QUALIS EVALUATION OF MEDICINE III: ANALYSIS OF ANESTHESIOLOGY AND GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS JOURNALS

Objective: To know the current publication of Anesthesiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology subareas, to support the updating of Qualis Journals criteria in these specific subareas. Method: Cross-sectional, descriptive study in which was evaluated in quantitatively and qualitatively way the bibliographic production of Anesthesiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology subareas, from January 2010 to December 2012. Were investigated the values of the impact factor; calculated (i) the number (n) and the percentage of journals in each stratum Qualis A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, B4 and B5, and (ii) the median values and their extreme limits (minimum values and maximum) and quartiles (p25; p50; p75; p90) of the impact factors in the different strata. Results: The bibliographic production of the three-year period 2010-2012 was published in 69 journals in Anesthesiology subarea and in 345 in Gynecology and Obstetrics. In Anesthesiology, 44% were within the limits of impact factor of superior A1, A2 and B1; in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 42.4% were in those limits and strata. Conclusions: Despite lagging behind by international standards, publications of Anesthesiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology showed tendency to improve the quality. In these sub-areas, the median of journals impact factor is beyond the limits defined by the area in the last assessment. Therefore, it must be reconsidered new indicators to assess this aspect.

研究目的：旨在明晰麻醉学与妇产科学两个细分领域的当前期刊发表现状，为这两个特定细分领域的Qualis期刊（Qualis Journals）评级标准更新提供支撑。
研究方法：本研究为横断面描述性研究，采用定量与定性结合的评估方式，对2010年1月至2012年12月期间麻醉学与妇产科学细分领域的文献产出进行分析。本次调研测定了影响因子（Impact Factor）数值，并完成两项统计计算：(i) 各Qualis评级层级（A1、A2、B1、B2、B3、B4及B5）下的期刊数量（n）及占比；(ii) 不同评级层级下影响因子的中位数、极值范围（最小值与最大值）及四分位数（p25、p50、p75、p90）。
研究结果：2010至2012年三年间的该领域文献产出，分别发表于69种麻醉学细分领域期刊与345种妇产科学细分领域期刊。其中，麻醉学领域中有44%的期刊影响因子处于A1、A2及B1层级及以上的区间；妇产科学领域中则有42.4%的期刊符合上述评级区间与层级要求。
研究结论：尽管相较于国际标准仍存在一定差距，但麻醉学与妇产科学领域的期刊发表质量呈逐步提升趋势。在这两个细分领域中，期刊影响因子的中位数超出了上一轮评估中该领域设定的评级阈值。因此，亟需重新考量用于评估该维度的新型评价指标。