A comparative study was carried out to determine the quality of research pa
pers published during 1996 in two leading Russian psychiatric journals: Soc
ial and Clinical Psychiatry - SCP (27 papers) and the Journal of Neuropatho
logy and Psychiatry S.S. Korsakov - JNP (33 papers).
A newly created "Checklist for the formalised assessment of medical papers"
elaborated on the principles of the evidence-based medicine was used for t
he analysis. A paper was defined as a scientific study if the suggested hyp
othesis had been verified by the methods that permitted to minimise systema
tic errors, to take into consideration random errors and if conclusions and
arguments answered the suggested goals and were based on the data obtained
1/3 of all papers in both journals appeared to be purely descriptive ones.
Tbe analysis showed that only 2 papers in SCP (7%) and 5 papers in JNP (15%
) could be defined as scientific studies. 12% of papers met the requirement
s of scientific standards to a certain extent. But 77% of papers published
in 1996 were real spoilage of scientific research.