Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Scopus is a new abstract and citation database produced by Elsevier Science. Its data sources include MEDLINE, EMBASE, open access sources, scientific websites and grey literature. Scopus indexes Cochrane reviews, which include reviews from the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Scopus also provides cited references.
Objectives: This abstract will analyse the referenced citation pattern of EPOC reviews. It is anticipated that this knowledge will improve understanding of some of the translational issues of EPOC reviews.
Methods: A search of Scopus was conducted to identify the total number of Cochrane reviews and the number of reviews from the EPOC Group. The cited references of the EPOC reviews were analyzed and information was collected about the nature of the journals in which the citations were published, the year of publication and the nature of the publication (i.e. guideline, research article). Scopus records were exchanged for PubMed records using Batch Citation Matcher as the MEDLINE records are indexed and contain more information.
Results: For example, the review 'Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes' was cited 29 times. This review was cited between 2000 and 2006. The references were in two languages (English and Spanish), general medicine (including BMJ) and specialist journals (including Transfusion Medicine), print and online journals, and qualitative (experience of educational needs) and quantitative articles (new randomized controlled trials).
Conclusions: The information provided by this analysis is very useful for the EPOC editorial base to understand how and where EPOC reviews are being used. This is an important element in the knowledge translation process and also a means of determining the success and usefulness of EPOC reviews for funders.
Objectives: This abstract will analyse the referenced citation pattern of EPOC reviews. It is anticipated that this knowledge will improve understanding of some of the translational issues of EPOC reviews.
Methods: A search of Scopus was conducted to identify the total number of Cochrane reviews and the number of reviews from the EPOC Group. The cited references of the EPOC reviews were analyzed and information was collected about the nature of the journals in which the citations were published, the year of publication and the nature of the publication (i.e. guideline, research article). Scopus records were exchanged for PubMed records using Batch Citation Matcher as the MEDLINE records are indexed and contain more information.
Results: For example, the review 'Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes' was cited 29 times. This review was cited between 2000 and 2006. The references were in two languages (English and Spanish), general medicine (including BMJ) and specialist journals (including Transfusion Medicine), print and online journals, and qualitative (experience of educational needs) and quantitative articles (new randomized controlled trials).
Conclusions: The information provided by this analysis is very useful for the EPOC editorial base to understand how and where EPOC reviews are being used. This is an important element in the knowledge translation process and also a means of determining the success and usefulness of EPOC reviews for funders.