Evidence-based editing: factors influencing the number of citations in a national journal

Purpose: Citations received by papers published within a journal serve to increase its bibliometric impact. The objective of this paper was to assess the influence of publication language, article type, number of authors, and year of publication on the citations received by papers published in Gaceta Sanitaria, a Spanish-language journal of public health. Methods: The information sources were the journal website and the Web of Knowledge, of the Institute of Scientific Information. The period analyzed was from 2007 to 2010. We included original articles, brief original articles, and reviews published within that period. We extracted manually information regarding the variables analyzed and we also differentiated among total citations and self-citations. We constructed logistic regression models to analyze the probability of a Gaceta Sanitaria paper to be cited or not, taking into account the aforementioned independent variables. We also analyzed the probability of receiving citations from non-Spanish authors. Results: Two hundred forty papers fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The included papers received a total of 287 citations, which became 202 when excluding self-citations. The only variable influencing the probability of being cited was the publication year. After excluding never cited papers, time since publication and review papers had the highest probabilities of being cited. Papers in English and review articles had a higher probability of citation from non-Spanish authors. Conclusions: Publication language has no influence on the citations received by a national, non-English journal. Reviews in English have the highest probability of citation from abroad. Editors should decide how to manage this information when deciding policies to raise the bibliometric impact factor of their journals.

Integrating Evidence-Based Practice in the Training Programme Bachelor’s Degree in Nursing, University Jaume I

The Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) aims to combine a form methodological process of professional experience in health with the most current information on the clinical situation. The professional novice can make better decisions despite lacking sufficient years in clinical practice. We then train the student in correct habits within the methodological process by which you can strengthen both their knowledge and their attitude and ability, allowing secure customs, where all of your work is based on PBE.

Making it easy to do the right thing in healthcare: Advancing improvement science education through accredited pan European higher education modules

Background: Numerous international policy drivers espouse the need to improve healthcare. The application of Improvement Science has the potential to restore the balance of healthcare and transform it to a more person-centred and quality improvement focussed system. However there is currently no accredited Improvement Science education offered routinely to healthcare students. This means that there are a huge number of healthcare professionals who do not have the conceptual or experiential skills to apply Improvement Science in everyday practise. Methods: This article describes how seven European Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) worked together to develop four evidence informed accredited inter-professional Improvement Science modules for under and postgraduate healthcare students. It outlines the way in which a Policy Delphi, a narrative literature review, a review of the competency and capability requirements for healthcare professionals to practise Improvement Science, and a mapping of current Improvement Science education informed the content of the modules. Results: A contemporary consensus definition of Healthcare Improvement Science was developed. The four Improvement Science modules that have been designed are outlined. A framework to evaluate the impact modules have in practise has been developed and piloted. Conclusion: The authors argue that there is a clear need to advance healthcare Improvement Science education through incorporating evidence based accredited modules into healthcare professional education. They suggest that if Improvement Science education, that incorporates work based learning, becomes a staple part of the curricula in inter-professional education then it has real promise to improve the delivery, quality and design of healthcare.

Does the scientific evidence support the advertising claims made for products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis? A systematic review

Background To analyse the scientific evidence that exists for the advertising claims made for two products containing Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium lactis and to conduct a comparison between the published literature and what is presented in the corporate website. Methods Systematic review, using Medline through Pubmed and Embase. We included human clinical trials that exclusively measured the effect of Lactobacillus casei or Bifidobacterium lactis on a healthy population, and where the objective was related to the health claims made for certain products in advertising. We assessed the levels of evidence and the strength of the recommendation according to the classification criteria established by the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM). We also assessed the outcomes of the studies published on the website that did not appear in the search. Results Of the 440 articles identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Only four (25%) of these presented a level of evidence of 1b and a recommendation grade of A, all corresponding to studies on product containing Bifidobacterium lactis, and only 12 of the 16 studies were published on the corporate website (47). Conclusions There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the health claims made for these products, especially in the case of product containing Lactobacillus casei.