背景:研究单个国家对特定学科的领先期刊的贡献可以突出显示哪些国家对该学科的影响最大,以及是否存在地理偏见。本文旨在研究生物伦理学领域出版物的国际分布。
方法:对生物伦理学和医学伦理学领域的9种同行评审期刊进行回顾性定量研究(Bioethics,剑桥医疗保健道德季刊,黑斯廷斯中心报告,临床伦理学杂志,医学伦理学杂志,肯尼迪伦理研究所杂志,护理伦理学,基督教生物伦理学,理论医学和生物伦理学)。
结果:总计,从所研究的9种生物伦理期刊中检索到1990年至2003年之间发表的4,029篇文章。美国(59.3%,n=2390),英国(13.5%,n=544),加拿大(4%,n=160)和澳大利亚(3.8%,n=154)的出版物绝对数量最高。当归一化到人口规模时,较小的富裕国家,比如新西兰,芬兰和瑞典的生产率比美国高。在1990年至2003年期间,来自美国的研究数量正在减少。
结论:虽然许多生物伦理学领域的同行评审期刊将自己定位为国际期刊,他们当然不辜负人们对“国际”杂志的期望。事实上,说英语的国家,在更大程度上是美国作家,在生物伦理学领域占主导地位的国际期刊是对这些期刊中正在进行的生物伦理学讨论的明显的地理偏见。
BACKGROUND: Studying the contribution of individual countries to leading journals in a specific discipline can highlight which countries have the most impact on that discipline and whether a geographic bias exists. This article aims to examine the international distribution of publications in the field of bioethics.
METHODS: Retrospective quantitative
study of nine peer reviewed journals in the field of bioethics and medical ethics (Bioethics, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Hastings Center Report, Journal of Clinical Ethics, Journal of Medical Ethics, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, Nursing Ethics, Christian Bioethics, and Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics).
RESULTS: In total, 4,029 articles published between 1990 and 2003 were retrieved from the nine bioethical journals under
study. The United States (59.3%, n = 2390), the United Kingdom (13.5%, n = 544), Canada (4%, n = 160) and Australia (3.8%, n = 154) had the highest number of publications in terms of absolute number of publications. When normalized to population size, smaller affluent countries, such as New Zealand, Finland and Sweden were more productive than the United States. The number of studies originating from the USA was decreasing in the period between 1990 and 2003.
CONCLUSIONS: While a lot of peer reviewed journals in the field of bioethics profile themselves as international journals, they certainly do not live up to what one would expect from an \"international\" journal. The fact that English speaking countries, and to a larger extent American authors, dominate the international journals in the field of bioethics is a clear geographic bias towards the bioethical discussions that are going on in these journals.