Search

Background: We explored perceptions and preferences regarding the conversion of in-person to virtual conferences as necessitated by travel and in-person meeting restrictions., Methods: A 16-question online survey to assess preferences regarding virtual conferences during the COVID-19 pandemic and future perspectives on this subject was disseminated internationally online between June and August 2020., Findings: A total of 508 responses were received from 73 countries. The largest number of responses came from Italy and the USA. The majority of respondents had already attended a virtual conference (80%) and would like to attend future virtual meetings (97%). The ideal duration of such an event was 2-3 days (42%). The preferred time format was a 2-4-h session (43%). Most respondents also noted that they would like a significant fee reduction and the possibility to attend a conference partly in-person and partly online. Respondents indicated educational sessions as the most valuable sections of virtual meetings. The reported positive factor of the virtual meeting format is the ability to re-watch lectures on demand. On the other hand, the absence of networking and human contact was recognized as a significant loss. In the future, people expressed a preference to attend conferences in person for networking purposes, but only in safer conditions., Conclusions: Respondents appreciated the opportunity to attend the main radiological congresses online and found it a good opportunity to stay updated without having to travel. However, in general, they would prefer these conferences to be structured differently. The lack of networking opportunities was the main reason for preferring an in-person meeting., Key Points: • Respondents appreciated the opportunity to attend the main radiological meetings online, considering it a good opportunity to stay updated without having to travel. • In the future, it is likely for congresses to offer attendance options both in person and online, making them more accessible to a larger audience. • Respondents indicated that networking represents the most valuable advantage of in-person conferences compared to online ones., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.)

Objective: To determine that the quality, measured by the Hirsch index, of Spanish authors who publish in international radiology journals with an impact factor (AJR, European Radiology, Investigative Radiology, Radiographics, and Radiology) is higher of those who publish only in Spanish journals or in both types of journals., Material and Methods: We analyzed a total of 6 radiology journals, including 5 international journals and one national (Radiología). We selected Spanish authors of original articles published in 2008 and 2009 who were working at Spanish centers when their articles were written. We classified the authors into three categories: a) those who published only in international journals; b) those who published only in Radiología, and c) those who published in Radiología and in an international journal. We calculated the Hirsch index score for each author and analyzed the groups using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov goodness-of-fit test, the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric test, and the median test to evaluate the differences., Results: Of the 440 identified Spanish authors as having published in the two-year period, 248 (56%) published only in Radiología, 172 (39%) only in international journals, and 20 (5%) in both. The mean Hirsch index score for the group of authors who published only in Radiología (1.15±2.35) was lower than for those who published only in international journals (2.59±3.39). Authors who published in both international journals and Radiología had the highest score on the Hirsch index (4.1±3.89) (P<.001)., Conclusions: The Spanish authors with the highest prestige and quality publish both in international journals and in Radiología., (Copyright © 2010 SERAM. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

The tough [correction of turf] battles with other specialties that tend to take control of the radiological practice and some of our areas of interest are one of the most important problems that Radiology must face at the present time. Interventional Radiology is the last one and the more recent example of this phenomenon that spreads world-wide. Far from defeatist attitudes, we must learn from our past mistakes to turn this scenario into an opportunity to evolve towards a more competitive and updated specialty according to our time. The authors review the present situation of the tough [correction of turf] batlles of Radiology with other specialties, pointing to their possible causes and proposing the resolution strategies.

The purpose of this report was to determine the rate at which abstracts orally presented at the European Congress of Radiology (ECR) 2001 were published in 2001-2005 Medline-indexed journals and to compare publication rates and factors with presentations at the ECR in two different periods (2001 and 2000). Absolute and relative publication rates (APR, RPR) and different publication-related factors were analysed. From 991 abstracts originating from 52 countries, 449 articles (APR 45%) were subsequently published in 125 journals, most frequently in European Radiology (n=79, 18%). Country of origin statistically (p<0.0001) influences subsequent publication of the abstract, with Germany having the highest number of presentations (n=300) and derived articles (n=175, RPR 58%) whereas Sweden had the highest RPR (82%). Interventional and physics studies had the highest RPR (59% and 58%, respectively). The ECR meeting has a very high and stable APR (ECR 2001: 45% vs ECR 2000: 47%), and the journal European Radiology had the larger number of related publications (18% RPR following ECR 2001 compared with 14% from ECR 2000). Germany had the highest number of presentations and publications for both meetings. The highest RPR for ECR 2001 was found in interventional and physics studies whereas chest and cardiac studies had the highest RPR for ECR 2000.

