Methodological Errors in Clinical Studies Published by Medical Journals of Ex-Yugoslav Countries

Abstract

Introduction: Certain methodological principles should be inexcusably followed when designing clinical or observational research to avoid bias and presentation of results that do not reflect the truth about the phenomenon that is the object of the study. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the methodological quality of clinical trials and observational studies published in medical journals from ex-Yugoslav countries indexed in Pubmed/MEDLINE. Methods: Clinical studies published in medical journals of ex-Yugoslav countries were retrieved from the Pubmed/MEDLINE database, and the sample for analysis was randomly chosen from the retrieved publications. The rate of the most common errors in the design of clinical/observational studies was established by a careful reading of the sampled publications and their checking against predefined criteria. Results: The studies published in two countries that are now member states of the European Union (Slovenia and Croatia) have significantly higher citation rates, impact factor, and methodological quality scores than studies from other ex-Yugoslav countries. While publications from Croatia show clear improvement trend throughout the last two decades, which is visible also in the last 10 years in Slovenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, quality of clinical research published in journals from Serbia was stagnating in the same period. Conclusions: There are significant differences in methodological quality and scientometric characteristics of clinical research published in medical journals of ex-Yugoslav countries that could be mitigated by more intensive training of clinical researchers in statistics and research design, as well as by more rigorous editorial practices.

Comparative Analysis of Web of Science and Pubmed Indexed Medical Journals Published in Former Yugoslav Countries

“…Number and percent of the evaluated studies that failed to meet each of the methodological criteria tested, number of the evaluated criteria not satisfied per database and number of studies that satisfied more than 4 criteria per database are presented in the Table 2 . References of the analyzed studies referred in both WoS and MEDLINE could be found in our previous publication ( 6 ), while the references of the studies covered only by WoS or only by Pubmed/MEDLINE ( 10 - 96 ) medical journals are given at the end of this article ( Table 3 and 4 ). When explanatory potential of journal impact factor, number of citations, time elapsed from publication and a database where a journal is referred were tested by linear regression in regard to the number of methodological criteria satisfied per study, the linear regression model was obtained by backward deletion method and achieved R2 adjusted of 0.166 (F=13.827, df1 = 2, df2 = 127, p=0.000).…”

“…Scientometrics with its various indices is a reliable method for evaluation of scientific development ( 1 , 2 , 97 ). Name bibliometrics in the seventies was introduced to denote a quantitative study of the communication process using mathematical and statistical methods to books and other media of communication ( 6 ). More specifically, in 1969 was introduced the name scientometrics relating to scientific field that deals with the study of science as an information process by applying quantitative (statistical) method, and later Tibor Braun (founder of the International Journal of Scientometrics), introduced the name Scientometrics ( 97 ).…”

“…The following search strategy was used for each country separately to implement inclusion and exclusion criteria and select clinical/observational studies for further analysis: ("title of the journal 1" [All Fields] OR „title of the journal 2“ [All Fields] OR ...) AND (("observational study"[Publication Type] OR "observational studies as topic"[MeSH Terms] OR "observational study"[All Fields]) OR ("clinical trial"[Publication Type] OR "clinical trials as topic"[MeSH Terms] OR "clinical trial"[All Fields])) Filters: Free full text. The data for journals referred in both WoS and PubMed were used from our previous study ( 6 ).…”

“…Since the studies retrieved were numbered orderly in the respective database, the study sample was extracted by simple randomization, using random number generator in Excel. The sample of studies published in journals referenced in both WoS and PubMed was used as analyzed in our previous study ( 6 ).…”

Rare Use of National Languages in Europe for Communicating Scientific Information in Medicine

“…There are two main reasons why the authors are not publishing in their native language at international medical journals. The first is obvious, number of international medical journals published in national language is small and decreasing from year to year; many coutries do not have any more international medical journals published in national language [9]. The second reason is also important, but less clear: the authors themselves may avoid publishing at journals printed in national language because they fear that their work will pass unnoticed by wider scientific community which does not understand this native language [10].…”