JAPMA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Menz, H. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Menz, H. B.
Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association Volume 92 Number 5 308-313 2002
Copyright © 2002 American Podiatric Medical Association

A Retrospective Analysis of JAPMA Publication Patterns, 1991–2000

Hylton B. Menz, BPod(Hons)*

* Lecturer, School of Exercise and Health Sciences, College of Social and Health Sciences, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith DC, New South Wales 1797, Australia.

Abstract

A retrospective analysis of 878 articles published in JAPMA from 1991 to 2000 was conducted to investigate changing patterns of publication activity in podiatric medicine. Most of the articles published in JAPMA were case reports (37%), followed by literature reviews (33%) and original research (30%). The Journal has covered a wide range of topic areas, with the most common being foot surgery (14%). A breakdown of the proportion of original research versus review articles and case reports for each topic area revealed that while orthotic therapy and biomechanics attract considerable attention from researchers, other important specialty areas such as foot surgery, dermatology, pediatrics, and rheumatology continue to be represented primarily by literature reviews and case reports. Two significant trends were observed: a gradual increase in the proportion of original research articles and a steady increase in the number of articles by authors outside the United States. These findings provide valuable insight into patterns of publication in podiatric medicine and raise a number of issues regarding the ongoing development of the profession. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 92(5): 308-313, 2002)







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Podiatric Medical Association.