Qualitative and quantitative measures of indexed health sciences electronic journals.
BACKGROUND
Little is known about qualitative and quantitative characteristics of indexed health sciences electronic journals (e-journals).


METHODS
To determine peer-review practices and qualitative and quantitative characteristics of different types of indexed health sciences e-journals, 3 types of e-journals indexed in MEDLINE were compared (type 1, completely electronic with no print counterpart; type 2, print and electronic versions with the same title but each publishing some unique content; and type 3, print and electronic versions containing equal content).


RESULTS
There were 13 type 1 journals, 16 type 2 journals, and 16 type 3 journals. Most journals in each category (85%-94%) imply or state the use of peer review. Significant differences (P<.05, analysis of variance) exist among the e-journals for the inclusion of complex types of publications (clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and practice guidelines) (15%-100%), editorials (0%-75%), letters to the editor (10%-88%), and case reports (17%-94%); the average number of items indexed in MEDLINE (22.5-544.5); and the number of complex publication types, editorials, letters, and case reports.


CONCLUSIONS
Type 1 e-journals do not have the qualitative or quantitative complexity of traditional print journals. Although editors' statements on editorial peer review are similar, there are differences in number and type of materials included in the 3 different types of e-journals.
Weller
Ann C
AC
Library of the Health Sciences, University of Illinois Library, 1750 W Polk St, Chicago, IL 60612, USA. acw@uic.edu
D000043:Abstracting and Indexing; D016239:MEDLINE; D017712:Peer Review, Research; D011643:Publishing