Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T05:37:17.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The editor's dilemma: assessing papers from low-income countries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Peter Tyrer
Peter Tyrer*
Affiliation:
British Journal of Psychiatry; Department of Psychological Medicine, Imperial College (Charing Cross Campus), London W6 8RP, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Most scientists are now aware of what has been called the 10:90 divide (Saxena et al, 2006): the fact that 90% of the published scientific activity in the world comes from the richest 10% of countries. Many would like to brush off this simple fact as unimportant, but at another level it could be regarded as a scandalous disequilibrium of the planet's resources. One small way of reversing this is for editors to publish more papers from low-income countries and counter what can be described somewhat strongly as editorial racism (Horton, 2003). We have tried to do so in the British Journal of Psychiatry (Tyrer, 2005); this paper describes some of the difficulties.

Type
Guest Editorial
Information
International Psychiatry , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , October 2008 , pp. 79 - 80
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits noncommercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists 2008

References

Horton, R. (2003) Medical journals: evidence of bias against the diseases of poverty. Lancet, 361, 712–713.Google Scholar
Howard, L. & Wilkinson, G. (1998) Impact factors of psychiatric journals. The British Journal of Psychiatry now has the highest impact factor of all psychiatric journals outside the USA. British Journal of Psychiatry, 172, 457.Google Scholar
Incayawar, M. (2008) Efficacy of Quichua healers as psychiatric diagnosticians. British Journal of Psychiatry, 192, 390–391.Google Scholar
Patel, V. & Kim, Y-R. (2007) Contribution of low- and middle-income countries to research published in leading general psychiatry journals, 2002–2004. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190, 77–78.Google Scholar
Saxena, S., Paraje, G., Sharan, P., et al (2006) The 10/90 divide in mental health research: trends over a 10-year period. British Journal of Psychiatry, 188, 81–82.Google Scholar
Tyrer, P. (2005) Combating editorial racism in psychiatric publications. British Journal of Psychiatry, 186, 1–3.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.