Invited commentary on "Level of evidence in four selected rehabilitation journals".
editorial · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 21272729.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.09.031.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Level of evidence has been studied in 4 selected rehabilitation journals in the article by Kocak, Unver, and Karatosun. However, other journals within the rehabilitation field would also have been relevant to study to get a more comprehensive analysis. Examples of such journals are mentioned in this commentary. The limitations of the traditional impact factor are discussed, and the use of a 5-year impact factor is suggested. The categorization of journals used and the lack of definitions of the categories are criticized. The importance of publishing more randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in rehabilitation is supported.
Medical subject headings
- Bibliometrics
- Periodicals as Topic
- Rehabilitation