored by the Nursing and Allied Health Resources Section of the Medical Library Association, this study identifies core journals cited by general or "popular" US nursing journals and the indexing services that cover the cited journals. METHODS: Three journals were selected for analysis: American Journal of Nursing, Nursing 96-98, and RN. The source journals were subjected to a citation analysis of articles from 1996 to 1998, followed by an analysis of database access to the most frequently cited journal titles. RESULTS: Cited formats included journals (63.7%), books (26.6%), government documents (3.0%), Internet (0.5%), and miscellaneous (6.2%). Cited references were relatively current; most (86.6%) were published in the current decade. One-third of the citations were found in a core of 24 journal titles; one-third were dispersed among a middle zone of 94 titles; and the remaining third were scattered in a larger zone of 694 titles. Indexing coverage for the core titles was most comprehensive in PubMed/MEDLINE, followed by CINAHL and Science Citation Index. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the popular (not scholarly) nature of these titles. While not a good source for original research, they fulfill a key role of disseminating nursing knowledge with their relevantly current citations to a broad variety of sources. (+info)
How accurate are the references in Emergency Medical Journal?
(29/121)
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of references in Emergency Medicine Journal during 2003. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All references cited in Emergency Medicine Journal during 2003 were examined carefully, and the accuracy of the citations was checked against reliable electronic and manual resources. References were categorised as correct or incorrect. The errors were classified as minor if the integrity of the reference was not greatly compromised and major if the error severely detracted from the quality of the reference. RESULTS: Overall, errors were found in 19% of all citations checked (n = 2561), and in 8% the errors were major and markedly detracted from the quality of the reference. CONCLUSIONS: Citation errors reflect badly on authors and the publishing journal and may reflect underlying flaws in other areas of the research published. It is hoped that identification of this problem will lead to attempts to improve the accuracy of reference citation in the emergency medicine literature and to an improvement in the credibility of research in our specialty. (+info)
Development of a questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF-QoL).
(30/121)
BACKGROUND: The Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) assessment in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients has traditionally been carried out in a poorly standardised fashion, or via the use of non disease-specific HRQoL questionnaires. The development of a HRQoL questionnaire with a good measuring performance will allow for a standardised assessment of the impact of this disease on the patient's daily living. METHODS: A bibliography review was conducted to identify the most relevant domains of daily living in AF patients. Subsequently, a focus group was created with the aid of cardiologists, and 17 patients were interviewed to identify the most-affected HRQoL domains. A qualitative analysis of the interview answers was performed, which was used to develop a pilot questionnaire administered to a 112-patient sample. Based on patient responses, an analysis was carried out following the statistical procedures defined by the Classical Test Theory (CTT) and the Item Response Theory (IRT). Reliablility was assessed via Cronbach's coefficient alpha and item-total score correlations. A factorial analysis was performed to determine the number of domains. For each domain, a Rasch analysis was carried out, in order to reduce and stand hierarchically the questionnaire items. RESULTS: By way of the bibliography review and the expert focus group, 10 domains were identified. The patient interviews allowed for the identification of 286 items that later were downsized to 40 items. The resultant preliminary questionnaire was administered to a 112-patient sample (pilot study). The Rasch analysis led to the definition of two domains, comprising 7 and 11 items respectively, which corresponded to the psychological and physical domains (18 items total), thereby giving rise to the initial AF-QoL-18 questionnaire. Cronbach's coefficient alpha was acceptable (0.91). CONCLUSION: An initial HRQoL questionnaire, AFQoL-18, has been developed to assess HRQoL in AF patients. (+info)
A student of history: perspectives on the contributions of Estelle Brodman.
(31/121)