You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 20, Issue 4
  • Is email a reliable means of contacting authors of previously published papers? A study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Short report
Is email a reliable means of contacting authors of previously published papers? A study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001
  1. F O’Leary
  1. Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr F O’Leary, PO Box 109, Concord, NSW 2137, Australia; 
 fmoleary{at}bigpond.com

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether it is possible to contact authors of previously published papers via email.

Methods: A cross sectional study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001.

Results: 118 articles were included in the study. The response rate from those with valid email addresses was 73%. There was no statistical difference between the type of email address used and the address being invalid (p=0.392) or between the type of article and the likelihood of a reply (p=0.197). More responses were obtained from work addresses when compared with Hotmail addresses (86% v 57%, p=0.02).

Conclusions: Email is a valid means of contacting authors of previously published articles, particularly within the emergency medicine specialty. A work based email address may be a more valid means of contact than a Hotmail address.

  • email

https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.20.4.352

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Funding: none.

    • Conflicts of interest: none declared.