Submited on: 17 Mar 2012 05:12:39 AM GMT
Published on: 17 Mar 2012 07:16:40 AM GMT
 
Beyond PubMed-Indexed Journals: Importance of Broader Searches of Medical Literature
Posted by Dr. Patrick M Foye on 28 Oct 2015 03:26:00 AM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    Overall, this paper reviews various databases and approaches to indexing, searching, and finding publications within the medical literature. This is an extremely important topic since even the best of medical research publications will have only limited usefulness if the publications cannot be readily found and accessed by interested physicians, researchers, patients, or others.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    While the claims are not necessarily novel, this paper is the best overall review that I have seen covering this topic.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes, the authors appropriately site dozens of references to support the points made within this review article.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Not applicable (as this is a review article).


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Not applicable (as this is a review article).


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Follow up studies could look at whether younger generations of physician/clinicians and researchers tend to use broader-based Internet searches (beyond PubMed) when seeking articles in the medical literature.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Overall, yes, this is an excellent review on this topic. It is well written and covers a very timely (Internet age) topic.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Full time academic faculty member (Professor) at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School. Director of Medical Student Education in the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School. Author and co-Author of dozens of PubMed-indexed publications in the medical literature, as well as Author of WebMedCentral publications.

  • How to cite:  Foye P M.Beyond PubMed-Indexed Journals: Importance of Broader Searches of Medical Literature[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;6(10):WMCRW003253
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Title is acceptable.
Posted by Dr. KETAN R VAGHOLKAR on 04 Oct 2014 10:41:07 AM GMT Reviewed by Interested Peers

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper elborately describes the commonly used indexing sites.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes, the review is excellent.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    NA


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Not applicable as it is a review article.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    NA


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    NA


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes


  • Other Comments:

    Excellent overview. In fact Google scholar also provides citation statistics which gives the researcher a report on the quality of his research work. This is provided free of charge which is a great asset to researchers from the developing world where there is no departmental sponsorship.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:

    None

  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    19 years of active research.

  • How to cite:  VAGHOLKAR K R.Title is acceptable.[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;5(10):WMCRW003116
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Relevance of Pubmed in Biomedical Literature
Posted by Dr. William J Maloney on 26 Jun 2012 08:51:42 PM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The purpose of this article is to examine PubMed and other databases and to suggest areas for further improvement.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Yes


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    No


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes.  It would be a great seminar course to aid faculty at universities in a very important aspect of academic publishing.


  • Other Comments:

    The birth of PubMed was a major landmark in the archiving of biomedical scientific literature.  It states that a negative of PubMed is that it excludes a large body of peer-reviewed and "gray" literature.  It states that the literature that is published on WebmedCentral.  It states that WebmedCentral aims to combine the best of peer-reviewed literature and gray literature.  It states that PubMed needs to include this work.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Clinical associate professor

  • How to cite:  Maloney W J.Relevance of Pubmed in Biomedical Literature[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(6):WMCRW001989
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Relevance of the journals visibility
Posted by Dr. Brijesh Sathian on 05 May 2012 12:09:06 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today is a well written article for all the readers. 

    The vital part of the publishing process is the editorial management. The editors commence action with the receipt of the manuscript by directing the various steps of evaluation, correction and re-submission, until an editorial decision is taken to accept the paper as is, accept it after modification or reject it if it is unacceptable. They then carry out the necessary text and layout editing. Appropriate concern is given to the statistical and ethical aspects as well as to the overall uniformity of the terminology, nomenclature and style throughout the volume as a whole. Experts review plays a pivotal role on maintaining the quality of a medical journal. A reviewer’s duty is to comment on important aspects of the paper and to formulate recommendations relating to the acceptability of the paper. Then only the journal can be indexed in Pubmed. 

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I am editor of Several Peer revewed Indexed Medical Journals.

  • How to cite:  Sathian B .Relevance of the journals visibility[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(5):WMCRW001779
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    It is time to publish all information relative to science method. The problem is that some bias will always presnt when an author's focus on personal agenda dominates. Now both the authors and the reviewers are permitted to meet on a common stage to determine the soundness or lack of support a publication may present.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Bill D. Misner Ph.D Methylmercury Antidote Canadian Medical Association Journal. 20 Nov 2002. eCMAJ, 20 Nov 2002
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    AMA PRA Category I CME 110 units from Harvard Medical School, Yale Medical School, University of Alabama Medical School, University of Washington Medical School, Vanderbilt Medical School, University of Florida Medical School, & Medscape – 2008-2011.

