2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0025-7753(00)71537-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolución de la producción científica española en revistas internacionales de sistema respiratorio de 1987 a 1998

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
2

Year Published

2001
2001
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
6
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Nor were publications in general medicine journals or in respiratory journals that were not included in the Journal Citation Reports or on MedLine considered. As for the biases originating in the classification of the journals into areas by topic by the Journal Citation Reports, a high number of documents published by cardiovascular surgeons and cardiologists in the respiratory area [28] has recently been reported. This fact proves the inadequate definition of this area due to the inclusion of cardiological periodic publications, and even those of cardiovascular surgery, and the scarce presence of pneumological journals [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nor were publications in general medicine journals or in respiratory journals that were not included in the Journal Citation Reports or on MedLine considered. As for the biases originating in the classification of the journals into areas by topic by the Journal Citation Reports, a high number of documents published by cardiovascular surgeons and cardiologists in the respiratory area [28] has recently been reported. This fact proves the inadequate definition of this area due to the inclusion of cardiological periodic publications, and even those of cardiovascular surgery, and the scarce presence of pneumological journals [21].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aunque la producción científica española en sistema respiratorio se ha incrementado claramente en los últimos años (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11), no observamos un aumento, a lo largo del perIodo estudiado, de la productividad en técnicas diagnóstico-terapéuticas relacionadas con dicho sistema. Recientemente se ha comunicado (9), al analizar la producción científica española en biomedicina y ciencias de la salud desde el año 1994 al 2000, que entre las disciplinas que incluye la medicina clínica destacan, con más de 1.000 documentos citables (por número de documentos), la hematología y la oncología seguidas de enfermedades infecciosas, sistema respiratorio, neurología clínica y, gastroenterología (que incluye hepatología), subrayando seguidamente la investigación en Salud Pública medioambiental y laboral.…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…However, as an example, the mean EIF was 1.380 for the Spanish scientific production in nutrition-dietetics, 1.410 for pharmacology-pharmacy, 2.701 for neurosciences, and 1.859 for the respiratory apparatus (Barneys, Recasesns, Camps, & Salas-Salvadó, 1992;Bordons et al, 1996;García Río et al, 2000;López Muñoz, Marín, & Boya, 1996). If we compare these data with those of the maximum impact factor of the publications of each area in 1998 (i.e., if the mean EIF is divided by the impact factor of the journal that occupy the first position for each area), we would obtain a relative impact factor of 0.230 for nutrition, 0.067 for pharmacology, 0.117 for neurosciences, 0.356 for the respiratory apparatus, and 0. in the Citation Index) 2 .…”
Section: Research Impactmentioning
confidence: 99%