Our new index was seemingly all fine, but, we now know that we have a problem!! The problem lies with how we categorise articles as systematic reviews. So, you will find that many articles are being incorrectly labelled as systematic reviews. Apologies for this and we’re racing to fix this.
The release of the new update to Trip (A momentous milestone) has, so far, gone without a hitch. And, as such we’re building on this and improving the way we work. One area has been how we grab articles from PubMed. We’ve found some important issues that affected the timeliness of adding documents and these are being ironed out. We have also taken the opportunity to review the journals we add to Trip.
Years ago, when we started adding journals to Trip, we started with around 25 ‘core’ journals. That then expanded to around 100 and more recently (possibly last 7-8 years) we increased it to around 450. We typically focussed on journals with a high impact factor and ones that were clinically focussed. We had no desire – and still don’t – to include all 5000+ journals that PubMed currently includes.
With our review we have identified a number of new journals to add. These might have been new publications that weren’t available when we last reviewed journals and other might have risen up the impact factor ‘ranks. In total we’ll be adding just over 100 extra journals and these include the likes of:
- Nature Medicine
- Lancet Global Health
- Annual Review of Public Health
- Lancet Digital Health
- Journal of Clinical Investigation
- JAMA network open
- Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
- Sports medicine
- Military Medical Research
- Health systems in transition
- Social Science and Medicine
- BMJ Quality and Safety
With the solid base of a new system improving Trip is becoming so much easier. The next year should see dramatic improvements across the site.
Trip Database Blog 
Recent Comments