  • How to cite:  Misner B .Time is now arrived...favoring full disclosure: Fact without bias.[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001640
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Comment on point 3: Several articles have tried to address this issue. However, it appears to be more comprehensive and suggest some criteria for the database of the future that will help to deal with many problems faced by researchers doing meta analytic review of literature.

     

    The general comments

    The article has been well-written and attracts attention of scientists and researchers to rethink about the nature of the scientific database of the future.

    Most of the contemporary databases of scientific literature are available on subscription and thus restricts access to the entire scientific community. Many researchers and institution of developing countries are not having access to such commercial databases and thus restricts them to produce a comprehensive reviewer in their respective field of inquiry. Thus the author’s proposition to make the databases free for access is a welcome suggestion and the need of the hour. Further making available free access to full articles through these database will contribute to the cause of knowledge, The lack of access and availability of the literature to those scholarly researchers who are not able to afford the high priced commercial data-bases is also likely to produce another type of publication bias that has not yet been acknowledged explicitly. Given, the full and free access to such talented scholarly researchers may help to produce high quality publications that otherwise would remain only a remote possibility in the contemporary system.

    I agree with the author that PubMed seems to be fitting with many of the criteria led by him and may be considered a better database as compared to many others. However, the non-inclusion of the so called "grey literature" appears to be an important limitation of it. The publication bias is an important issue faced by meta-analytic reviewers and among the various biases; the file-drawer effect seems a major concern. I think that emergence of post-publication review system would very nicely handle such biases in future provided they are given place in the contemporary scientific databases that are available for free access (such as PubMed). Inclusion of only peer-reviewed journals not only limits the access to vast data and literature that may become available through post-publication review systems (such as WebmedCentral) but also creates a heavy tailed distribution of literature (similar to Pareto distribution). And commercial databases further add to creation of such heavy tailed distribution of scientific literature.

    Many articles, though, make adverse comment about the post-publication reviewer system such as, "Post-publication review is spotty, unreliable, and may suffer from cronyism, several studies reveal (see http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/07/14/post-publication-review/)", I personally do not find any problem with such system. Whichever article is published in this system remains open to comments and review to be made by any person and thus if articles are considered poor as per the contemporary standard of scientific writing it will become apparent from the review posted on these articles. Further, the author of any article may respond to such comments and is also free to revise the articles from time-to-time and thus any article in such system may not remain obsolete at any point of time. Such features of open post-publication review system thus make most of the findings available to scientific community with a wide range of comments and review and it is free choice of the researcher to include or not to include any article in his/her review.

    I congratulate the author for starting a debate of contemporary interest through publication of this article and agree with most of the views presented.  Both commercial and free databases of scientific literature need to take the issues raised in this paper seriously and should also take initiative to deal with them. Further, we academicians should also come forward to give a momentum to such proposals and raise our voice by posting comments that highlights the emerging need of changing the current practice of the present databases to focus more or exclusively on peer-reviewed journals and electronic publications and overlooking the portals that believe in post-publication review system.

     

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have experience of using various databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar etc. and I am aware of the practical difficulties in using such databases

  • How to cite:  Pandey R .Contemporary Scientific datases: Urgent need to keep pace with emerging challenges[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001616
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Originality of contribution: Others have written on similar issues (Conn, Banks, Brookes etc).

    But this excellent article article puts everything succinctly in proper perspective

     

    Two points to be emphasized

     

    1. Commercial considerations by established publishers have enabled perpetuation of Bradford's Law into the electronic era.

     

    2. Bibliographic databases should include grey literature, and search engines should be able to trawl them also. Thoroughness of science means presenting all available literature to the user (searcher) and letting him / her decide which (s)he wants to use. This underpins freedom of choice.

     

    Overall, a very well-written article.

     

    The occasional typo requires correction (Further. None of the databases are all inclusive.)

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Sanyal, S. INTERNET SEARCHING FOR HEALTHCARE INFORMATION. http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg2nhch3_121cvdk2pdf (Mirror site: http://www.slideshare.net/sanyalsanjoy8/u2ainternet-searching) Last accessed on 23 / 03 / 2012
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I possess estensive experience (nearly a decade's worth) in searching for relevant literature from bibliographic databases, and am fully familiar with the frustrations of not finding what I want to the correct level of sensitivuty and  / or specificity.

  • How to cite:  Sanyal S .Commercial Monopoly Perpetuates Bradford's Law into Electronic Era[Review of the article 'Is Your Journal Indexed in PubMed? Relevance of PubMed in Biomedical Scientific Literature Today ' by Mahawar K].WebmedCentral 2012;3(3):WMCRW001614
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse