Abstract

Background: A few objective indicators support the relevance of articles published in medical journals, such, as the ISI Impact Factor and Citation indices. However, a feedback from the readers can help to improve a journal. Aim: To report the results of an opinion survey addressed to readers of Revista Médica de Chile, in June-August 2007. Material and methods: A survey was devised and distributed electronically or by mail, among all subscribers. It requested information about gender, age, site of work, proportion of time dedicated to clinical practice, teaching or research, plus their opinion about the contents and format of the journal, inviting them to propose improvements. Results: The survey was distributed to 1274 subscribers (98.7% phydcians, most, living in Chile) and was responded by 309 (24%). Those who responded were practicing medicine for a mean of 24 ± 13 (SD) years and did not differ in gender, age or years of medical practice from those thatdid not respond. Sixty three percent practiced asinternists and dedicated 63 ± 26 (SD) % of their time to clinical practice, 22 ±16% to teaching activities and 16 ± 17% to research. More than half of respondents qualified the sections of the journal, as good or excellent. Fifty one per cent requested to include more clinical topics updates, 35% more articles on evidence based medicine and 34% more articles focused on continuing medical education. The more frequent free suggestions referred to changes in the format of the journal. Conclusions: Most readers are satisfied with me journal's contents. Suggested changes were referred to review articles and the journal's format.