| Abstracts and papers published in the International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia since inception. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20171083 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
BACKGROUND: Since the International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia (IJOA) was first published in 1991, barriers to conducting and publishing research in the UK have increased, as has the pressure to improve practitioners' curricula vitae. We speculated that the type and geographical origin of abstracts and papers published in IJOA might reflect these changes. METHODS: We analysed all substantive papers and Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association abstracts published in IJOA, using online access. Full articles and abstracts were categorised and the location of the submitting hospital recorded. Those published in the period 1991-99 inclusive were compared with those in 2000-08. RESULTS: A total of 890 substantive papers were reviewed, 387 in 1991-99 and 503 in 2000-08. We found non-significant changes (P = 0.065) in the type of paper between the two time periods; the number (proportion) of observational studies increased from 178 (46%) to 256 (51%), respectively, while randomised and non-randomised interventional trials remained similar. Changes in geographical origin were also not significant (P = 0.17), with most coming from the UK and outside Europe. Non-UK European papers accounted for only 54 (14%) and 65 (13%), respectively. Abstract numbers have increased greatly, from 190 in 1991-99 to 702 in 2000-08, with increases in all categories but a doubling of the proportion of observational studies and a reduced proportion of interventional trials: observational 17% and 34% respectively; randomised 23% and 13% respectively; and non-randomised interventional 29% and 26% respectively (P < 0.0001). Most abstracts were from the UK although this proportion fell from 92% in 1991-99 to 86% in 2000-08, whilst those from non-UK European countries and the rest of the world increased (respectively 2% and 6% in 1991-99; 7% and 8% in 2000-08; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Substantive papers and abstracts show different trends but observational studies are the most frequent type in both forms of presentation. Trends in abstracts suggest a decrease in the proportion of randomised controlled trials, although the absolute numbers of interventional trials has increased. Non-UK European papers and abstracts are relatively few compared with those from the UK and rest of the world. |
| | |
Authors:
|
G N B Jackson; M J Mackenzie; L A Arrandale; S M Yentis |
Related Documents
:
|
12854973 - More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review. 10828163 - A scientific meeting held at maastricht university, maastricht, the netherlands on 18-2... 20673343 - Ethics review as a component of institutional approval for a multicentre continuous qua... |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article Date: 2010-02-18 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: International journal of obstetric anesthesia Volume: 19 ISSN: 1532-3374 ISO Abbreviation: Int J Obstet Anesth Publication Date: 2010 Apr |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2010-03-29 Completed Date: 2010-12-27 Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 9200430 Medline TA: Int J Obstet Anesth Country: Netherlands |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 188-92 Citation Subset: IM |
Copyright Information:
|
Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
Affiliation:
|
Magill Department of Anaesthesia, Intensive Care & Pain Management, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK. guy.jackson@royalberkshire.nhs.uk |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Anesthesia, Obstetrical
/
statistics & numerical data* Bibliometrics* Periodicals as Topic / statistics & numerical data*, trends Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic |
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: A randomised study of magnesium sulphate as an adjuvant to intrathecal bupivacaine in patients with ...
Next Document: Comparison of self-reported late effects with medical records among survivors of childhood cancer.