| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Editor's Notebook |
rstanley{at}ajroffice.org
A recent press release based on an article in the March 2005 issue of AJR, dealing with the role of breast MRI in the diagnosis of breast cancer [1], stimulated a number of stories in both the lay and medical press. The lead author, Jonathan I. Wiener, and his colleagues reported on their experience from a large community hospital patient population.
After previewing the press release, I was struck by the fact that this was an excellent study originating outside of the traditional academic medical center. It caused me to wonder how often studies published in the AJR originate in the community practice setting.
A review of the 24 issues from January 2003 through December 2004 revealed an average of one article per issue submitted by a person or group in the community practice of radiology in the United States. I was not always able to distinguish confidently whether articles submitted from outside of North America did or did not originate in medical schools or academic centers.
The dominant topics involved musculoskeletal radiology, breast imaging and related biopsy procedures, and interventional radiology; but abdominal imaging, computer-related topics (e.g., Power Point, PACS, software solutions), and "practice of radiology" articles also appeared. Types of articles ranged from case reports to original research. All in all, these articles form an impressive and substantive contribution to our field.
I always have known that many very bright and talented radiologists practice in the community; after all, we have been training bright and talented residents for decades. But I was not so keenly aware of how many are actively and substantively contributing to the scientific literature. Has something changed in recent years? I suspect that the growth of the internet and the ready access to the scientific literature at PubMed, the National Library of Medicine, and multiple generic search engines such as Google and Yahoo, allow these authors unparalleled access to the medical literature without a nearby medical school library, all contributing to their ability to do clinical research. In addition, one no longer needs a medical photography lab to produce superb radiologic images, ready for publication. Electronic transfer of radiologic images from PACS and image-management tools such as Photoshop allow suitable transmission to the AJR production office in a very reasonable amount of time. Finally, the software programs designed to facilitate the production of a text document, such as the one I have just now produced, can transform the busiest community practice radiologist into an author ready for prime time. The patients and imaging tools are out there. The brainpower is abundant; now all we need is the harmonious convergence of brilliant ideas and the prioritization of time.
The AJR is known for being the practical journal, the journal that provides articles that affect patient care. It makes sense then for radiologists from both academic institutions and community practices to contribute to our knowledge base. Their experiences mean better care for our patients.
I hope to see this trend continue and grow. I suspect that it will parallel the growth in the number of excellent community practice radiologists who are willing to volunteer their time and expertise to the AJR manuscript peer review process.
References
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
