 |
|
A Comparison of the Opinions of Experts and Readers as to What Topics a General Medical Journal (JAMA) Should Address
George D. Lundberg, MD;
Marshall C. Paul, BA;
Helga Fritz
JAMA. 1998;280:288-290.
Context.— Journal editors are responsible to many publics, and their choices of articles to publish are a frequent source of dispute.
Objective.— To assess the extent of agreement between topics identified by experts and by JAMA readers as most important for publication.
Design and Participants.— Modified Delphi process of polling of JAMA Editorial Board members and senior staff (ie, experts) in 1996, and masked direct mail survey of a stratified sample of JAMA readers in late 1996 and early 1997.
Main Outcome Measures.— Agreement between experts and readers on the topics most important for JAMA to deal with in 1997.
Results.— Of 55 experts polled, the 40 respondents (73% response rate) proposed 178 topics. Editing to combine similar topics left 73. The same 55 persons were asked to stratify all 73 alphabetically arranged topics on a scale of 1 to 5 (85% [47/55] response rate). They were then given the results of this ballot and asked to vote again (76% [42/55] response rate). Of the 55 experts, 40 attending the annual editorial board meeting were given all results; 39 attendees voted on the final topics. In response to the mail survey, a single pass of the same 73 topics yielded a response rate of 41.6% (208 returns). Nonresponders were roughly equivalent to responders demographically. Readers agreed with the experts on only 3 of the top 10 subjects: managed care, cancer, and aging.
Conclusion.— Expert opinion and the opinion of readers as to what JAMA should emphasize vary widely.
Dr Lundberg is Editor and Ms Fritz is Administrative Assistant, JAMA. Dr Paul is with HCI, Inc, Princeton, NJ.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
July 15, 1998
JAMA. 1998;280(3):303-304.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Optimising a curriculum for clinical haematology and biochemistry in sports medicine: a Delphi approach
Fallon and Trevitt
Br. J. Sports. Med. 2006;40:139-144.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Challenge of Infectious Diseases to the Biomedical Paradigm
Foladori
Bulletin of Science Technology Society 2005;25:145-158.
ABSTRACT
Judging the judges: the role of journal editors
Ray
QJM 2002;95:769-774.
FULL TEXT
An Evaluation of Telemedicine in Surgery: Telediagnosis Compared With Direct Diagnosis
Demartines et al.
Arch Surg 2000;135:849-853.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Smoking cessation rate among outpatients at a cancer hospital.
WAHLGREN and HOVELL
Tobacco Control 1999;8:349-350.
FULL TEXT
Socioeconomic Factors and Determinants of Mortality
Smith et al.
JAMA 1998;280:1744-1745.
FULL TEXT
|
