Abstract
Background
: Research is essential for the development of family medicine as a professional field in primary care, Since information is available through the articles in the Journals of Family Medicine which contain subjects such as disease mechanism, pathophysiology, drug or new treatment method, and it is necessary to evaluate the contribution of recent researches in this field. The paper is intended to evaluate the current status of the quality of papers published in the Journal of the Korea Academy of Family Medicine (below JKAFM) and provide statistical data & direction of studies in the future.
Methods : 1218 articles in 185 editions of JKAFM were analyzed among 188 editions published from Nov.1980 to Dec. 1996. The papers were classified into Case Report, Original Article, Review Article by the type of papers, and then categorized into descriptive studies, analytic studies, and clinical trials by its methodology. In each category, the papers were stratified by the topic. Also, the analysis was conducted according to the authors, research subjects, sampling methods and the statistical methods, and observed the changes each year through 1980s to 1990s.
Results : The portion of original articles has increased from 18.6% in 1980s to 73.9% in 1990s. In terms of research methodology, the portions of analytical studies and clinical trials occupy 28.8% and 2.1% in 1990's respectively, compared with those of 1.8% and 0.6% in 1980's. When the papers were stratified by study topics, topics on family medicine showed the highest of 34.9% of the total. According to the detailed stratification, the principle of family medicine recorded 24.2%. In terms of sampling method, 89% and above was from the clinical data when current data were used, and 69.1% was by questionnaires when the data were newly collected. The most of the study subjects were outpatients of family medicine departments. The portion of papers in which the statistical analysis was not included was 29.9% in 1980s which decreased to 15.7% in 1990s. In terms of the statistical analysis methodology, the Chi-square test was the most frequently used(26.2%), followed by Descriptive(19.6%), t-test(18.2%) and ANOVA(8.7%) were the next.
Conclusion : The academic performance of family medicine can be most effectively measured by the analysis of the journals on family medicine. According to the analysis, the papers based on clinical activity is increasing in recent years with substantial contribution, which means that the field of family medicine has found its own position in medical science and is developing actively. In terms of study methodology, the portion of analysis study is getting larger, and the various method are being tried. The application of statistical methods is being developed in its quality and quantity. It should be noted that research on family medicine should provide the basis for new knowledge and promote public health by the integrated and intensive efforts.
초록
연구배경 : 가정의학 영역의 연구는 가정의학이 일차의료의 전문분야로서 발전하는데 반드시 필요한 중요 요소이다. 본 연구는 가정의학의 학문적 성숙을 이루기 위해 국내 가정의학회지에 발표된 논문들의 지적수준과 변화양상을 분석하여, 가정의학 연구의 향후 발전방향을 제시하기 위한 기초자료를 제공하고자 한다.
방법 : 1980년 11월 가정의학회지 창간호부터 1996년 12월호까지 발표된 총 188권 중 자료수집이 가능했던 185권의 1218편에 해당하는 논문을 대상으로 논문의 종류에 따라 증례보고, 원저, 종설 등으로 나누고, 원저는 다시 기술연구, 분석연구(Cohort study, Cross-sectional study, Case-control study), 실험연구의 연구설계방법에 의한 분류를 하였다. 또한 논문의 주제에 따라 분석내용별로 저자, 연구대상, 자료수집방법, 사용한 통계기법별로 분류하여 각각의 연도별 변화를 분석하였다.
결과 : 분석결과 논문의 종류는 원저의 비율이 1980년대 18.6%에서 1990년대 73.9%로 증가를 하였으며, 분석연구방법은 10.0%에서 39.4%로 상승하였다. 논문내용의 영역에 따른 분류 결과 가정의학연구가 34.9%로 가장 많았으며, 이중 가정의학원론이 24.2%로 가장 많은 비율을 차지하였다. 자료수집방법은 병원의무기록지와 설문지를 이용한 방법이 대부분이었고, 연구대상은 가정의학과 외래환자가 55.2%로 가장 많았다. 원저에서 사용된 통계처리방법은 Chi-square 26.2%, t-test 18.2%, ANOVA 8.7%의 순이었고, 특별한 통계처리기법을 사용하지 않은 기술연구는 19.6%였다.
결론 : 가정의학의 학문적 성과를 반영하는 가정의학회지를 분석한 결과, 연도별 원저의 비율이나 분석적 연구방법론의 증가가 관찰되었고, 통계처리기법도 지속적으로 성장하고 있다. 이는 가정의학의 학술활동이 활발해지고 기틀을 잡아가는 과정에 있음을 나타내는 것이지만, 아직도 오류가 많은 방법론 및 통계처리기법이 사용되고 있다. 이러한 취약점을 파악하여 더욱 다양하고 적적한 연구방법론을 적용하므로써 가정의학연구에 전문성을 부여하고, 새로운 지식을 창출할 수 있는 기반을 마련하여야 할 것이다. 또한 국민건강에 도움이 된다는 것을 입증하는 연구의제를 정해 향후 연구의 질적 수준을 향상시켜야 한다.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
