HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS Psychiatric Bulletin Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Data supplement - journal usage questionnaire Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Related articles in BJP Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jones, T. Articles by Burns, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jones, T. Articles by Burns, T.

What British psychiatrists read

Questionnaire survey of journal usage among clinicians

Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge

Tom Burns, FRCPsych

Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Correspondence: Teresa Jones, Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK. E-mail: teresa.jones{at}brunel.ac.uk

Declaration of interest T. B. is on the editorial board of the British Journal of Psychiatry and Psychological Medicine. The National Health Service Executive, London, funded the study.

Background The role of journals in disseminating research to clinicians is increasingly debated. Current measures of esteem for journals (e.g. impact factors) may not indicate clinical penetration.

Aims To assess the perceived importance of different mental health journals to psychiatrists’ clinical practice and compare this with impact factors.

Method Random samples of psychiatrists providing child and adolescent, adults of working age and old age services chose up to ten journals read or consulted with regard to their clinical work, ranking the top three. For these journals, comparisons were made with impact factors and importance as outlets for UK psychiatry research.

Results A total of 560 questionnaires were completed (47%). Two membership journals (the British Journal of Psychiatry and the BMJ) were most read and highest ranked. Associations between impact factors, clinicians’ ratings and importance as outlets for psychiatry papers varied.

Conclusions The results could lead to reconsideration of the importance of some journals. Academic assessments of the status of journals should not be assumed to reflect their influence on clinicians.

Related articles in BJP:

Peter Tyrer
BJP 2004 185: 276. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. LEWISON, G. THORNICROFT, G. SZMUKLER, and M. TANSELLA Fair assessment of the merits of psychiatric research The British Journal of Psychiatry, April 1, 2007; 190(4): 314 - 318. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. P. Weiss Measuring the Impact of Medical Research: Moving From Outputs to Outcomes Am J Psychiatry, February 1, 2007; 164(2): 206 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Rummel-Kluge, G. Pitschel-Walz, J. Bauml, and W. Kissling Psychoeducation in Schizophrenia--Results of a Survey of All Psychiatric Institutions in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland Schizophr Bull, October 1, 2006; 32(4): 765 - 775. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. TYRER The British Journal of Psychiatry, January 1, 2006; 188(1): 104 - 104. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. K. Chaturvedi Reading habits of British psychiatrists The British Journal of Psychiatry, May 1, 2005; 186(5): 448 - 448. [Full Text] [PDF]