论文部分内容阅读
以2011年版《中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)》外科学类影响因子排名前10名的期刊为样本,对2010年发表的2129篇论文的出版时滞进行调查统计,结果显示10种期刊2010年的出版时滞为(148.1±87.4)d,比刘雪立2003年报道的2002年我国58种中文医学期刊的出版时滞(8.605±4.597)个月明显缩短。出版时滞最短的期刊是《中国美容整形外科杂志》,为(95.7±34.0)d,最长的期刊是《中国微创外科杂志》,为(267.7±145.7)d,二者相差172 d;出版时滞最短的论文仅为4 d,最长的论文为646 d,二者相差642 d。按2007年朱晓东等学术类期刊年平均报道时差标准,<90 d为5分,90~<120 d为4分,120~<180 d为3分,180~<210 d为2分,≥210 d为0分,10种外科学类期刊年平均报道时差评分平均3.1分,其中《临床骨科杂志》、《中国美容整形外科杂志》、《中国实用外科杂志》、《腹腔镜外科杂志》评分为4分,《中国微创外科杂志》评分为0分,其余5种杂志评分为3分;2129篇论文中,504篇(23.7%)评分为5分,474篇(22.3%)评分为4分,622篇(29.2%)评分为3分,191篇(9.0%)评分为2分,338篇(15.9%)评分为0分。由此得出结论,2010年外科学类影响因子排名前10名期刊的平均出版时滞比2002年58种中文医学期刊明显缩短,但10种期刊的出版时滞差别较大,4种期刊年平均报道时差评分较高。
Taking the top 10 journals of the influential factor of science in the 2011 edition of “China Sci-tech Journals Citation Report (core edition)” as a sample, the publication delay of 2129 papers published in 2010 was investigated. The results showed that 10 journals 2010 The time lag of publication was (148.1 ± 87.4) days in 2006, which was significantly shorter than that of Liu Xu-li’s publication in 2003 (8.605 ± 4.597) months in 2002 in 58 Chinese medical journals. The journal with the shortest time lag was published in China Journal of Cosmetic and Plastic Surgery (95.7 ± 34.0) d, while the longest journal was China Gemini Surgical Journal (267.7 ± 145.7) d, with a difference of 172 days. The paper with the shortest time lag is only 4 days, the longest paper is 646 days, the difference between the two is 642 days. According to the annual average standard of Zhu Xiaodong and other academic journals in 2007, the time difference standard is <90 d, 5 for 90 ~ <120 d, 3 for 120 ~ <180 d, 2 for 180 ~ <210 d, ≥ 210 d is 0, the average annual time of 10 kinds of surgical journals averaged 3.1 points. The scores of Clinical Orthopedics, Chinese Journal of Cosmetic Surgery, Chinese Journal of Practical Surgery and Laparoscopic Surgery were 4 points, “China Minimally Invasive Surgery” scored 0 points, and the remaining five kinds of magazines scored 3 points; 2129 papers, 504 (23.7%) scored 5 points, 474 (22.3%) scored 4 points , 622 (29.2%) scored 3 points, 191 articles (9.0%) scored 2 points and 338 articles (15.9%) scored 0 points. This concludes that the average publishing time lags of the top 10 influential factor in the science category in 2010 were significantly shorter than those in 58 Chinese medical journals in 2002. However, the publication time lag of the 10 journals was quite different. The four journals The average reported time difference higher.