CAJ | 학술논문

以《中文核心期刊要目总览》（2008年版）中的24种医药卫生类高校学报为研究对象，以2006—2010年出版的《中国科技期刊引证报告》（核心版）数据为依据，采用学术影响力动态评估模型，对研究对象的学术影响力状况进行分析。结果显示，相对学术影响力评估分值（，r）大于1的学报有5个，1—0．60的学报有8个，小于0．60的学报有11个。说明其中优秀学报的比例偏低，而且，r之间相差非常悬殊。建议在办刊过程中，重视论文的学术质量、来源文献量、相关学科的高被引论文和提高基金论文比。
이《중문핵심기간요목총람》（2008년판）중적24충의약위생류고교학보위연구대상，이2006—2010년출판적《중국과기기간인증보고》（핵심판）수거위의거，채용학술영향력동태평고모형，대연구대상적학술영향력상황진행분석。결과현시，상대학술영향력평고분치（，r）대우1적학보유5개，1—0．60적학보유8개，소우0．60적학보유11개。설명기중우수학보적비례편저，이차，r지간상차비상현수。건의재판간과정중，중시논문적학술질량、래원문헌량、상관학과적고피인논문화제고기금논문비。
We selected 24 comprehensive medical and health science journals listed in Chinese Core Journals （2008 edition） for the study. Based on the data of core version of China Science end Technology Journal Citation Reports published between 2006 and 2010 and using e dynamically assessing academic impact model, we analyzed the academic impact of the 24 journals. Results showed that five journals had the assessment score of the relative academic impact （h） above 1, eight journals had the score ranging from 1 to 0.60, and eleven journals had the score below 0.60. It indicated that the proportion of excellent journals was relatively small and that /r difference between the very poor and the highest-quality ones was very great. We suggest that journals should pay more attention to papers＇ academic quality, the amount of source documents, highly cited papers, and increasing the proportion of fund-supported papers.