Papers published in Japanese Journal of Ichthyology

Clinical articles published in Japanese journals are said to be characterized by poor study design, less sophisticated statistics, and producing few high-grade clinical evidences. Two American and two Japanese medical journals, published in 1990, 1993, 1996, and 1999 were compared to find out the differences regarding study design, statistical methods, and level of clinical evidence of original articles and synthetic studies. There were 1689 original articles in American and 308 in Japanese journals. Regarding study design, American articles contributed much more to randomized controlled trials/controlled trials/clinical trials (27.9% vs. 14.3%, p=0.001), cohort studies (21.6% vs. 6.2%, p=0.001), and case-control studies (6.5% vs.0.3 %, p=0.000). Among original articles in American and Japanese journals, mean number of statistical methods used were 2.4 and 1.7 per article (p=0.000), respectively. Articles providing high grade clinical evidence (grade Ia, Ib & IIa) were much greater in proportion in American journals than Japanese journals (31.1% vs. 12.7%, p=0.001). The overall picture of Japanese medical articles seems to be improving recently, at least in terms of statistical methods toward more diversified and sophisticated way of use, compared to the previous data.

Japanese journals also have their citation classics in occupational medicine

Unlike indexes and abstracts, review literature has not been a popular topic for research. And most of these studies have been either on its definition and classification or on its searching tools and lists. Few studies made by Japanese ware mostly in medical and pharmaceutical fields.Many of the studies describe the Bibliography of Medical Reviews (BMR) as an excellent searching tool for them in the field of medicine.Woodward examined and counted the review articles published in 1972 in the fields of science and technology by using Science Citation Index, and he suggested a method of determining them by counting reference given in articles. He suggests that 40 references would be practical level of determining that an article should be a review.To find the coverage of Japanese medical review articles by the BMR, its 1974 and 1975 volumes were examined, and all articles written by authors with Japanese names were searched. Seven hundred and fifty one articles were found, of which 141 were from journals published outside of Japan, including 63 with co-authors of non-Japanese names and 25 with two or more of Japanese names. The latter group's articles could be safely assumed to be by Japanese authors, however, the former group's articles could be written by non-Japanese with Japanese names such as nisei doctors.Among 610 articles from Japanese medical journals, there were 9 of them from English language journals.The trouble is that these 610 are not representing a major portion of review articles from Japanese medical journals published in these two years covered by the BMR. The BMR indexed 101 Japanese medical journals in 1974 and 103 in 1975, while there are more than 1,400 Japanese journals in the fields of health sciences.Igaku Chuo Zasshi, comprehensive abstracting service in the field in Japan does not provide any means of searching reviews.These 610 articles were classified by their number of references, and the largest group was with 21–30. The result revealed that Woodwards' method can not be successfully applied to those review articles.

We conducted a survey about what kind of journal has been used in research of nursing in our country. In Volume 1 through 37 of journal “Kango Kenkyu (The Japanese journal of nursing research)”, we analyzed 11, 202 journal theses listed in reference of thesis written by Japanese. Number of journal title was 828 non-Japanese journals and 967 Japanese journals. Number of journal thesis was 4, 159 non-Japanese journals and 7, 043 Japanese journals. Average number of year cited was 11 years for non-Japanese journal and 6 years for Japanese journals. The journal “Kango Kenkyu (The Japanese journal of nursing research)”, which was eligible for research, was cited 814 times, and it is 12 percent of the number cited in Japanese journals. In the ranking of cited document by journal, top were “Nursing Research” (329 times) for non-Japanese journal and “Kango Kenkyu (The Japanese journal of nursing research)” (814 times) for Japanese journal. In addition, as a result of summarizing ranking of journals cited by thesis eligible for survey, title of non-Japanese and Japanese journal was not changed. In non-Japanese journals, 126 theses listed the “Nursing Research” as cited document while in Japanese journals, 298 theses listed the “Kango Kenkyu (The Japanese journal of nursing research)” as cited document.

The editorial "Reducing the risks of nuclear war - The role of health professionals" was published at the same time in 137 journals worldwide. No Japanese journals have published this editorial. Japan suffered the Hiroshima-Nagasaki atomic-bomb disaster and thus may have a special and leading position regarding this issue in the world. I believe that now is the time for us, Japanese health professionals, to raise our voices against nuclear war.

BackgroundLittle is known about the recent proportion and trends of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in Japanese cardiovascular journals.Methods and resultsThis study retrospectively reviewed all original research articles published between...

