Relationship between journal impact factor and levels of evidence in anaesthesia

Evidence-based medicine uses a hierarchy of publication types according to their vulnerability to bias. A widely used measure of journal "quality" is its impact factor, which describes the citation rate of its publications. We investigated the relationship between impact factor for eight a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Anaesthesia and intensive care 2005-10, Vol.33 (5), p.567-570
Main Authors: BAIN, C. R, MYLES, P. S
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anesthesia
Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy
Bibliometrics
Biological and medical sciences
Evidence-Based Medicine
Medical sciences
Periodicals as Topic - classification
Periodicals as Topic - standards
Quality Control
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Evidence-based medicine uses a hierarchy of publication types according to their vulnerability to bias. A widely used measure of journal "quality" is its impact factor, which describes the citation rate of its publications. We investigated the relationship between impact factor for eight anaesthesia journals and publication type with respect to their level of evidence 1-4 using Spearman rank correlation (rho). There were 1418 original publications during 2001 included in the analysis. The number (%) of publication types according to evidence-based medicine level were: level 1:6 (0.4%), level 2:533 (38%) level 3:329 (23%), level 4:550 (39%). There was no correlation between journal ranking according to impact factor and publication type (rho =-0.03, P=0.25). The correlation between journal rank and the proportion of publications that were randomized trials was -0.35 (P
ISSN:0310-057X
1448-0271
DOI:10.1177/0310057X0503300503