Biomedical Research ; China ; Preventive Medicine ; Research Support as Topic

Biomedical Research ; China ; Preventive Medicine ; Research Support as Topic

OBJECTIVEThe reporting of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instrument development is vital for both researchers and clinicians to determine its validity, thus, we propose the Preferred Reporting Items for PRO Instrument Development (PRIPROID) to improve the quality of reports.

METHODSAbiding by the guidance published by the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network, we had performed 6 steps for items development: identified the need for a guideline, performed a literature review, obtained funding for the guideline initiative, identified participants, conducted a Delphi exercise and generated a list of PRIPROID items for consideration at the face-to-face meeting.

RESULTSTwenty three items subheadings under 7 topics were included: title and structured abstract, rationale, objectives, intention, eligibility criteria, conceptual framework, items generation, response options, scoring, times, administrative modes, burden assessment, properties assessment, statistical methods, participants, main results, and additional analysis, summary of evidence, limitations, clinical attentions, and conclusions, item pools or final form, and funding.

CONCLUSIONSThe PRIPROID contains many elements of the PRO research, and this assists researchers to report their results more accurately and to a certain degree use this instrument to evaluate the quality of the research methods.

Humans ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Research Report ; Research Support as Topic ; Treatment Outcome

The applications accepted and approved by general program, young scientist fund and fund for less developed region of national natural science funds in the discipline of Chinese materia medica, NSFC in 2011 have been introduced. The character and problems in these applications have been analyzed to give a reference to the scientists in the field of Chinese material medica.
China ; Foundations ; Materia Medica ; Natural Science Disciplines ; Research Support as Topic

China ; Metals, Heavy ; Research Support as Topic ; statistics & numerical data

PURPOSE: This study was done to explore the knowledge structure of Korean Nursing Science. METHODS: The main variables were key words from the research papers that were presented in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing and journals of the seven branches of the Korean Academy of Nursing. English titles and abstracts of the papers (n=5,936) published from 1995 through 2009 were included. Noun phrases were extracted from the corpora using an in-house program (BiKE Text Analyzer), and their co-occurrence networks were generated via a cosine similarity measure, and then the networks were analyzed and visualized using Pajek, a Social Network Analysis program. RESULTS: With the hub and authority measures, the most important research topics in Korean Nursing Science were identified. Newly emerging topics by three-year period units were observed as research trends. CONCLUSION: This study provides a systematic overview on the knowledge structure of Korean Nursing Science. The Social Network Analysis for this study will be useful for identifying the knowledge structure in Nursing Science.
Bibliometrics ; Humans ; Nursing Research/*trends ; Periodicals as Topic/statistics & numerical data ; Qualitative Research ; Republic of Korea ; *Social Support

In this article, the items from 1999 to 2003 of pharmaceutics of Chinese medicine accepted and supported by subject of traditional Chinese medicine, No.9 department of life science, national natural science foundation of China (NSFC) have been reported, in several aspects, such as extracting process, preparation, biopharmaceutics, pharmacokinetic, etc. The problems in these items have also been analyzed briefly.
Biopharmaceutics ; China ; Dosage Forms ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal ; Pharmacokinetics ; Research ; Research Support as Topic ; Technology, Pharmaceutical

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the academic level and influence of National Journal of Andrology through statistical analysis for the fund sponsored articles.

METHODSUtilizing the information from China Hospital Knowledge Database (CHKD), and adopting bibliometrics methods, we carried on statistical analysis for the fund sponsored articles published on National Journal of Andrology dated from Mar. 2000 to Jun. 2005.

RESULTSNine hundred and fourty-two articles were screened, of which 204 (21.7%) were fund sponsored, and the proportion of the articles supported by various funds, including the funds from national key projects, presented an increasing tendency every year. The authors were distributed among 30 provinces and 6 oversea countries with an average age 37.4 years old, of whom 37.7% got doctor's degree and 38.7% masters degree. The articles involved clinical research were at 28.9%, and basic study and applied study were at 71.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONThe articles supported by various funds in National Journal of Andrology have taken a high percentage, so the journal achieves a fine academic level and social influence.

Andrology ; statistics & numerical data ; Bibliometrics ; China ; Periodicals as Topic ; statistics & numerical data ; Research Support as Topic

Bibliometrics ; Financial Management ; Medicine, Chinese Traditional ; Periodicals as Topic ; Research Support as Topic

INTRODUCTIONThe journal impact factor is often used to judge the scientific quality of individual research articles and individual journals. Despite numerous reviews in the literature criticising such use, in some countries the impact factor has become an outcome measure for grant applications, job applications, promotions and bonuses. The aim of this review is to highlight the major issues involved with using the journal impact factor as a measure of research quality.

METHODSA literature review of articles on journal impact factors, science citation index, and bibliometric methods was undertaken to identify relevant articles.

RESULTSThe journal impact factor is a quantitative measure based on the ratio between yearly citations in a particular journal to total citations in that journal in the previous 2 years. Its use as a criterion for measuring the quality of research is biased. The major sources of bias include database problems from the Institute for Scientific Information and research field effects. The journal impact factor, originally designed for purposes other than the individual evaluation of research quality, is a useful tool provided its interpretation is not extrapolated beyond its limits of validity.

CONCLUSIONResearch quality cannot be measured solely using the journal impact factor. The journal impact factor should be used with caution, and should not be the dominant or only factor determining research quality.

Authorship ; Bias ; Bibliometrics ; Humans ; Peer Review, Research ; Periodicals as Topic ; statistics & numerical data ; Publishing ; statistics & numerical data ; Research Support as Topic