Making sense of the electronic resource marketplace: trends in health-related electronic resources.
(9/1217)
Changes in the practice of medicine and technological developments offer librarians unprecedented opportunities to select and organize electronic resources, use the Web to deliver content throughout the organization, and improve knowledge at the point of need. The confusing array of available products, access routes, and pricing plans makes it difficult to anticipate the needs of users, identify the top resources, budget effectively, make sound collection management decisions, and organize the resources effectively and seamlessly. The electronic resource marketplace requires much vigilance, considerable patience, and continuous evaluation. There are several strategies that librarians can employ to stay ahead of the electronic resource curve, including taking advantage of free trials from publishers; marketing free trials and involving users in evaluating new products; watching and testing products marketed to the clientele; agreeing to beta test new products and services; working with aggregators or republishers; joining vendor advisory boards; benchmarking institutional resources against five to eight competitors; and forming or joining a consortium for group negotiating and purchasing. This article provides a brief snapshot of leading biomedical resources; showcases several libraries that have excelled in identifying, acquiring, and organizing electronic resources; and discusses strategies and trends of potential interest to biomedical librarians, especially those working in hospital settings. (+info)
Medical faculty use of the journal literature, publishing productivity and the size of health sciences library journal collections.
(10/1217)
OBJECTIVES: This 1990-1991 study explored the relationship between the size of health sciences library journal collections and the number of different journals cited by medical school faculty in departments of biochemistry and medicine. METHODS: Two regression equations, including variables associated with a national stratified sample of 622 faculty who published articles during those two years, were used to explore factors correlated with variations in faculty use of the journal literature and faculty publishing productivity. RESULTS: Results suggest that, after controlling for other variables in the models, neither the number of different journals those faculty cited, nor the number of articles they published, had statistically significant correlations with the number of journals in the health sciences library collection. CONCLUSION: The traditional view that the size of an academic health sciences library's journal collection is a good measure of how well that library is positioned to support faculty research may not be entirely accurate. (+info)
The fate of neuroradiologic abstracts presented at national meetings in 1993: rate of subsequent publication in peer-reviewed, indexed journals.
(11/1217)
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Abstract presentations are a valuable means of rapidly conveying new information; however, abstracts that fail to eventually become published are of little use to the general medical community. Our goals were to determine the publication rate of neuroradiologic papers originally presented at national meetings in 1993 and to assess publication rate as a function of neuroradiologic subspecialty and study design. METHODS: Proceedings from the 1993 ASNR and RSNA meetings were reviewed. A MEDLINE search encompassing 1993-1997 was performed cross-referencing lead author and at least one text word based on the abstract title. All ASNR and RSNA neuroradiologic abstracts were included. Study type, subspecialty classification, and sample size were tabulated. Publication rate, based on study design and neuroradiologic subspecialty, was compared with overall publication rate. Median duration from meeting presentation to publication was calculated, and the journals of publication were noted. RESULTS: Thirty-seven percent of ASNR abstracts and 33% of RSNA neuroradiologic abstracts were published as articles in indexed medical journals. Publication rates among neuroradiologic subspecialty types were not significantly different. Prospective studies presented at the ASNR were published at a higher rate than were retrospective studies. There was no difference between the publication rate of experimental versus clinical studies. Neuroradiologic abstracts were published less frequently than were abstracts within other medical specialties. Median time between abstract presentation and publication was 15 months. CONCLUSION: Approximately one third of neuroradiologic abstracts presented at national meetings in 1993 were published in indexed journals. This rate is lower than that of abstracts from medical specialties other than radiology. (+info)
Going digital: image preparation for biomedical publishing.
