Bibliographic databases: Some critical points

Journal of Korean Medical Science

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 799-800

  Gasparyan, Armen Yuri ^a  

^a RUSSELLS HALL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; DOCUMENTATION; EDITORIAL; FACTUAL DATABASE; PUBLISHING;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; DATABASES, FACTUAL; PUBLISHING;

EID: 84880020837     PISSN: 10118934     EISSN: 15986357     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.6.799     Document Type: Editorial

References (14)

1. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Blackmore H, Kitas GD. Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors. Rheumatol Int 2011; 31: 1409-17.
2. Suh CO, Oh SJ, Hong ST. Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors at the forefront of improving the quality and indexing chances of its member journals. Eur Sci Ed 2012; 38: 95-6.
3. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Kitas GD. Biomedical journal editing: elements of success. Croat Med J 2011; 52: 423-8.
4. Balhara YP. Indexed journal: what does it mean? Lung India 2012; 29: 193.
5. Hrastinski S, Aghaee NM. How are campus students using social media to support their studies? an explorative interview study. Educ Inf Technol 2012; 17: 451-64.
6. Masic I, Sivic S, Pandza H. Social networks in medical education in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mater Sociomed 2012; 24: 162-4.
7. Masic I, Milinovic K. On-line biomedical databases-the best source for quick search of the scientific information in the biomedicine. Acta Inform Med 2012; 20: 72-84.
8. Lippi G, Favalor EJ, Simundic AM. Biomedical research platforms and their influence on article submissions and journal rankings: an update. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012; 22: 7-14.
9. Marx W. Tracking historical papers and their citations. Eur Sci Ed 2012; 38: 35-7.
10. Gasparyan AY, Kitas GD. Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals. Croat Med J 2012; 53: 386-9.
11. Available at http://thomsonreuters.com/content/science/pdf/Web_of_Knowledge_ factsheet.pdf [accessed on 28 August 2012].
12. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB J 2008; 22: 338-42.
13. Bornmann L, Marx W, Gasparyan AY, Kitas GD. Diversity, value and limitations of the journal impact factor and alternative metrics. Rheumatol Int 2012; 32: 1861-7.
14. Marušic A, Marušic M. Can small journals provide leadership? Lancet 2012; 379: 1361-3.