PropertyValue
?:abstract
  • INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic is having a deep impact on our surgical practice and scientific publishing output. METHODS: The 100 best-ranked \'surgery journals\' were selected. The contents of the March, April, May, and June 2020 issues and ahead-of-print articles were screened. The retrieved articles on COVID-19 were separated into two categories: \'opinion articles\' and \'scientific articles,\' i.e., randomized trials and original articles with structured methods and results. The number of COVID articles published in the TOP-10 journals was compared with that of COVID articles published elsewhere. RESULTS: There were 59 COVID original articles (8%). The great majority of articles were opinion articles (83.4%). Almost 40% of COVID articles were published in the TOP-10 journals. CONCLUSION: Original COVID articles (the core of our knowledge) are scant. Faced with a novel disease, neither the authors nor the editors should be criticized regarding this situation. The future step should be to publish high-quality papers in the setting of a major health crisis.
?:creator
?:journal
  • Langenbecks_Arch_Surg
?:license
  • unk
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease
?:source
  • WHO
?:title
  • The wave of \'opinion articles\' in the coverage of COVID-19 in surgical literature
?:type
?:who_covidence_id
  • #648723
?:year
  • 2020

Metadata

Anon_0  
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#DataItem>
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/rdfg-1/Graph>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/39b7ihwz>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/topic> Anon_0
<http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/informationrealization.owl#realizes> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/data/entity/39b7ihwz>
<http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#createdBy>
Anon_1   (more)
expand all