Research output of Australian general practice: A comparison with medicine, surgery and public health

Objectives: To compare the productivity of Australian general practice in terms of research publications with the productivity of other medical disciplines. Design: A survey of Australian general practice, medicine, surgery and public health publications carried out by manual searching of specific journals and an electronic search of the US National Library of Medicine's PubMed database. Main outcome measures: The number of original research publications by Australian general practitioners, physicians, surgeons and public health physicians during 1999; the relative publication rate of Australian general practice, medicine, surgery and public health over the period 1990-1999. Results: Of original research articles published in 1999, GPs authored 65% (17/26) in Australian Family Physician and 3% (3/90) in the Medical Journal of Australia; physicians published 4% and 37%, respectively. The electronic search identified 54 research articles relating to Australian general practice published in 1999 in 21 different journals, only two of which were primary care journals. Over the period 1990-1999, there was a publication rate of one general practice [discipline] article per 1000 GPs in practice per year. Corresponding rates for medicine, surgery and public health were 105/1000, 61/1000 and 148/1000, respectively. Conclusions: There is considerable disparity between the level of research output of general practice and that of the disciplines of medicine, surgery and public health. If we are to have effective general practice research, we urgently need to develop research skills, a supportive infrastructure and a culture that nurtures research.

Applications of motion study in developmental disabilities: A review

Motion study is an engineering technology that analyzes human body motions. During the past decade (1990-1999) a series of studies investigated the role of motion study in developmental disabilities. This article reviews the literature on the applications of motion study in the field. A historical and conceptual review of motion study leading to the current status of studies is presented followed by a review of the research literature. Two main eras of research focus were identified. The first era (1990-1995) of studies established the superior effectiveness and efficiency of tasks designed with motion study or motion study-related principles over traditional site-based task designs. The second era (1995-1999) of studies examined the interaction between motion study-based task designs and other variables such as choice, preference, and functionally equivalent and competing task designs and communicative alternatives. Our review found that applying motion study principles as an antecedent guide and practice to eliminating or reducing ineffective motions and simplifying effective motions resulted in positive task outcomes with most of the participants.

Authors' institutional affiliations in Australian intellectual and developmental disabilities journals: a comparison of two decades

The generation of new knowledge through research can contribute significantly to the improvement of services for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. This study extends a previous study by Sigafoos, Roberts, and Couzens [Aust. N.Z.J. Dev. Disabil. 17 (1991) 331] by examining research productivity in intellectual and developmental disability in Australian journals for 1990-1999. Institutions that published research articles on intellectual and developmental disabilities in Australian journals in the 1990s were identified by noting the affiliations of authors. The most productive institutions were primarily universities in Australia and the United States of America. Publication trends in the decade of the 1990s are compared with trends of the previous decade (1980-1990). (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd.