Abstract
The aim of this study is to explore the positions of five leading general medical journals (The Lancet, British Medical Journal--BMJ, Journal of American Medical Association--JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine--NEJM, and Annals of Internal Medicine--AIM) toward the issues of collective violence. We calculated the proportion of war-related articles in the total number of articles published in these five high-impact journals, and in the total number of articles indexed in PubMed during the last 60 years. The results showed a continuous increase in the proportion of war-related articles. Our findings suggest that the leading general medical journals have taken an active editorial stance toward the issues of war and peace. We conclude that high-impact medical journals can make an important contribution to efforts aimed at reducing the risks and consequences of war and violence.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
