Search results for "Periodicals as topic"

Evaluation of the quality of publications on randomized clinical trials using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement guid…

2011

The main reason for conducting a clinical trial (CT) is to test the effect of a drug or medical procedure to improve treatment of a disease. CTs contribute most when they are rigorously conducted and the results are published adequately. The aim of this study is to assess, using the CONSORT statement guidelines, the quality of reporting of completed CTs conducted at a tertiary hospital to determine which sections of the articles should be improved. CTs published between 2002 and 2008 were identified by searching the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library. Forty of 127 completed CTs were published. There was a marked increase in the number of articles and the quality of the journals that published the…

Bibliometric analysis of leishmaniasis research in Medline (1945-2010)

2012

Background Publications are often used as a measure of success of research work. Leishmaniasis is considered endemic in 98 countries, most of which are developing. This article describes a bibliometric review of the literature on leishmaniasis research indexed in PubMed during a 66-year period. Methods Medline was used via the PubMed online service of the US National Library of Medicine. The search strategy was Leishmania [MeSH] or leishmaniasis [MeSH] from 1 January 1945 until 31 December 2010. Neither language nor document type restrictions were employed. Results A total of 20,780 references were retrieved. The number of publications increased steadily over time, with 3,380 publications f…

Predatory journals: The silent intruder.

2019

Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers

2018

The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre-publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer? published

Toward modernizing the systematic review pipeline in genetics: efficient updating via data mining

2012

Purpose: The aim of this study was to demonstrate that modern data mining tools can be used as one step in reducing the labor necessary to produce and maintain systematic reviews. Methods: We used four continuously updated, manually curated resources that summarize MEDLINE-indexed articles in entire fields using systematic review methods (PDGene, AlzGene, and SzGene for genetic determinants of Parkinson disease, Alzheimer disease, and schizophrenia, respectively; and the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry for cost-effectiveness analyses). In each data set, we trained a classification model on citations screened up until 2009. We then evaluated the ability of the model to class…