Quality of report of the clinical quantitative research by area of investigation on the Revista Médica de Chile between years 2017-2021
2Interdisciplinary Centre for Health Studies Universidad de Valparaíso - Cochrane Chile, Chile
Background: Revista Médica de Chile (RevMedChile) is the oldest monthly journal of Chilean health science which is responsible for publishing original articles related to internal medicine and its derived subspecialties. It is the Chilean journal of health science with the highest indexes h5 (26) and m5 (40) in the year 2021 according to SCImago Journal Rank (SJR).
These indexes have been criticized for being quantitative tools by relying on the number of citations; therefore, they do not ensure the quality of the published articles. Because of this, it is important to evaluate the quality of the report of articles presented in journals in addition to considering the values of their bibliometric indexes.
Objectives: To identify the clinical research articles published between 2017 and 2021 by RevMedChile, to classify them by type of design and to assess the quality of the report.
Methods: We searched all articles published in RevMedChile between the years 2017 and 2021 and performed a full text revision and classified them by medical specialty and methodology. Only quantitative research articles from clinical and preclinical areas were considered. Once they were grouped, we applied the respective report Guidelines according to the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) network guideline decision tree for each methodology, seeking to correlate the quality of the report with the area of specialty and theme of the research.
Preliminary
Results: We found 1,056 articles, of which 728 were included; 523 (34.7%) corresponded to internal medicine and its subspecialties, 115 (15,8%) to neurology, 99 (13.6%) to psychiatry and mental health, 75 (10.3%) to radiology and oncology and 71 (9.7%) to surgery and its subspecialties. In relation to methodology, 291 (40%) were observational, 266 (36.5%) were descriptive, 152 (20.9%) were secondary investigations and 19 (2.6%) used interventional methods. We then assessed the quality of the report using reporting guidelines (Equator Network).
Conclusions: The final results and conclusions will be presented at the colloquium.
Patient, public and/or healthcare consumer involvement: Patients, the public and/or healthcare consumers were not involved in this study.