Volume 7, Issue 1 (20 2011)
irje 2011, 7(1): 1-6 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Akbarein H, Bahonar A, Nekouei Jahromi O, Sharifi H. Evaluation of Published Articles in the Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran between 2000 and 2009. irje 2011; 7 (1) :1-6
URL: http://irje.tums.ac.ir/article-1-55-en.html
URL: http://irje.tums.ac.ir/article-1-55-en.html
Abstract: (12972 Views)
Background and Objectives: Designing and application of experimental studies in veterinary medicine have
been given paid more attention in recent years. This review aimed to evaluate the methodological quality of all
published articles in Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran between 2000 and 2009.
Methods: Evaluation studies with experimental designs were identified by reviewing titles and abstracts. Two reviewers coded reporting quality of articles.
Results: Of the 738 total published articles, 289 (39.16%) articles had experimental designs. Sample size was reported in 93.4% of studies, only 36% of studies explained their study design clearly and randomization was reported only in 33.6%. The ethical approval was mentioned in only two percent. Seventy six percent studies had comparison group.
Conclusion: The quality of reporting of experimental studies in the Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine was not generally acceptable. Therefore it is felt that authors should consider more necessary criteria for standard publication in veterinary journals.
Methods: Evaluation studies with experimental designs were identified by reviewing titles and abstracts. Two reviewers coded reporting quality of articles.
Results: Of the 738 total published articles, 289 (39.16%) articles had experimental designs. Sample size was reported in 93.4% of studies, only 36% of studies explained their study design clearly and randomization was reported only in 33.6%. The ethical approval was mentioned in only two percent. Seventy six percent studies had comparison group.
Conclusion: The quality of reporting of experimental studies in the Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine was not generally acceptable. Therefore it is felt that authors should consider more necessary criteria for standard publication in veterinary journals.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
General
Received: 2009/10/21 | Accepted: 2010/09/25 | Published: 2013/09/1
Received: 2009/10/21 | Accepted: 2010/09/25 | Published: 2013/09/1
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
