The Medical News Online survey of more than 2,000 physicians found that the top three journals that patients read are Allergan (which has a clinical practice focus) and Elsevier (which offers a variety of health care-related research).
However, the survey also found that a significant number of doctors, as well as the general population, were interested in reading only journals with a research focus.
“What I think we are seeing in terms of the number of people who are interested in these journals is that the number that are actually doing it is very small,” said Dr. John A. Hynes, chairman of the Department of Medicine at Boston University School of Medicine.
“They are not going to be able to pay for it.”
The survey also showed that doctors, and the general public, are most interested in the journals that offer a full range of articles, including general medicine, radiology, neurology, pediatrics, cardiology, and oncology.
The survey found that more than half of doctors (57%) were either reading only a general medical journal, a general health journal, or both, with a majority (52%) saying they read both.
Another 22% were reading only general medical journals.
About half of all doctors said they were also reading a health journal with a clinical focus, which includes a variety: oncologies, oncologic, onpatients, geriatric medicine, and geriatrics.
Doctors were most interested on the topics of oncogenesis, ondosis, metastasis, and endocrinology.
Doctors and the public were equally interested in a variety other areas, including diabetes, endocrinotherapy, infectious disease, endocrine, and pulmonary disease.
The study is published in the journal MMWR.
The top three general medical medical journals, in order of popularity, were Allerga (62%), Elsevier in the US (55%), and Springer in Europe (51%).
In total, more than two-thirds of doctors read either a general or health journal.
Dr. Hays said that there are more than one million general medical articles available in the medical library.
But he noted that the percentage of medical journals reading general medical is not large enough to explain the higher number of medical doctors who were interested.
“There are a lot of other journals that are also trying to become the go-to journals for the general medical field,” he said.
“I think a lot more work needs to be done on that.”
A recent survey by Elsevier and other medical publishers found that in 2017, the number was 4.7 million, with only 20% of all physicians having read a general medicine journal.
A similar survey by the American Medical Association found that doctors read about 9.6 million general health articles in 2017.
But Dr. A. J. Hutton, professor of pediatrics at Boston College, said the large number of general medical publications does not mean that they are all “good” or “good enough.”
“We are still talking about thousands of articles out there,” Dr. Jens H. Hahn, director of the Center for Research on Medical Practice and Quality at Boston Medical School, told Medscape Medical News.
“So I think that in the next decade or two, we will have more and more articles that will be published in general medicine.”
For example, Dr. Michael J. Mankin, the chief executive of Elsevier, said he believes there are too many articles that contain “unnecessary” details that are “very, very damaging.”
“That is the first thing that we would look for if we were to look at quality,” Dr Mankins said.
He also said that in general, articles published in major medical journals often have more than a few errors.
For example: “If you don’t know the patient, you might not know what you are talking about,” Dr Hynes said.
Also, in the study, Dr Hanks suggested that there is no single right way to read a journal.
“All you need to do is to read it in the right way,” he told Medsite.com.
“It is possible to have a different approach and have different priorities.”
Dr Hanes said that when he is in his office, he is always looking for a journal to read that contains the most “good stuff.”
The Medical Journal of Australia, for example, published articles that were “more than adequate in terms to meet clinical needs.”
But Dr Hans said that this approach to research can be “very misleading.”
He said that a good general medical article will tell you everything you need “to know about the research you are doing.”
For instance, a review of a study in a general-medicine journal will tell “you everything you should know about how a drug works,” Dr Jens said.
In addition, Dr Jans said, a good clinical journal can provide “a clear view of the clinical trials that have