This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lauritsen, J. Articles by Moller, A. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lauritsen, J. Articles by Moller, A. M. Related Collections Economics and Health Care Research

---

ECONOMICS, EDUCATION, AND HEALTH SYSTEMS RESEARCH

Publications in Anesthesia Journals: Quality and Clinical Relevance

Department of Anesthesia, Herlev University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark

Address correspondence to Jakob Lauritsen, MD, Bakkedraget 18, 2. th, 3400 Hillerod, Denmark. Address e-mail to jakobl{at}dadlnet.dk

Clinicians performing evidence-based anesthesia rely on anesthesia journals for clinically relevant information. The objective of this study was to analyze the proportion of clinically relevant articles in five high impact anesthesia journals. We evaluated all articles published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, British Journal of Anesthesia, Anesthesia, and Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica from January to June, 2000. Articles were assessed and classified according to type, outcome, and design; 1379 articles consisting of 5468 pages were evaluated and categorized. The most common types of article were animal and laboratory research (31.2%) and randomized clinical trial (20.4%). A clinically relevant article was defined as an article that used a statistically valid method and had a clinically relevant end-point. Altogether 18.6% of the pages had as their subject matter clinically relevant trials. We compared the Journal Impact Factor (a measure of the number of citations per article in a journal) and the proportion of clinically relevant pages and found that they were inversely proportional to each other.

IMPLICATIONS: We analyzed the proportion of clinically relevant articles in five major anesthesia journals. Using predetermined criteria, 20% of the articles in 5 journals were found to be clinically relevant.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Heidegger, M. Nuebling, D. Saal, and G. Kreienbuhl Patient-centred outcomes in clinical research: does it really matter? Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2008; 100(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. P. Weiss Measuring the Impact of Medical Research: Moving From Outputs to Outcomes Am J Psychiatry, February 1, 2007; 164(2): 206 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. W. Schultheis, L. L. Mathis, R. A. Roca, A. F. Simone, S. H. Hertz, and B. A. Rappaport Pediatric drug development in anesthesiology: an FDA perspective. Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2006; 103(1): 49 - 51. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Y. Y. Lai, G. M. Leung, V. W. Y. Wong, R. F. Lam, A. C. O. Cheng, and D. S. C. Lam How Evidence-Based Are Publications in Clinical Ophthalmic Journals? Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2006; 47(5): 1831 - 1838. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. H. Dyson and S. C. Sparling Delay in Final Publication Following Abstract Presentation: American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting J Vet Med Educ, January 1, 2006; 33(1): 145 - 148. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]