Duplicate Publications in Korean medical journals indexed in KoreaMed

Duplicate publication is considered unethical. It has several negative impacts. To estimate the frequency and characteristics of duplicate publications in Korean medical journals, we reviewed some portion of Korean journal articles. Among 9,030 articles that are original articles indexed in KoreaMed from January to December 2004, 455 articles (5%) were chosen by random sampling. PubMed, Google scholar, KMbase, and KoreaMed were searched by two librarians. Three authors reviewed titles, abstracts, and full text of index articles and suspected articles independently. Point of disagreement were reconciled by discussion. Criteria for a duplicate publication defined by editors of cardiothoracic journals and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors were used. A total of 455 articles were evaluated, of which 27 (5.93%) index articles were identified with 29 duplicate articles. Among 27 index articles, 1 was quadruple publication and 26 were double publications. Of 29 duplicated articles, 19 were classified as copy, 4 as fragmentation, and 6 as disaggregation. The proportion of duplicate publications in Korean medical journals appears to be higher than expected. Education on publication ethics to researchers is needed.     

Analysis of PubMed and KoreaMed Indexed Korean Publications on COVID-19

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, publications on the disease have exploded globally. The present study analyzed PubMed and KoreaMed indexed COVID-19 publications by Korean researchers from January 1, 2020 to August 19, 2021. A total of 83,549 COVID-19 articles were recorded in PubMed and 1,875 of these were published by Korean authors in 673 journals (67 Korean and 606 overseas journals). The KoreaMed platform covered 766 articles on COVID-19, including 612 by Korean authors. Among the Journal of Korean Medical Science (JKMS) articles on COVID-19, PubMed covered 176 and KoreaMed 141 documents. Korean researchers contributed to 2.2% of global publications on COVID-19 in PubMed. The JKMS has published most articles on COVID-19 in Korea.     

《中华精神科杂志》第六届编辑委员会成立大会会议纪要

本文对《中华精神科杂志》第六届编辑委员会成立大会进行了介绍,会上宣读了中华医学会关于第六届编辑委员会组成的批复文件,并为新一届编委颁发聘书,总结了第五届编辑委员会4年期间的工作,介绍了第六届编辑委员会的工作计划和展望并针对期刊如何更好地发展进行讨论。     

实用皮肤病医学期刊论文关键词的标引探析

期刊论文关键词是一种直接取自文献主题中有实质意义的词,利用关键词法实行计算机编制索引,方法简便,速度加快,最能体现出论文的思想和方法的内容,准确的标引可以影响到检索效果。该文重点对《实用皮肤病学杂志》关键词的标引原则及几种内容较为复杂的医学论文关键词标引方法进行分析和阐述。     

Helping general practitioners to keep up with the literature: evaluation of an RCGP initiative

The recent Report of The Medical Information Review Panel suggested that locally-produced abstracting bulletins are likely to be of great value in promoting continuing education; most notably by helping GPs to 'keep up with the literature'. The Report identified Current Medical Abstracts for Practitioners (CMAP) , a publication produced by the S.E. Scotland Faculty of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP), as an example of the kind of bulletin it had in mind. It further suggested that the role and effectiveness of this publication should be investigated.
A survey of the readership of CMAP was therefore carried out. It was found that CMAP is regularly read by only 28% of those to whom it is sent (free of charge). More particularly, CMAP is read predominantly by those GPs who are already conscientious users of medical literature: they use the bulletin as a complement and supplement to their other professional reading. Those GPs who devote little time to journal reading, in general, tend to ignore CMAP. They do not seek to use it as a substitute for more extensive reading of medical journals.
It therefore appears that CMAP does little to overcome the problem of GPs who do not keep up with the literature, and it is unlikely that similar publications will be initiated in other areas. Indeed, publication of CMAP may be ceased, at least in its present form.     

Introducing students to the medical literature

It is extremely difficult to determine if it really makes a difference to provide a medical journal to medical students. Does it alter their reading habits? Does it indeed form the basis for learning? In 1976 84% of the third year class and in 1972 69% (n= 97 ), personally subscribed to a Journal designated. In the fourth year class, 75% (n= 149 ) subscribed in 1976 and 58% (n = 82 ) in 1972. The conclusion is that the New England Journal of Medicine Project can be viewed as an endeavour which meets the need of students.     

Statement on Publication Ethics for Editors and Publishers

The digitization and related developments in journal editing and publishing necessitate increasing the awareness of all stakeholders of science communication in the emerging global problems and possible solutions. Journal editors and publishers are frequently encountered with the fast-growing problems of authorship, conflicts of interest, peer review, research misconduct, unethical citations, and inappropriate journal impact metrics. While the number of erroneous and unethical research papers and wasteful, or ''predatory'', journals is increasing exponentially, responsible editors are urged to ''clean'' the literature by correcting or retracting related articles. Indexers are advised to implement measures for accepting truly influential and ethical journals and delisting sources with predatory publishing practices. Updating knowledge and skills of authors, editors and publishers, developing and endorsing recommendations of global editorial associations, and (re)drafting journal instructions can be viewed as potential tools for improving ethics of academic journals. The aim of this Statement is to increase awareness of all stakeholders of science communication of the emerging ethical issues in journal editing and publishing and initiate a campaign of upgrading and enforcing related journal instructions.