Skip Navigation



Annals of Occupational Hygiene Advance Access published online on October 14, 2006
Annals of Occupational Hygiene, doi:10.1093/annhyg/mel070
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
50/8/751    most recent
mel070v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ogden, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ogden, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society
Received September 14, 2006

Commentary

Annals of Occupational Hygiene at Volume 50: Many Achievements, a Few Mistakes, and an Interesting Future

Trevor Ogden 1 *

1 Editor-in-Chief, Annals of Occupational Hygiene, British Occupational Hygiene Society, 5/6 Melbourne Business Court, Millennium Way, Derby DE24 8LZ, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Trevor Ogden, E-mail: Ogden{at}ogs.org.uk


  Abstract

The past 10 years have seen a doubling of the number of papers submitted to the Annals, and a 5-fold increase in the number of institutions with access to the journal. Electronic access is now far more important than print access. Papers from British authors dominated the first 20 years of the journal, but the rest of Europe is now more important, with Scandinavia and The Netherlands being the major continental sources. North America is the other major source. For British papers, there has been a big growth in government authors, and a decline in papers from industry and armed forces. From many possible topics, trends are selectively reviewed in: standards and exposure limits; measurement methods and criteria; sampling strategy and statistics; fibres; control banding; dermal exposure; and evaluation of control. For the future, we will continue to have the same aims and standards, but the changes of the past few years, and the growth of new approaches such as open access, have emphasized the difficulty of forecasting. The growth in submissions from countries which we presently regard as ‘developing’, and especially the growth in higher education in China, and the amount of occupational disease there, are bound to have major impacts. Perhaps the English language will not continue to dominate scientific publishing, but in any case an eastward shift in the source of papers must lead to other changes.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
W. Fransman, J. Schinkel, T. Meijster, J. Van Hemmen, E. Tielemans, and H. Goede
Development and Evaluation of an Exposure Control Efficacy Library (ECEL)
Ann. Hyg., October 1, 2008; 52(7): 567 - 575.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
T. L. Ogden and D. L. Bartley
The Ups and Downs of Journal Impact Factors
Ann. Hyg., March 1, 2008; 52(2): 73 - 82.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
T. OGDEN
Editorial Note
Ann. Hyg., June 1, 2007; 51(4): 427 - 427.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.