论文部分内容阅读
目的:通过对广西10种医学期刊主要评价指标的分析,初步评价期刊的学术水平和质量。方法:利用《中国医院知识仓库》(简称 CHKD)2000～2004年数据及《中国学术期刊综合引证报告》(2005版,简称 CAJCCR)中的数据,对广西10种医学期刊的基金论文比、总被引频次、影响因子等主要评价指标进行统计和对比分析。结果:2004年 CHKD 和 CAJCCR 统计结果显示,广西10种医学期刊基金论文比均值、总被引频次均值、他引总引比均值分别为0.03和0.06、282和318、0.94和0.92;影响因子均值为0.134(CAJCGR)。CHKD 的统计结果和 CAJCCR 数据有所差异,但总的倾向一致。结论:广西10种主要医学期刊大多为综合性期刊,刊载的论文侧重不同,学术水平和质量存在差异,主要评价指标均低于全国医学科学类期刊的平均水平,和我国优秀期刊相比仍存在较大的差距。
OBJECTIVE: Through the analysis of the main evaluation indexes of 10 kinds of medical journals in Guangxi, the academic standards and quality of journals are preliminarily evaluated. Methods: Using the data from 2000 to 2004 of China Hospital Knowledge Warehouse (abbreviated as CHKD) and the data from China Academic Journals Comprehensive Citation Report (2005 Edition), the paper compares the fund theses of 10 medical journals in Guangxi, Citation frequency, impact factors and other major evaluation indicators for statistical and comparative analysis. Results: According to the statistics of CHKD and CAJCCR in 2004, the mean of the fund articles, the mean of the total cited citation and the citation of his citation in 10 medical journals in Guangxi were 0.03, 0.06, 282 and 318, 0.94 and 0.92, respectively; the mean of influencing factors 0.134 (CAJCGR). CHKD statistics and CAJCCR data differences, but the general tendency of the same. Conclusion: Most of the 10 main medical journals in Guangxi are comprehensive journals. The dissertations focus on the different journals and the differences in academic quality and quality. The main evaluation indexes are lower than the average level of national journals of medical science, which is still higher than that of outstanding journals in our country Big difference.