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the number of articles on cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) imaging written by authors from radiology and cardiology departments and published in Medline-indexed journals from 1999 to 2004 and the relationship between the author's specialty and various parameters., Materials and Methods: Specific search profiles were devised to retrieve items from the Medline database. Eight hundred seven articles were included in the study. Relationships between the author's specialty (radiology or cardiology) and several evaluated parameters were analyzed and compared by using chi(2) statistics., Results: Four hundred eight (50.5%) of 807 publications were from cardiologists, and 399 (49.5%) of 807 were from radiologists. Articles most commonly originated from the United States (n = 270, 53% from radiologists) and Germany (n = 178, 66% from radiologists). Developing techniques (n = 248, 64% from radiologists, P < .001) was the most frequent topic. Results of clinical trials, controlled clinical trials, and randomized controlled trials were published mainly by cardiologists (67%, P = .03; 70%, P = .2; 86%, P = .008, respectively). A majority of articles were published in cardiology journals (n = 269, 83% from cardiologists, P < .001) and radiology journals (n = 249, 82% from radiologists, P < .001)., Conclusion: The number of publications on cardiac MR imaging written by radiologists and that written by cardiologists was essentially the same., ((c) RSNA, 2007.)

Purpose: To estimate the influence of the authors' country and collaboration on the probability of subsequent full publication of material from oral presentations at the 2000 European Congress of Radiology (ECR)., Materials and Methods: After searching the Medline database for articles published between 2000 and 2003, all articles that originated from presentations at the ECR in 2000 and were published in journals indexed in the Journal Citation Report were evaluated. Relative likelihood of full publication depending on the country in which an abstract originated was compared with that of Austria, which is the host country of the ECR. The chi(2) test was used to compare publication rates according to country of origin and collaboration. The median and interquartile range of the impact factor of publications according to country of origin and collaboration in the abstract were analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The percentage of articles published in journals ranked in the top quartile (top 25% of journals according to impact factor) was calculated., Results: Of 1020 presentations, 403 articles (39%) with significant (P < .001) variations according to country of origin were identified. Studies originating from the United States had the highest percentage of full publication (62%; relative likelihood, 1.41), median impact factor (4.5), and percentage of articles in the top quartile (54%). Radiology was the top quartile journal, with the most articles published (60%). Impact factor differed according to country of origin (P < .001). Abstracts submitted with collaboration between (a) European countries and countries outside of Europe (other than the United States) and (b) different European countries had the highest publication rates (83% and 52%, respectively; P = .03)., Conclusion: The country of origin of an abstract was useful in predicting the chances of full publication of the abstract, with the United States having the highest publication rate. Authors were more likely to publish an article if it had been prepared with international collaboration., ((c) RSNA, 2006.)

To determine the rate at which abstracts orally presented at the ECR 2000 were published between 2000-2004, and to identify predictive factors of publication and differences between abstracts and subsequently published papers. Specific search profiles were devised to retrieve items from the Medline database. From 1020 abstracts originating from 39 countries, 479 articles (publication rate 47%) were subsequently published in 139 Medline-indexed journals, most frequently in European Radiology (14%). Country of origin statistically (P<0.0001) influences the subsequent publication of the abstract, Germany having the highest number of presentations (n=343) and derived articles (publication rate 54%). Abstracts presented by authors from the USA (n=21) had the highest publication rate (76%). Most papers were published within the first 3 years after the meeting, as original articles and in English-language journals. Both the study sample size and the first author frequently changed. Chest and cardiac studies had the highest publication rates (56%, both). In summary, abstracts presented at the ECR 2000 had a high publication rate in Medline-indexed journals. Country of origin and subspecialty of presentation appeared to influence subsequent full publication. More articles were published in European Radiology than in other journal.

Objective: Analyze the different contribution of hierarchical categories in the papers published by radiologists of hospitals belonging to Comunidad Valenciana along the period 1994-2001, as well as their distribution in the different journals., Material and Methods: For the recovery of the papers sample we have designed specific search profiles for EMI and Medline databases. Hierarchical category of the authors was identified through personal interviews., Results: We have analyzed 417 works, with 1,321 authors distributed in the following form: chief of service, 8.8%; chief of section, 12.4%; assistant physician, 50.7%, and resident, 28%. Hierarchical groupings with participation of residents were more consistent for publishing papers along all the study period (1994-2001). Higher percentage of papers (21%) corresponded to <> grouping. Radiología was the most productive journal (42% papers). All results were statistically significant (p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: Radiodiagnosis residents of Comunidad Valenciana hospitals showed an active participation in research papers published along the period 1994-2001, in collaboration with the rest of the hierarchical categories, basically with the assistant physician. Assistant physicians contributed most of papers. Chief of section and chief of department contributed fifth of papers.

