Уважаемые коллеги, доброго времени суток! Представляем вам британское научное издание British Journal of General Practice. Журнал имеет первый квартиль, издаётся в Royal College of General Practitioners, его SJR за 2021 г. равен 0,873, печатный ISSN - 0960-1643, электронный - 1478-5242, предметная область Семейный врач. Вот так выглядит обложка:
Редактором является Эуан Лоусон, контактные данные - euanlawson@gmail.com, journal@rcgp.org.uk.
Это международный журнал, публикующий исследования, передовицы, дебаты и анализ, а также клинические рекомендации для семейных врачей и исследователей первичной медико-санитарной помощи по всему миру. BJGP начал свою деятельность в 1953 году как "Исследовательский информационный бюллетень колледжа врачей общей практики", а "Журнал колледжа врачей общей практики" впервые появился в 1960 году. После изменения статуса колледжа в 1967 году был выпущен "Журнал Королевского колледжа врачей общей практики". Тремя редакторами позже, в 1990 году, название было изменено на "Британский журнал общей практики". Журнал обычно упоминается как "BJP" и является независимым от редакции изданием Королевского колледжа врачей общей практики.
Адрес издания - https://bjgp.org/
Пример статьи, название - Non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions to improve mental health in deprived populations: a systematic review. Заголовок (Abstract)
Background Common mental health disorders are especially prevalent among people from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions, such as social prescribing and collaborative care, provide alternatives to pharmaceutical treatments for common mental health disorders, but little is known about the impact of these interventions for patients who are socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Aim To synthesise evidence for the effects of non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions on common mental health disorders and associated socioeconomic inequalities.
Design and setting Systematic review of quantitative primary studies published in English and undertaken in high-income countries.
Method Six bibliographic databases were searched and additional grey literature sources screened. Data were extracted onto a standardised proforma and quality assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool. Data were synthesised narratively and effect direction plots were produced for each outcome.
Results Thirteen studies were included. Social-prescribing interventions were evaluated in 10 studies, collaborative care in two studies, and a new model of care in one study. Positive results (based on effect direction) were reported for the impact of the interventions on wellbeing in groups that were socioeconomically deprived. Inconsistent (mainly positive) results were reported for anxiety and depression. One study reported that people from the group with least deprivation, compared with the group with greatest deprivation, benefitted most from these interventions. Overall, study quality was weak.
Conclusion Targeting non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions at areas of socioeconomic deprivation may help to reduce inequalities in mental health outcomes. However, only tentative conclusions can be drawn from the evidence in this review and more-robust research is required.
Keywords
healthcare disparities; health inequalities; systematic review; mental disorders; primary health care; socioeconomic factors