(12/1217)
Authors are more often being held responsible for readying their own data figures for digital publication by scanning them at the proper resolution and preparing them for presentation in both print and on-line journals. In this manner, the visuals can be printed at the highest quality the publisher can provide and be ready for rapid electronic distribution on the Internet. Therefore, authors must become knowledgeable in the visual preparation process in order to generate electronic images that will be as true a representation of the original image as possible. Perfecting this procedure can be a learning experience and often requires some experimentation. When accomplished, the author will have more control of exactly how the images will look before they are published. In addition to the scan resolution, the type of digital scanner and software applications used are very important, and instruction manuals should be followed closely so as to understand the full potential of the digitizing equipment. Anat Rec (New Anat): 257:128-136, 1999. (+info)
Dear author--advice from a retiring editor.
(13/1217)
This commentary, detailing the handling of a manuscript by the editor and guiding authors on preparing manuscripts and responding to reviews, provides parting advice to authors from a retiring editor. A close reading of this commentary will give some insight into the editorial process at the American Journal of Epidemiology through the observations of one of its editors. (+info)
Productivity of SCI Korean medical papers: 1996-1997.
(14/1217)
In order to investigate the extent and growth of SCI publication activity of Korean medicine, DIALOG's SCISearch database was searched and the number of SCI Korean medical papers in each medical specialty was measured by publication year and by document type for 1996 and 1997. The percentage contribution of Korean medical papers to SCI database and the SCI publication productivity ratio were analyzed for each of 57 medical specialties. The data obtained in this study was compared with the data representing the 1980s and the data for the first half of the 1990s. The absolute productivity of SCI Korean medical papers as measured by the number of SCI Korean papers has increased about ten times from 306 papers in 1990 to 3,261 papers in 1997. More than 15% of SCI Korean publication output has resulted from six Korean medical journals indexed in SCI from 1995. The relative productivity of SCI Korean medical papers as measured by the percentage contribution from Korea to SCI and by its corresponding productivity ratio is not as impressive as the absolute productivity and its growth rate. It has increased three times from 0.245% to 0.642% during the same period. The relative productivity of SCI Korean medical publication output is not as great as the SCI Korean publication output of all sciences combined (1.02%). (+info)
Health related research in Bangladesh: MEDLINE based analysis.
(15/1217)
BACKGROUND: Health research is not a priority sector in Bangladesh. By and large, physicians and academicians are neither interested nor are they properly trained to conduct quality research. The objective of this study is to quantify the volume of researches related to health in Bangladesh with a view to propose remedial measures. METHODS: Data regarding health research, originating from Bangladesh during the period of 1990-1996, were extracted from MEDLINE database using certain inclusion criteria. Data on name of the institution, main author (Bangladeshi or foreigner), country of publication, and research topics were abstracted and analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 580 (on average 83 per year) articles met the inclusion criteria. About two-third (64.0%) of the researches were from International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, followed by Institute of Post Graduate Medicine & Research with 5.7%. Seven medical colleges and one dental college collectively contributed 5.8%. Infectious diseases was the single largest (54.8%) topic dealt with, followed by non-infectious diseases (7.7%), and nutrition and nutrition-related diseases (6.9%). CONCLUSION: The number of research articles from Bangladesh is very small possibly owing to the lack of proper training and funding shortage. Incorporating research methodology in both graduate and postgraduate medical education, appointing researchers in clinical and academic departments and allocating more funding towards research activities are necessary to boost health related research activities in Bangladesh. (+info)
Preparing manuscripts for submission to medical journals: the paper trail.
(16/1217)
CONTEXT: Preparing a manuscript for publication in a medical journal is hard work. OBJECTIVE: To make it easier to prepare a readable manuscript. APPROACH: Start early--A substantial portion of the manuscript can be written before the project is completed. Even though you will revise it later, starting early will help document the methods and guide the analysis. Focus on high-visibility components--Pay attention to what readers are most likely to look at: the title, abstract, tables, and figures. Strive to develop a set of tables and figures that convey not only the major results but also the basic methods. Develop a systematic approach to the body of the paper--A standard framework can make it easier to write the introduction, methods, results, and discussion. An obvious organization with frequent subheadings and consistent labels makes the paper easier to read. Finish strong--Improve the paper by sharing it with others and by learning how to elicit and receive their feedback. Take the time to incorporate useful feedback by revising frequently. (+info)