Comparison of the papers published in journal of shahrekord university of medical sciences with those published in other medical journals of Iran in view of methodology

Mobasheri, M. and Ahmadi, A. and Khaledifar, B. (2013) Comparison of the papers published in journal of shahrekord university of medical sciences with those published in other medical journals of Iran in view of methodology. Life Science Journal, 10 (4). pp. 3640-3645.

[img]
Preview
Text
44.pdf

Download (178kB) | Preview
Official URL: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2....

Abstract

Background and aim: Scientific and research journals are considered as one of the most important tools for scientific and research information and science advancement in any discipline. Publishing articles in these journals is known to be an important indicator for knowledge generation. Comparing and assessing medical journals which present research outcomes, quantitatively and qualitatively, is particularly important to improve and promote them. The present study was conducted to compare the papers published in scientific and research Journal of Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences (JSKUMS) with those published in other medical journals of Iran in view of methodology. Methods: This cross-sectional study examined and compared the observance of scientific writing of "Materials and Method" and "Results" of 113 articles published in JSKUMS with that of 269 articles published in other medical journals of Iran within 2010-2012 through random sampling using a validated questionnaire. The data were analyzed by SPSS software using Chi square, ANOVA, and t test. Results: The percentage of original, cross-sectional, clinical trial, and experimental studies published in JSKUMS in 2011-2012 was respectively 93, 48, 20, and 17. The mean number of authors of the articles was 4.9 ± 3 and the most common errors in JSKUMS and other medical journals of Iran were failure to mention method of sampling (29 and 42 respectively), sample size (7 and 9 respectively), the software used (39 and 10 respectively), methods of randomization and blinding (72 and 27 respectively), letter of consent and ethics committee's approval (11 and 4 respectively), failure to provide confidence intervals for descriptive indicators (9 and 14 respectively) and required analytical indicators (7 and 16 respectively), and failure to observe the instructions of drawing tables (30 and 17 respectively) and graphs (35 and 25 respectively). The number of case-control studies and cohorts was significantly higher in other medical journals of Iran compared to JSKUMS. Conclusion: Identifying the common errors in the examined journals provided the context for improving and promoting them quantitatively and qualitatively. Therefore, it seems helpful to inform the authors and consider the most common errors, to empower the reviewers and address the quality and quantity of workshops on research methodology and scientific writing, and to provide opportunities for publishing guidelines for research and writing research papers.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: cited By 1
Uncontrolled Keywords: scientific and research journals; the appropriate principles of scientific writing; general and specific methodology of articles
Subjects: W General medicine- Health professions > W.20.55 H9 special topics A-Z (Human expenmentation)
Divisions: Faculty of Health > Department of Epidemiology
Faculty of Medicine > Department of Clinical Sciences > Department of Surgery
Depositing User: Users 1 not found.
Date Deposited: 08 Aug 2017 06:45
Last Modified: 08 Aug 2017 06:45
URI: http://eprints.skums.ac.ir/id/eprint/2601

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item