Entrar/Registro  
HOME SPANISH
 
Cirujano General
   
MENU

Contents by Year, Volume and Issue

Table of Contents

General Information

Instructions for Authors

Message to Editor

Editorial Board






>Journals >Cirujano General >Year 2001, Issue 4


Guillermo León López, en Biblioteconomía Verónica Soto Rodríguez, Abilene C Escamilla Ortiz, Juan Carlos Hernández Gante
Bibliometric analysis of the biomedical literature in Mexico
Cir Gen 2001; 23 (4)

Language: Español
References: 7
Page: 301-303
PDF: 4. Kb.


Full text




ABSTRACT

Objective: To identify the mistakes encountered in bibliographic references of articles published in seven Mexican biomedical journals, six chosen randomly and one predetermined, based on the uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals.
Design: Retrospective, observations, and comparative study.
Material and methods: We reviewed the list of references of seven articles, randomly chosen, published in six Mexican biomedical journals, and compared them with seven unpublished articles submitted to the editorial office of Cirujano General. We analyzed the structure of 200 references based on the guidelines indicated in the uniform requirements for authors established by the Vancouver group. Two groups were established: I with 100 references from the seven unpublished articles submitted to the editorial office of Cir Gen, group II constituted by 100 references from the seven articles published in the six Mexican biomedical journals, of which two are indexed in the Index Medicus, two in Artemisa, and two in Bibliomex Salud. We assessed the following variables: First author, co-authors, standardization on the use of et al., title of the article, year, volume, and pages (first and last).
Results: The mistakes found in the structure of the references expressed in percentages were in decreasing frequency: Pages (75%), Co-authors (54%), Title of the article (51%), and Volume (35%) for group I articles; whereas for Group II they were: Pages (62%), Co-authors (53%), Title of the article (35%), and First author (34%).
Conclusion: All reference lists from both groups had some mistake in their structure.


Key words: References, bibliography, bibliometry.


REFERENCIAS

  1. King J. The use of bibliometric techniques for institutional research evaluation; a study of avian virology research. Scientometrics 1988; 14: 293-313.

  2. Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. J Docum 1969; 25: 348-69.

  3. Lockett MW. The Bradford distribution. A review of the literature, 1934-1987. Libr Inf Sci Res 1989; 11: 21-36.

  4. Angulo Marcial N. Manuel de tecnología y recursos de la información. México: Instituto Politécnico Nacional; 1996. p: 22-33.

  5. Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas. Requisitos uniformes para preparar los manuscritos enviados a revistas biomédicas. Bol Of Sanit Panam 1994; 116: 146-59.

  6. Benning SP, Speer SC. Incorrect citations: a comparison of library literature with medical literature. Bull Med Libr Assoc 1993; 81: 56-8.

  7. Evans JT, Nadjari HI, Burchell SA. Quotational and reference accuracy in surgical journals: a continuing peer review problem. JAMA 1990; 263: 1353-4.






>Journals >Cirujano General >Year 2001, Issue 4
 

· Journal Index 
· Links 






       
Copyright 2019