This book analyses the portrayal of nuclear power in Japanese journalism and the factors that influence it. Combining a field theoretical approach to journalism with frame analysis on different levels of the communication process, the author argues that the nuclear industry in Japan used its financial power to form a ‘pro-nuclear civil society’ and that this frame sponsorship is the reason for the relatively positive portrayal of nuclear power in Japan until 2011. After ‘Fukushima’, journalistic autonomy in this domain increased and journalism became a driving force of change in nuclear policy. At the same time, the field of journalism became polarised because its more heteronomous parts remained integrated into the ‘pro-nuclear civil society’. This book offers a new perspective on the Japanese media and journalism in Japan, emphasising heterogeneity and change in contrast to previous research, which focused on press clubs as institutions of pervasive media control.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the Japanese journals in bibliometric parameters such as impact factors (IFs), mean IFs from citing and cited journals, and self-citing and sell-cited rates. The data consists of 128 Japanese journals indexed in the 1994 Journal Citation Reports. The results note that only 15 journals, with a wide variation of self-citing and self-cited rates, have obtained a current impact higher than 1.00. The results also note that the Japanese journals have not achieved a high international reputation, although some of the citing journals are the top most-cited journals identified by Garfield as a small core of journals worldwide.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the Japanese journals in bibliometric parameters such as impact factors (IFs), mean IFs from citing and cited journals, and self-citing and self-cited rates. The data consists of 128 Japanese journals indexed in the 1994 Journal Citation Reports. The results note that only 15 journals, with a wide variation of self-citing and self-cited rates, have obtained a current impact higher than 1.00. The results also note that the Japanese journals have not achieved a high international reputation, although some of the citing journals are the top most-cited journals identified by Garfield as a small core of journals worldwide. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

People whose native language is not Japanese are puzzled by the Romanized names of Japanese journals when they use information retrieval systems like MEDLINE. This is an opinion is regarding the Romanized names of Japanese journals indexed in information retrieval systems. There are several styles of labeling and quoting Japanese journals in MEDLINE and Index Medicus: a style that uses only the Romanized name, a style that uses the Romanized name with the English name, and a style that uses the English name alone. These styles are inconvenient for persons whose native language is not Japanese. Since most of medical librarians and readers in China know English, but not Roman, they are unable to convert the Romanized journal names into the original Japanese journal names. In order to make it more convenient for readers to search Japanese journals, it is suggested that English names be printed on the journal cover along with the Romanized names.

The correlation between the frequencies of use of Japanese medical journals and their inclusion in major worldwide secondary materials such as IM, EM, BA and CC is described in this paper. One hundred twenty-two journals that seemed to be frequently used, judging from the state of acquisition of Japanese medical journals, a survey of journals used at the libraries of medical colleges and universities in Japan, and a survey of frequently cited journals, were selected. Among the 122 journals, 52 (42.6%) were not covered in major international secondary materials. It was found that 41 (74.5%) of 55 journals, 48 selected from the above mentioned 52 (excluding 4) and 7 other frequently cited journals, were published by commerical companies. It was also found that almost none of the articles in these journals had English abstracts. Further, from a survey of the inclusion of Japanese medical journals in IM during the period from 1960 to 1984, it was found that the same journals were not always included in IM.Many Japanese medical journals which seem to be used frequently are not covered in secondary materials. This paper discusses some issues involved in the selection criteria for journals that editors of secondary materials find difficult to understand owing to the language barrier.To enhance evaluation of Japanese journals internationally, the authors suggest that it be made a rule that authors prepare an English title and English abstract for each article and that these be sent to editors of secondary materials.

European language content in Japanese journals is analysed from the data provided in various editions of the Directory of Japanese Scientific Periodicals. Figures for 1957, 1962, 1964, and 1967 are compared indicating a diminishing trend of European language content in Japanese journals. Comparative fluency in European languages of Japanese scientists and engineers is shown by a subject breakdown.

Despite recent developments in global communication networks in medicine, researchers whose first language is not English are confronted by a dilemma; international demand to publish their works in English as the de facto common language and domestic needs to maintain a high level of research activity. To facilitate more contributions by non-English speaking researchers we reviewed rehabilitation research in China and Japan. The review was conducted by investigating 4 Chinese journals and the Japanese journal on rehabilitation medicine (1997/1999-2001), financial information from the proceedings of the Annual Congress of the Chinese Society (2000-02) and government grants given for research in Japan (1998-2000). In China, half of the articles focused on the effects of physical modality and therapeutic exercise on normal subjects. Most funds came from a Natural Science Foundation run by the central government. The Japanese journal contained a small number of clinical trials and many experimental studies. The number of applications for government grants increased. Though rehabilitation research is a relatively young branch of medical science, research in both China and Japan has been increasing. In the future we should organize clinical research to satisfy the needs of specific socioeconomic backgrounds and overcome the dilemma between global and domestic activities.

(1987). New Japanese Journals on Modern China. Republican China: Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 83-85.

Medical journals are the most important resources in hospital libraries. Journal collection is a significant problem for hospital librarians. In the case of foreign medical journals, there are the celebrated Brandon/Hill List for small medical libraries and citation analysis researches by using the Science Citation Index, Journal Citation Reports or Impact Factor. But there are no reference journal lists or criteria in Japan. Therefore, the author attempts to evaluate Japanese medical journals for hospital libraries. Eight hundred eighty two Japanese medical journals from among “Igaku Chuo Zasshi” or “Igaku Chuo Zasshi CD-ROM”, which include 2, 452 journals were selected in 1999. A “Medical Journal Check Sheet” was prepared for the evaluation of each journal. Respiratory tract and orthopedics journals were examined using the “Check Sheet”. Although the elements for journal evaluation are mostly concerned with journal formalities, there are some very important factors in regard to academic journals. On the other hand, “A List of 132 Japanese Journals for Hospital Libraries” was drawn by researching the holdings of Japanese hospital libraries. Journals on respiratory tract and orthopedics among the 132 journals received the highest score in evaluation by the “Check Sheet”.