Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims: There is an increasing enthusiasm and pressure to submit scientific articles to journals for publication due to official policies. This has led to increased stress on authors and editors and in issues like plagiarism. We planned a cross-sectional study with an aim to explore the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Madhuri S Kurdi, Ashwini Halebid Ramaswamy, Laxmikant Lokare, Jagadish G Sutagatti
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2015-01-01
Series:Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2015;volume=59;issue=12;spage=794;epage=800;aulast=Kurdi
id doaj-eaffdcac181745beaff4054f552804d6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-eaffdcac181745beaff4054f552804d62020-11-24T23:27:24ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Anaesthesia0019-50492015-01-01591279480010.4103/0019-5049.171567Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional studyMadhuri S KurdiAshwini Halebid RamaswamyLaxmikant LokareJagadish G SutagattiBackground and Aims: There is an increasing enthusiasm and pressure to submit scientific articles to journals for publication due to official policies. This has led to increased stress on authors and editors and in issues like plagiarism. We planned a cross-sectional study with an aim to explore the current publication related views and practice of faculty members and consultants. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire based prospective survey with 22 questions divided into parts. Print and electronic versions were sent to around 18,270 members in total, a majority of whom were anaesthesiologists and 600 members responded to our questionnaire. A database was created and analysed using Microsoft Excel. Results: About 80% felt that online journals were better read than print journals. Eighty eight percent agreed that publications improve academic skills. The Medical Council of India requirements to publish in reputed journals were cited as the main reasons for plagiarism. The publication rule had become a burden for 46% respondents. Review articles were most likely to be read though clinical investigations were considered to be of maximum academic significance. Review/publishing time followed by author requirements and journal indexing were the points our respondents liked to see most when choosing a journal for article submission. Conclusion: Our survey results depict the current author related views and trends in publication practice which may guide in evidence-based policy making.http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2015;volume=59;issue=12;spage=794;epage=800;aulast=KurdiAttitudejournal articlepublicationsquestionnaires
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Madhuri S Kurdi
Ashwini Halebid Ramaswamy
Laxmikant Lokare
Jagadish G Sutagatti
spellingShingle Madhuri S Kurdi
Ashwini Halebid Ramaswamy
Laxmikant Lokare
Jagadish G Sutagatti
Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
Attitude
journal article
publications
questionnaires
author_facet Madhuri S Kurdi
Ashwini Halebid Ramaswamy
Laxmikant Lokare
Jagadish G Sutagatti
author_sort Madhuri S Kurdi
title Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
title_short Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
title_full Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′Publications in India′: A cross-sectional study
title_sort current views and practice of faculty members and consultants regarding ′publications in india′: a cross-sectional study
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
issn 0019-5049
publishDate 2015-01-01
description Background and Aims: There is an increasing enthusiasm and pressure to submit scientific articles to journals for publication due to official policies. This has led to increased stress on authors and editors and in issues like plagiarism. We planned a cross-sectional study with an aim to explore the current publication related views and practice of faculty members and consultants. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire based prospective survey with 22 questions divided into parts. Print and electronic versions were sent to around 18,270 members in total, a majority of whom were anaesthesiologists and 600 members responded to our questionnaire. A database was created and analysed using Microsoft Excel. Results: About 80% felt that online journals were better read than print journals. Eighty eight percent agreed that publications improve academic skills. The Medical Council of India requirements to publish in reputed journals were cited as the main reasons for plagiarism. The publication rule had become a burden for 46% respondents. Review articles were most likely to be read though clinical investigations were considered to be of maximum academic significance. Review/publishing time followed by author requirements and journal indexing were the points our respondents liked to see most when choosing a journal for article submission. Conclusion: Our survey results depict the current author related views and trends in publication practice which may guide in evidence-based policy making.
topic Attitude
journal article
publications
questionnaires
url http://www.ijaweb.org/article.asp?issn=0019-5049;year=2015;volume=59;issue=12;spage=794;epage=800;aulast=Kurdi
work_keys_str_mv AT madhuriskurdi currentviewsandpracticeoffacultymembersandconsultantsregardingpublicationsinindiaacrosssectionalstudy
AT ashwinihalebidramaswamy currentviewsandpracticeoffacultymembersandconsultantsregardingpublicationsinindiaacrosssectionalstudy
AT laxmikantlokare currentviewsandpracticeoffacultymembersandconsultantsregardingpublicationsinindiaacrosssectionalstudy
AT jagadishgsutagatti currentviewsandpracticeoffacultymembersandconsultantsregardingpublicationsinindiaacrosssectionalstudy
_version_ 1725552128775159808