| Titre : | Comparison of review articles published in peer-reviewed and throwaway journals. (2002) |
| Auteurs : | Paula-A ROCHON ; Ari-M BAY ; Lisa-A BERO ; Malcolm-A BINNS ; Julie-M DERGAL ; Jennifer-L GOLD ; Jerry-H GURWITZ ; David-L STREINER ; Kunin-Lunenfeld Applied Research Unit. University of Toronto. Toronto. ON. CAN |
| Type de document : | Article |
| Dans : | JAMA - Journal of the american medical association (vol. 287, n° 21, 2002) |
| Pagination : | 2853-2856 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Mots-clés : | Qualité ; Article ; Etude comparée ; Homme |
| Résumé : | [BDSP. Notice produite par INIST-CNRS BO2l2R0x. Diffusion soumise à autorisation]. Context To compare the quality, presentation, readability, and clinical relevance of review articles published in peer-reviewed and "throwaway" journals. Methods We reviewed articles that focused on the diagnosis or treatment of a medical condition published between January 1 and December 31,1998, in the 5 leading peer-reviewed general medical journals and high-circulation throwaway journals. Reviewers independently assessed the methodologic and reporting quality, and evaluated each article's presentation and readability. Clinical relevance was evaluated independently by 6 physicians. Results Of the 394 articles in our sample, 16 (4.1%) were peer-reviewed systematic reviews, 135 (34.3%) were peer-reviewed nonsystematic reviews, and 243 (61.7%) were nonsystematic reviews published in throwaway journals. The mean (SD) quality scores were highest for peer-reviewed articles (0.94 [0.09] for systematic reviews and 0.30 [0.19] for nonsystematic reviews) compared with throwaway journal articles (0.23 [0.03], F2.391=280.8, P<. 001). Throwaway journal articles used more tables (P=02), figures (P=01), photographs (P<. 001), color (P<. 001), and larger font sizes (P<. 001) compared with peer-reviewed articles. Readability scores were more often in the college or higher range for peer-reviewed journals compared with the throwaway journal articles (104 [77.0% ] vs 156 [64.2% ] ; P=01). Peer-reviewed article titles were judged less relevant to clinical practice than throwaway journal article titles (P<. 001). Conclusions Although lower in methodologic and reporting quality, review articles published in throwaway journals have characteristics that appeal to physician readers. |
Service Documentation EHESP
Me connecter
PORTAIL DOCUMENTAIRE
École des hautes études en santé publique
Catalogue
Multi-bases
Accueil
Sélection de la langue
Adresse
Service Documentation EHESPBibliothèque Rennes Avenue du Professeur Léon Bernard – CS 74312 – 35043 Rennes Cedex Bibliothèque MSSH Paris 20 avenue George Sand - 93210 La Plaine Saint-Denis
France
Bibliothèque Rennes : 02 99 02 29 50 Bibliothèque MSSH Paris : 02 99 02 24 50
contact