Objective: To evaluate, qualitatively, the Brazilian nursing journals and identify their strengths and weaknesses when compared to international journals in the area. Methods: A historic approach regarding the period from 2012 to 2016. We included national nursing journals indexed in the SciELO Database and international journals with an impact factor above 1.0 and below 1.8 indexed in the WoS and Scopus databases. Results: The national journals met SciELO requirements for internationalization and obtained visibility when they were included in international indexing bases. Their citations were mostly national, with the following mean values: 86% in Portuguese; 12% in Spanish and 2% in English. Conclusion: The excellence requirements of the national journals are being accomplished. The publication of articles in Spanish can impact on the increase of bibliometric indicators.

Objective To analyze the bibliometric indicators of the national and international journals in the area of nursing from the perspective of index databases. Method A historical cohort referring to the period of 2014 to 2016. National nursing journals indexed in the SciELO database and classified in the Qualis as A1, A2 and B1, and international nursing journals with impact factor above 1.0 and below 1.8, indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus Bases, were selected. Nursing specialty periodicals were excluded. The bibliometric indicators were collected from the index databases and imported into Ms Excel for analysis and data tabulation. Results The bibliometric indicators of the different index databases are divergent and cannot be compared. Lower title coverage and shorter calculation periods amplify the distortions between the indicators of national and international journals. Conclusion The internationalization criteria imposed on national journals do not contribute to obtaining or increasing the impact factor. A broader coverage of indexed titles and a longer calculation period for citations represent a significant difference in results. The h-index and CiteScore appear to be better impact indicators for national nursing research.

EditorialHow to cite this article: Avena MJ, Barbosa DA. The production of knowledge and the strategies to incorporate results into the practice of nursing [Editorial]. Rev Gaúcha Enferm. 2016;37(spe) Science is a tool through which mankind seeks to give meaning to nature and its phenomena by means of investigations based on a systematic, safe method. As an essentially dynamic process, science evolves as it is challenged, checked, and confronted by new ideas put forward by the scientific community in its disclosure process (1) . At first, scientific communications were carried out via direct correspondence between peers or verbal presentations at scientific societies' meetings. As such sharing evolved into journal publication, scientific knowledge has become an essential input for scientific development, updates, and advances, along with academic practice (2) . The journals' transition into an electronic format allows the scientific community to share their findings at a speed that is unprecedented in the history of written communications. The ability to obtain real-time knowledge has brought nursing education continued updates based on the evidence published. Additionally, graduate Nursing programs have driven the production of science and advances in this field of knowledge.While Bibliometrics measures the impact of the available literature or its usage by researchers, other theories and ideas seek to organize how scientific production is measured and shared. New information technology tools such as Scientometrics, Webometrics, and Altmetrics make it possible to map and combine research results and social and academic relationships to create new ways for measuring their impact and use by society (3) . It should be noted that, most often than not, the knowledge produced in the field of Nursing will have an impact on people's health conditions, care, and training. In the few past decades, instructors and students have usually steered their practice based on the literature that generates the best evidence to ensure patient safety and shared decisions, while preserving the ethics and patients' right to choose.

No abstract