Formalised Assessment of Publication Quality in Russian Psychiatry

Authors: Zorin, Nikita; Nemtsov, Alexander; Kalinin, Vladimir

Source: Scientometrics, Volume 52, Number 2, October 2001 , pp. 315-322(8)

Publisher: Springer

Buy & download fulltext article:

Price: $47.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

Abstract:

A comparative study was carried out to determine the quality of research papers published during 1996 in two leading Russian psychiatric journals:Social and Clinical Psychiatry — SCP (27 papers) and the Journal of Neuropathology and Psychiatry S.S. Korsakov — JNP (33 papers).

A newly created “Checklist for the formalised assessment of medical papers” elaborated on the principles of the evidence-based medicine was used for the analysis. A paper was defined as a scientific study if the suggested hypothesis had been verified by the methods that permitted to minimise systematic errors, to take into consideration random errors and if conclusions and arguments answered the suggested goals and were based on the data obtained.

1/3 of all papers in both journals appeared to be purely descriptive ones. The analysis showed that only 2 papers in SCP (7%) and 5 papers in JNP (15%) could be defined as scientific studies. 12% of papers met the requirements of scientific standards to a certain extent. But 77% of papers published in 1996 were real spoilage of scientific research.

Document Type: Research article

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1017971908413

Publication date: 2001-10-01