No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Implications of changes in the impact factors of psychiatric journals
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 May 2011
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
- Type
- Letters to the Editor
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007
References
Andrews, G., Issakidis, C., Sanderson, K., Corry, J. & Lapsley, H. (2004). Utilising survey data to inform public policy: comparison of the cost-effectiveness of treatment of ten mental disorders. British Journal of Psychiatry 184, 526–533.Google Scholar
Goldberg, D. & Mann, A. (2006). How should financial support for research be distributed to universities? The Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) in England and Wales. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale 15, 104–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, T., Hanney, S., Buxton, M. & Burns, T. (2004). What British psychiatrists read: questionnaire survey of journal usage among clinicians. British Journal of Psychiatry 185, 251–257CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hecht, F., Hecht, B.K. & Sandberg, A.A. (1998). The journal “impact factor”: A misnamed, misleading, misused measure. Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics 104, 77–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walter, G.Bloch, S., Hunt, G. & Fisher, K. (2003). Counting on citations: a flawed way to measure quality. Medical Journal of Australia 178, 280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yu, G., Wang, X.H. & Yu, D.R. (2005). The influence of publication delays on impact factors. Scientometrics 64, 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access