PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “PUBLISHING”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1994

Evaluating the quality of articles published in journal supplements compared with the quality of those published in the parent journal.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the relationship between the quality of articles and whether they were published in a supplement or in the parent journal. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: All randomized control trials of drug therapies in adults published in the American Journal of Cardiology, the American Journal of Medicine and the American Heart Journal from January 1990 and obtained in November 1992 by means of a MEDLINE search. A total of 318 abstracts appeared to meet our inclusion criteria, and these articles were obtained and reviewed in further detail. An additional 76 were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Three reviewers who were "blinded" and thus unaware of supplement status independently assessed the quality of each of the remaining 242 articles according to a standard quality scoring system. DATA SYNTHESIS: Overall, 67 (27.7%) of the articles were published in journal supplements. Article quality scores ranged from 4.2% to 87.5%, with a mean (+/- SD) score of 37.2% +/- 13.1%. Quality scores were lower in articles published in journal supplements than in those published in the parent journal (t[240] = 2.61, P = .01). The mean quality score for articles published in journal supplements was 33.6% +/- 12.8% compared with a score of 38.5% +/- 13.1% for articles published in the parent journal. Supplement articles included in their final analysis a smaller proportion of the patients initially randomized (t[75] = 2.8, P = .007). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that randomized control trials published in journal supplements are generally of inferior quality compared with articles published in the parent journal. The review process surrounding the publication of journal supplements should be consistent with that of the parent journal.

Peer Review, Research↗
PubMed1998

Are road safety evaluation studies published in peer reviewed journals more valid than similar studies not published in peer reviewed journals?

The peer review system of scientific journals is commonly assumed to prevent seriously flawed research from getting published. This paper compares the quality of 44 road safety evaluation studies published in peer reviewed journals to the quality of 79 evaluation studies dealing with the same safety measures, but not published in peer reviewed journals, in terms of seven criteria of study validity. Studies were scored for validity in terms of (1) sampling technique, (2) total sample size, (3) mean sample size for each result, (4) specification of accident or injury severity, (5) study design, (6) number of confounding factors controlled and (7) number of moderator variables specified. Confounding factors are all factors that disturb the attribution of a causal relationship between the safety measure being evaluated and the observed changes in safety, moderator variables are all variables that influence the size of the effect of the safety measure. Very few statistically reliable differences in study validity were found between studies published in peer reviewed journals and studies not published in such journals. There was, at best, a weak tendency for studies published in peer reviewed journals to score higher for validity. An interaction was found between author affiliation and type of publication with respect to study validity. Studies published in peer reviewed journals by authors who were at a university scored highest for validity. For a number of reasons, this study must be regarded as exploratory and its results as indicative only. The study does, however, point to a line of research that might be worth pursuing in larger and more rigorous studies.

Automobile Driving↗
PubMed1998

Adherence to published standards of reporting: a comparison of placebo-controlled trials published in English or German.

CONTEXT: Although standards of reporting randomized controlled trials are well established internationally, essential study elements continue to be omitted, which hampers interpretation and systematic review of randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: To identify deficiencies in the quality of reporting of placebo-controlled randomized trials published in German or English. DESIGN: Observational study comparing 32 German- and 89 English-language reports of placebo-controlled trials with parallel design, published by the same group of authors between 1985 and 1994. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: High reporting quality, defined as adherence to published standards and measured by an 18-item scale based on 2 standard guidelines. RESULTS: The mean quality score was 8.4 (SD, 3.0; range, 1-16) of 18. The difference of the mean quality scores between English-language reports compared with German-language reports was small (0.27; 95% confidence interval, -0.97 to 1.52). More articles reported clinical aspects than trial methods or statistics. CONCLUSION: There is room for improvement in the reporting of placebo-controlled randomized trials for both English and German reports.

Language↗
PubMed2026

Update on novel, validly published, and included bacterial taxa derived from human clinical specimens and taxonomic revisions published in 2025.

This review summarizes novel taxon designations ascribed to prokaryotes derived from human primary clinical material during calendar year 2025, as well as proposed revisions to existing taxonomy. Major activity took place in the Streptococcus genus, as more than one dozen novel species were validly and effectively published, with two of these later classified as synonyms of Streptococcus thalassemiae. Moreover, whole genome sequencing and phylogenetic investigation of Streptococcus mitis group organisms resulted in a proposal to designate five species-level Streptococcus spp. taxa as Streptococcus mitis and an additional taxon as Streptococcus oralis subsp. dentisani. More than one dozen taxa were newly included in order Enterobacterales in 2025. Select novel taxa within genera Providencia and Enterobacter commonly possessed genotypes that conferred resistance to carbapenem and/or higher-generation cephem agents. Stenotrophomonas muris sp. nov. and Terrisporobacter muris sp. nov., initially characterized in gnotobiotic murine systems within the past 4 years, had clinical significance in human infection that was demonstrated in primary literature. The vast majority of the more than 70 novel obligate anaerobic taxa were derived from microbiome studies and had little ascribed clinical significance. Four novel obligate anaerobic Gram-negative taxa were shown to be of greater abundance in persons with Parkinson's disease than in those without. Updates to taxa previously published in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology compendia reveal that several could serve as reservoirs for multiple antimicrobial resistance determinants. One example is the non-glucose fermentative Gram-negative bacillus Pseudomonas juntendi.

human clinical specimens↗
PubMed2000

Scientific publishing. Publish and perish in the Internet world.

When 120 leaders in publishing and biomedicine met here last week to talk about the Internet's effect on scholarly journals, it didn't take long for disagreements to surface. Participants clashed over two very different visions of the future--one predicting that private firms will continue to produce the most reliable and readable journals, the other that scientists will soon abandon traditional journals and share results directly with other researchers on the Internet.

Internet↗
PubMed1991

Codes and abbreviations for approved of effectively published names of genera of bacteria published from January 1980 to December 1990.

Lists of abbreviations for genus names of bacteria are expanded to accommodate 103 new entries which are names that have been validity published since the publication of an updated list by Rogosa et al. in 1986 (Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 36:464-472). These abbreviations are provided to serve the need for appropriate codified abbreviations for use in processing or indexing of information on computers.

Abbreviations as Topic↗