Assessing the Relative Quality of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine Internet Mailing Lists

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We studied the relative quality of a subset of anesthesiology and critical care medicine Internet mailing lists regarding the publishing capacity of their members to compare them with the major journals and conferences regarding these specialties. Using systematic searches on MEDLINE and according to the Science Citation Index 1995, we investigated the impact factor of mailing list subscribers, of the first authors of the selected articles, and of the first authors of published abstracts from conferences. We studied six mailing lists, seven journals, and four conferences. Journals and conferences showed a higher percentage of published authors and higher average impact factor among their first authors than the mailing lists did per subscriber. However, when only the subset of publishing authors from the three media was considered, no significant differences were found. We conclude that qualified authors may be found among the subscribers of Internet medical mailing lists on anesthesiology and critical care medicine. These professional discussion groups could complement peer-reviewed publications and conferences in professional information exchange and continuing medical education. IMPLICATIONS: Internet publishing is not governed by rules that assure certain basic quality standards. Methods for assessing these standards are needed. We compared discussion groups with medical journals and conferences on anesthesiology and critical care medicine by calculating the impact factor of their members and first authors, respectively. Our study shows that qualified authors may be found in all three media.