论文部分内容阅读
目的分析加权秩和比法在医学期刊学术质量综合评价中的适用性。方法随机抽取40种医学期刊,选择目前反映期刊学术质量常用的总被引频次、影响因子、基金论文比、他引率和平均引文数等5项评价指标,采用加权秩和比法对预防医学期刊学术质量进行综合评价,并用Kappa系数与是否进入核心期刊进行一致性检验。结果 40种医学期刊中,较差期刊(WRSR估计值<0.204)2种,一般期刊(WRSR估计值为0.204~)17种,良好期刊(WRSR估计值为0.498~)18种,优秀期刊(WRSR估计值为0.792~)3种。对4个等级期刊WRSR估计值进行单因素方差分析,结果证明不同等级期刊学术质量差异有统计学意义(P=0.000)。按是否进入核心期刊对期刊分档结果进行一致性评价,Kappa系数为0.554,属于中、高度一致性。结论加权秩和比法简单直观,对医学期刊学术质量综合评价结果较为客观,可试用于医学期刊的学术质量评价。
Objective To analyze the applicability of weighted rank sum ratio method in the comprehensive evaluation of academic quality of medical journals. Methods We randomly selected 40 kinds of medical journals and selected five evaluation indexes, such as total number of cited citation, influencing factor, ratio of fund articles, his quotation rate and average number of citation currently used in the academic quality of journals. By using weighted rank sum ratio method, Academic quality of a comprehensive evaluation, and use Kappa coefficient and whether to enter the core journals consistency test. Results Among the 40 medical journals, there were 2 journals with poor WRSR (<0.204), 17 journals with normal WRSR (0.204 ~), 18 good periodicals (0.498 ~ WRSR), and WRSR Estimated value of 0.792 ~) 3 kinds. One-way ANOVA analysis of WRSR estimates of 4 journals indicated that there were significant differences in academic quality among different grades (P = 0.000). According to whether to enter the core periodical journals sub-file results consistent assessment, Kappa coefficient of 0.554, belonging to a high degree of consistency. Conclusion The weighted rank sum ratio method is simple and intuitive, and the comprehensive evaluation of the academic quality of medical journals is objective and can be applied to evaluate the academic quality of medical journals.