Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28042357›Full record

ArticlePharmacy practice

Analysis of ten years of publishing in Pharmacy Practice.

Antonio E Mendes, Fernanda S Tonin, Fernando Fernandez-Llimos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Antonio E MendesPharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Department of Pharmacy. Federal University of Paraná . Curitiba ( Brazil ). mmendesantonio@gmail.com.
Fernanda S ToninPharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Department of Pharmacy. Federal University of Paraná . Curitiba ( Brazil ). fer_stumpf_tonin@hotmail.com.
Fernando Fernandez-LlimosEditor-in-chief, Pharmacy Practice. Institute for Medicines Research (iMed.ULisboa), Department of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Lisbon . Lisbon ( Portugal ). f-llimos@ff.ul.pt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study is to characterize the patterns and trends in the editorial process and features of the first decade of Pharmacy Practice, with the final goal of initiating a benchmarking process to enhance the quality of the journal.

methodsMetadata of all of the articles published from 2006 issue #3 to 2016 issue #2 were extracted from PubMed and complemented by a manual data extraction process on the full-text articles. Citations of these articles were retrieved from Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, and Google Scholar on August 15, 2016. The references from all of the articles published by Pharmacy Practice in 2015 were also extracted. International collaboration was explored with a network analysis.

resultsA total of 40 issues were published in this timespan, including 349 articles, 91.1% of which were original research articles. The number of citations received by these articles varies from 809, as reported by the WOS, to the 1162 reported by Scopus and the 2610 reported by Google Scholar. The journals cited by Pharmacy Practice are mainly pharmacy journals, including Pharm Pract (Granada), Int J Clin Pharm, Am J Health-Syst Pharm, Am J Pharm Educ, and Ann Pharmacother. Only 17.3% of the articles involved international collaboration. Delays in the editorial process increased in 2013, mainly due to an increase in acceptance delay (mean=138 days).

conclusionPharmacy Practice has improved its visibility and impact over the past decade, especially after 2014, when the journal became indexed in PubMed Central. The editorial process duration is one of the weaknesses that should be tackled. Further studies should investigate if the low international collaboration rate is common across other pharmacy journals.

Indexed as

AuthorshipBibliometricsCooperative BehaviorPeriodicals as TopicPharmacistsPublishing

Identifiers

PMID28042357
PMCPMC5184379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.