Clinical relevance in anesthesia journals

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 166-170

  Lauritsen, Jakob ^a   Møller, Ann M ^a  

^a GENTOFTE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Anesthesia; Clinical relevance; Impact factor; Journals; Methodology; Outcome

Indexed keywords

ANESTHESIA; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW;

ANESTHESIOLOGY; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; PUBLISHING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33646034940     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.aco.0000192794.57054.22     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Pedersen T, Møller AM. How to use evidence-based medicine in anaesthesiology. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2001; 45:267-274.
2. Shaughnessy AF, Slawson DC, Bennett JH. Becoming an information master: a guidebook to the medical information jungle. J Fam Pract 1994; 39:489-499.
3. Ebell MH, Barry HC, Slawson DC, Shaughnessy AF. Finding POEMs in the medical literature. J Fam Pract 1999; 48:350-355.
4. McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. What do evidence-based secondary journals tell us about the publication of clinically important articles in primary healthcare journals? BMC Med 2004; 2:33.
5. Lauritsen J, Møller AM. Publications in anesthesia journals: quality and clinical relevance. Anesth Analg 2004; 99:1486-1491.
6. Shaughnessy AF, Slawson DC. What happened to the valid POEMs? A survey of review articles on the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Br Med J 2003; 327:266.
7. Phillips B, Ball C, Sackett D, et al. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. 2005. Available at: http://www.cebm.net/levels_of_evidence.asp.
8. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Br Med J 2004; 328:1490.
9. Harbour R, Miller J. A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines. Br Med J 2001; 323:334-336.
10. West S, King V, Carey TS, et al. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 2002; 47:1-11.
11. Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence (http://www.cebm.net). 2005.
12. Myles PS, Bain DL, Johnson F, McMahon R. Is anaesthesia evidence-based? A survey of anaesthetic practice. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82:591-595.
13. Horan BF. Evidence-based medicine and anaesthesia: uneasy bedfellows? Anaesth Intensive Care 1997; 25:679-685.
14. Lee A, Lum ME. Measuring anaesthetic outcomes. Anaesth Intensive Care 1996; 24:685-693.
15. Sorgenfrei IF, Viby-Mogensen J, Swiatek FA. Does evidence lead to a change in clinical practice? Danish anaesthetists' and nurse anaesthetists' clinical practice and knowledge of postoperative residual curarization. Ugeskr Laeger 2005; 167:3878-3882.
16. Choi PT, Halpern SH, Malik N, et al. Examining the evidence in anesthesia literature: a critical appraisal of systematic reviews. Anesth Analg 2001; 92:700-709.
17. CARG - The Cochrane Anaesthesia Review Group (http://www.cochrane-anaesthesia.suite.dk/). 2005.
18. Greenfield ML, Rosenberg AL, O'Reilly M, et al. The quality of randomized controlled trials in major anesthesiology journals. Anesth Analg 2005; 100:1759-1764.
19. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, et al. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA 1992; 268:240-248.
20. Savoie I, Kazanjian A, Bassett K. Do clinical practice guidelines reflect research evidence? J Health Serv Res Policy 2000; 5:76-82.
21. Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996; 125:605-613.
22. Gotzsche PC, Liberati A, Torri V, Rossetti L. Beware of surrogate outcome measures. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12:238-246.
23. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature: XIX. Applying clinical trial results. A. How to use an article measuring the effect of an intervention on surrogate end points. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1999; 282:771-778.
24. Messner M, Beese U, Romstock J, et al. The bispectral index declines during neuromuscular block in fully awake persons. Anesth Analg 2003; 97:488-491 (Table).
25. Echt DS, Liebson PR, Mitchell LB, et al. Mortality and morbidity in patients receiving encainide, flecainide, or placebo. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial. N Engl J Med 1991; 324:781-788.
26. Macario A, Weinger M, Truong P, Lee M. Which clinical anesthesia outcomes are both common and important to avoid? The perspective of a panel of expert anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 1999; 88:1085-1091.
27. Tenopir C, King DW. Towards electronic journals: realities for scientists, librarians and publishers. Washington, DC: Special Libraries Association; 2000.
28. Journal Citation Reports ISI (http://scientific.thomson.com/products/jcr/). 2005. Interesting study investigating the relationship between impact factor for eight anesthesia journals and publication type with respect to their level of evidence.
29. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. Br Med J 1997; 314:498-502.
30. Bain CR, Myles PS. Relationship between journal impact factor and levels of evidence in anaesthesia. Anaesth Intensive Care 2005; 33:567-570.
31. Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, loannidis JP. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA 2005; 293:2362-2366.
32. Callaham M, Wears RL, Weber E. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals. JAMA 2002; 287:2847-2850.