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the hypothetical changes in the 2001 impact factor of 52 radiological journals included in the Science Citation Index-Journal Citation Reports by also counting cites proceeding from 73 Spanish journals on different medical specialties. Also, to estimate the possible impact factor of the official Spanish radiology journal, Radiologia, not included in this database., Materials and Methods: A modified 2001 impact factor of 52 radiological journals and Radiologia was obtained by adding the number of cites in 1999 and 2000 from the medical Spanish journals. Data were obtained by consulting the 2001 edition of the Journal Citation Reports in the 'Web of Science' database., Results: The 16,985 bibliographical references were analysed (232 of them to radiological journals). The journal with the largest increase in its 2001 impact factor (from 1.83 to 1.90) was Radiologic Clinics of North America. European Journal of Radiology was the European journal with the highest increase (from 1.084 to 1.110) in the difference between the 2001 modified and original impact factor. The modified 2001 impact factor of the 34 American journals was statistically higher (P = 0.016) than that of the 18 European journals (1.64 versus 0.93). Differences between the 2001 modified and original impact factor were slightly higher in the American journals (no statistically significant difference). The 2001 impact factor of Radiologia was 0.056., Discussion: Differences between the 2001 original and modified impact factor were small, but larger in the American journals. The 2001 impact factor of Radiologia was modest, although similar to other publications included in the Journal Citation Reports.

Introduction and Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the production of research papers by Spanish authors on diagnostic imaging published in the official journals of two Spanish scientific societies (Revista Española de Cardiología and Radiología) between 1994 and 1998, and to compare publication rates with those of research papers published in foreign cardiological and radiological journals included in Journal Citation Reports., Material and Method: Specific search profiles were devised to retrieve items from the Indice Médico Español (IME) and MEDLINE databases. The impact factor for non-Spanish journals devoted to different specialties was normalized for the number of papers published., Results: 967 articles were analyzed (301 on cardiac imaging, 666 on radiology). In the former specialty, 50.5% of the items were published in Revista Española de Cardiología, and in the latter, 55.1% were published in Radiología (no statistically significant difference). Impact factor was 2.46 for cardiology and 0.98 for radiology. The percentage of papers published in journals ranked in the top quartile according to impact factor was 38.6% (cardiology) and 17.2% (radiology); the difference was significant at P< .0001., Discussion: Although a tendency for radiologists to publish increasingly in foreign radiological journals has been observed, Spanish cardiologists and radiologists publish more than 50% of their research papers on diagnostic imaging in the official journals of their national societies. The differences in the percentage of articles by Spanish authors published in international specialty journals ranked in the first quartile (twice as great for cardiology as for radiology) suggests that Spanish radiologists are joining the scientific international community at a slower rate than Spanish cardiologists.

Self-citation, considered as the number of times a paper cites other papers in the same journal, is an important criteria of journal quality. Our objective is to evaluate the self-citation in the official journal of the Spanish Society of Radiology (Radiología), and to compare it with the European Radiology and Radiology journals. Papers published in Radiología, European Radiology, and Radiology during 1997 and 1998 were analyzed. The Self Citation Index, considered as the ratio between self-references and total number of references per article, for the journals Radiología (SCIR), European Radiology (SCIER), and Radiology (SCIRY), were obtained and expressed as percentages. Also, the number of references to Radiología in European Radiology and Radiology papers were calculated. Stratification of the index per thematic area and article type was also performed. Mean SCIR, SCIER, and SCIRY values were compared with the ANOVA and the Student-Newman-Keuls tests. The self-citation index was statistically higher in Radiology (23.2%; p<0.0001) than in Radiología (1.8%) and European Radiology (0.8%). There were no statistically significant differences between SCIR and SCIER indexes ( p=0.25). In the stratification per thematic areas and article type, self-citation in Radiology was statistically higher ( p<0.0001), with the only exception of "Radioprotection" area ( p=0.2), to SCIR and SCIER. Although there were no statistically significant differences, by thematic areas SCIR was always larger than SCIER, with the only exception of the "Genitourinary imaging" area, and by article type SCIR also went greater to SCIER, except in review articles. Radiología, The Spanish official radiological journal, although not included in Index Medicus and its database Medline, had a larger number of self-citing than European Radiology in the period 1997-1998.