Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21938503›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2012

Journals publishing bio-medicolegal research in Europe.

Rafael Boscolo-Berto, Guido Viel, Rossana Cecchi, Claudio Terranova, Susanna Vogliardi, Thomas Bajanowski, Santo Davide Ferrara

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Medical malpractice and legal medicine.International journal of legal medicine · 2013
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rafael Boscolo-BertoDepartment of Environmental Medicine and Public Health, Institute of Legal Medicine, University Hospital of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Guido Viel
Rossana Cecchi
Claudio Terranova
Susanna Vogliardi
Thomas Bajanowski
Santo Davide Ferrara

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fragmentation of bio-medicolegal knowledge has led to a proliferation of ultra-specialised sub-disciplines and branches, often published in 'field-oriented' scientific journals.The aim of this work is to provide an in-depth analytical picture of bio-medicolegal sources of publication, within and outside the traditional conception of legal medicine. An extensive search of bio-medicolegal articles published in the last five and a half years was performed on the MEDLINE database according to MeSH terms combined with free-text protocols. We performed a systematic analysis of targeted journals after merging, selecting and categorising all retrieved records, taking into account data from the 2009 JCR Science Edition (released on June 2010); 1,037 different journals were identified, of which only 48 (4.6%) focus specifically on bio-medicolegal matters, and of which only seven (14.6%) have an impact factor (IF). Despite this apparent dispersion, 47% of articles were published in bio-medicolegal journals (BML), of which 70.2% were in journals with IF (BML-IF). Articles published in BML-IF journals (33% of total papers) reach almost 50%, mainly in "Forensic Science International", "International Journal of Legal Medicine" and "Journal of Forensic Sciences". Instead, publications in not specifically bio-medicolegal journals (Not BML-IF) are greatly scattered and even fragmented in about 650 journals.The sub-disciplines that appear most frequently in Not BML-IF rather than BML-IF journals are Forensic Psychiatry (48.2% vs. 5.1%), Criminology (37.1% vs. 8.3%), Malpractice (50.7% vs. 4.0%), Medical Law and Ethics (46.4% vs. 6.9%) and Clinical Forensic Medicine (39.5% vs. 21.3%). The proposed bibliometric analysis revealed the preference of Forensic Pathology, Criminalistics (Biological), Forensic Genetics, Forensic Anthropology and Forensic Entomology for journals traditionally considered pertinent to the medico-legal discipline, with a considerable dispersion involving Toxicology, Psychiatry, Criminology and Malpractice, which were published in less well-known journals. This dispersion could be reduced adapting specialised forensic sections and increasing the IF of forensic journals, in order to respond suitably to the present demand for visibility by bio-medicolegal scientists, clearly oriented towards enhancing the objective impact of their curricula and attempting to attract funding to their research projects.

Indexed as

BibliometricsForensic SciencesPeriodicals as TopicEuropeHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.